text:
Imperial Japanese Army

The Imperial Japanese Army (大日本帝国陸軍) (IJA) was the principal ground force of the Empire of Japan. Forming one of the military branches of the Imperial Japanese Armed Forces (IJAF), it was controlled by the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff Office and the Army Ministry, both of which were nominally subordinate to the Emperor of Japan, the supreme commander of IJAF. During the 20th century, an Inspectorate General of Aviation became the third agency with oversight of the IJA. At its height, the IJA was one of the most influential factions in the politics of Japan.

Origins (1868–1871)
In the mid-19th century, Japan had no unified national army and the country was made up of feudal domains (han) with the Tokugawa shogunate (bakufu) in overall control, which had ruled Japan since 1603. The bakufu army, although a large force, was only one among others, and bakufu efforts to control the nation depended upon the cooperation of its vassals' armies. The opening of the country after two centuries of seclusion subsequently led to the Meiji Restoration and the Boshin War in 1868. The domains of Satsuma and Chōshū came to dominate the coalition against the shogunate.

Boshin War
On 27 January 1868, tensions between the shogunate and imperial sides came to a head when Tokugawa Yoshinobu marched on Kyoto, accompanied by a 15,000-strong force, some of which had been trained by French military advisers. They were opposed by 5,000 troops from the Satsuma, Chōshū, and Tosa domains. At the two road junctions of Toba and Fushimi just south of Kyoto, the two forces clashed. On the second day, an Imperial banner was given to the defending troops and a member of the Imperial Family, the Prince Ninnaji, was named nominal commander in chief, in effect making the pro-imperial forces officially an Imperial army. (官軍) The bakufu forces eventually retreated to Osaka, with the remaining forces ordered to retreat to Edo. Yoshinobu and his closest advisors left for Edo by ship. The encounter at Toba–Fushimi between the imperial and shogunate forces marked the beginning of the conflict. With the court in Kyoto firmly behind the Satsuma-Chōshū-Tosa coalition, other domains that were sympathetic to the cause – such as Tottori (Inaba), Aki (Hiroshima), and Hizen (Saga) – emerged to take a more active role in military operations. Western domains that had either supported the shogunate or remained neutral also quickly announced their support of the restoration movement.

The nascent Meiji state required a new military command for its operations against the shogunate. In 1868, the "Imperial Army" being just a loose amalgam of domain armies, the government created four military divisions: the Tōkaidō, Tōsandō, San'indō, and Hokurikudō, each of which was named for a major highway. Overseeing these four armies was a new high command, the Eastern Expeditionary High Command (Tōsei daisō tokufu), whose nominal head was prince Arisugawa-no-miya, with two court nobles as senior staff officers. This connected the loose assembly of domain forces with the imperial court, which was the only national institution in a still unformed nation-state. The army continually emphasized its link with the imperial court: firstly, to legitimize its cause; secondly, to brand enemies of the imperial government as enemies of the court and traitors; and, lastly, to gain popular support. To supply food, weapons, and other supplies for the campaign, the imperial government established logistical relay stations along three major highways. These small depots held stockpiled material supplied by local pro-government domains, or confiscated from the bakufu and others opposing the imperial government. Local villagers were routinely impressed as porters to move and deliver supplies between the depots and frontline units.

Struggles to form a centralized army
Initially, the new army fought under makeshift arrangements, with unclear channels of command and control and no reliable recruiting base. Although fighting for the imperial cause, many of the units were loyal to their domains rather than the imperial court. In March 1869, the imperial government created various administrative offices, including a military branch; and in the following month organized an imperial bodyguard of 400 to 500, which consisted of Satsuma and Chōshū troops strengthened by veterans of the encounter at Toba–Fushimi, as well as yeoman and masterless samurai from various domains. The imperial court told the domains to restrict the size of their local armies and to contribute to funding a national officers' training school in Kyoto. However, within a few months the government disbanded both the military branch and the imperial bodyguard: the former was ineffective while the latter lacked modern weaponry and equipment. To replace them, two new organizations were created. One was the military affairs directorate which was composed of two bureaus, one for the army and one for the navy. The directorate drafted an army from troop contributions from each domain proportional to each domain's annual rice production (koku). This conscript army (chōheigun) integrated samurai and commoners from various domains into its ranks. As the war continued, the military affairs directorate expected to raise troops from the wealthier domains and, in June, the organization of the army was fixed, where each domain was required to send ten men for each 10,000 koku of rice produced. However, this policy put the imperial government in direct competition with the domains for military recruitment, which was not rectified until April 1868, when the government banned the domains from enlisting troops. Consequently, the quota system never fully worked as intended and was abolished the following year.

The Imperial forces encountered numerous difficulties during the war, especially during the campaign in Eastern Japan. Headquarters in faraway Kyoto often proposed plans at odds with the local conditions, which led to tensions with officers in the field, who in many cases ignored centralized direction in favor of unilateral action. The army lacked a strong central staff that was capable of enforcing orders. Consequently, military units were at the mercy of individual commanders' leadership and direction. This was not helped by the absence of a unified tactical doctrine, which left units to fight according to the tactics favored by their respective commanders. There was increased resentment by many lower ranked commanders as senior army positions were monopolized by the nobility together with samurai from Chōshū and Satsuma. The use of commoners within the new army created resentment among the samurai class. Although the nascent Meiji government achieved military success, the war left a residue of disgruntled warriors and marginalized commoners, together with a torn social fabric.

Foundation of a national army (1871–1873)
After the defeat of the Tokugawa shogunate and operations in Northeastern Honshu and Hokkaido a true national army did not exist. Many in the restoration coalition had recognized the need for a strong centralized authority and although the imperial side was victorious, the early Meiji government was weak and the leaders had to maintain their standing with their domains whose military forces was essential for whatever the government needed to achieve. The leaders of the restoration were divided over the future organization of the army. Ōmura Masujirō who had sought a strong central government at the expense of the domains advocated for the creation of a standing national army along European lines under the control of the government, the introduction of conscription for commoners and the abolition of the samurai class. Ōkubo Toshimichi preferred a small volunteer force consisting of former samurai. Ōmura's views for modernizing Japan's military led to his assassination in 1869 and his ideas were largely implemented after his death by Yamagata Aritomo. Aritomo has been described as the father of the Imperial Japanese Army. Yamagata had commanded mixed commoner-samurai Chōshū units during the Boshin War and was convinced of the merit of peasant soldiers. Although he himself was part of the samurai class, albeit of insignificant lower status, Yamagata distrusted the warrior class, several members of whom he regarded as clear dangers to the Meiji state.

Establishment of the Imperial Guard and institutional reforms

In March 1871, the War Ministry announced the creation of an Imperial Guard (Goshinpei) of six thousand men, consisting of nine infantry battalions, two artillery batteries and two cavalry squadrons. The emperor donated 100,000 ryō to underwrite the new unit, which was subordinate to the court. It was composed of members of the Satsuma, Chōshū and Tosa domains, who had led the restoration. Satsuma provided four battalions of infantry and four artillery batteries; Chōshū provided three battalions of infantry; Tosa two battalions of infantry, two squadrons of cavalry, and two artillery batteries. For the first time, the Meiji government was able to organize a large body of soldiers under a consistent rank and pay scheme with uniforms, which were loyal to the government rather than the domains. The Imperial Guard's principal mission was to protect the throne by suppressing domestic samurai revolts, peasant uprisings and anti-government demonstrations. The possession of this military force was a factor in the government's abolition of the han system.

The military ministry (Hyōbushō) was reorganized in July 1871; on August 29, simultaneously with the decree abolishing the domains, the Dajōkan ordered local daimyos to disband their private armies and turn their weapons over to the government. Although the government played on the foreign threat, especially Russia's southward expansion, to justify a national army, the immediately perceived danger was domestic insurrection. Consequently, on August 31, the country was divided into four military districts, each with its own chindai (garrison) to deal with peasant uprisings or samurai insurrections. The Imperial Guard formed the Tokyo garrison, whereas troops from the former domains filled the ranks of the Osaka, Kumamoto, and Sendai garrisons. The four garrisons had a total of about 8,000 troops – mostly infantry, but also a few hundred artillerymen and engineers. Smaller detachments of troops also guarded outposts at Kagoshima, Fushimi, Nagoya, Hiroshima, and elsewhere. By late December 1871, the army set modernization and coastal defense as priorities; long-term plans were devised for an armed force to maintain internal security, defend strategic coastal areas, train and educate military and naval officers, and build arsenals and supply depots. Despite previous rhetoric about the foreign menace, little substantive planning was directed against Russia. In February 1872, the military ministry was abolished and separate army and navy ministries were established.

Conscription

The conscription ordinance enacted on January 10, 1873, made universal military service compulsory for all male subjects in the country. The law called for a total of seven years of military service: three years in the regular army (jōbigun), two years in the reserve (dai'ichi kōbigun), and an additional two years in the second reserve (daini kōbigun). All able-bodied males between the ages of 17 and 40 were considered members of the national guard (kokumingun), which would only see service in a severe national crisis, such as an attack or invasion of Japan. The conscription examination decided which group of recruits would enter the army, those who failed the exam were excused from all examinations except for the national guard. Recruits who passed entered the draft lottery, where some were selected for active duty. A smaller group would be selected for replacement duty (hojū-eki) should anything happen to any of the active duty soldiers; the rest were dismissed. One of the primary differences between the samurai and the peasant class was the right to bear arms; this ancient privilege was suddenly extended to every male in the nation. There were several exemptions, including criminals, those who could show hardship, the physically unfit, heads of households or heirs, students, government bureaucrats, and teachers. A conscript could also purchase an exemption for ¥270, which was an enormous sum for the time and which restricted this privilege to the wealthy. Under the new 1873 ordinance, the conscript army was composed mainly of second and third sons of impoverished farmers who manned the regional garrisons, while former samurai controlled the Imperial Guard and the Tokyo garrison.

Initially, because of the army's small size and numerous exemptions, relatively few young men were actually conscripted for a three-year term on active duty. In 1873, the army numbered approximately 17,900 from a population of 35 million at the time; it doubled to about 33,000 in 1875. The conscription program slowly built up the numbers. Public unrest began in 1874, reaching the apex in the Satsuma Rebellion of 1877, which used the slogans, "oppose conscription", "oppose elementary schools", and "fight Korea". It took a year for the new army to crush the uprising, but the victories proved critical in creating and stabilizing the Imperial government and to realize sweeping social, economic and political reforms that enabled Japan to become a modern state that could stand comparison to France, Germany, and other European powers.

Foreign assistance
The early Imperial Japanese Army was developed with the assistance of advisors from France, through the second French military mission to Japan (1872–80), and the third French military mission to Japan (1884–89). However, after France's defeat in 1871 the Japanese government switched to the victorious Germans as a model. From 1886 to April 1890, it hired German military advisors (Major Jakob Meckel, replaced in 1888 by von Wildenbrück and Captain von Blankenbourg) to assist in the training of the Japanese General Staff. In 1878, the Imperial Japanese Army General Staff Office, based on the German General Staff, was established directly under the Emperor and was given broad powers for military planning and strategy.

Other known foreign military consultants were Major Pompeo Grillo from the Kingdom of Italy, who worked at the Osaka foundry from 1884 to 1888, followed by Major Quaratezi from 1889 to 1890; and Captain Schermbeck from the Netherlands, who worked on improving coastal defenses from 1883 to 1886. Japan did not use foreign military advisors between 1890 and 1918, until the French military mission to Japan (1918–19), headed by Commandant Jacques-Paul Faure, was requested to assist in the development of the Japanese air services.

Taiwan Expedition

The Japanese invasion of Taiwan under Qing rule in 1874 was a punitive expedition by Japanese military forces in response to the Mudan Incident of December 1871. The Paiwan people, who are indigenous peoples of Taiwan, murdered 54 crewmembers of a wrecked merchant vessel from the Ryukyu Kingdom on the southwestern tip of Taiwan. 12 men were rescued by the local Chinese-speaking community and were transferred to Miyako-jima in the Ryukyu Islands. The Empire of Japan used this as an excuse to both assert sovereignty over the Ryukyu Kingdom, which was a tributary state of both Japan and Qing China at the time, and to attempt the same with Taiwan, a Qing territory. It marked the first overseas deployment of the Imperial Japanese Army and Navy.

An Imperial Rescript to Soldiers and Sailors of 1882 called for unquestioning loyalty to the Emperor by the new armed forces and asserted that commands from superior officers were equivalent to commands from the Emperor himself. Thenceforth, the military existed in an intimate and privileged relationship with the imperial institution.

Top-ranking military leaders were given direct access to the Emperor and the authority to transmit his pronouncements directly to the troops. The sympathetic relationship between conscripts and officers, particularly junior officers who were drawn mostly from the peasantry, tended to draw the military closer to the people. In time, most people came to look more for guidance in national matters more to military than to political leaders.

By the 1890s, the Imperial Japanese Army had grown to become the most modern army in Asia: well-trained, well-equipped, and with good morale. However, it was basically an infantry force deficient in cavalry and artillery when compared with its European contemporaries. Artillery pieces, which were purchased from America and a variety of European nations, presented two problems: they were scarce, and the relatively small number that were available were of several different calibers, causing problems with ammunition supply.

First Sino-Japanese War
In the early months of 1894, the Donghak Peasant Revolution broke out in southern Korea and had soon spread throughout the rest of the country, threatening the Korea capital Seoul, itself. The Chinese, since the beginning of May had taken steps to prepare the mobilization of their forces in the provinces of Zhili, Shandong and in Manchuria, as a result of the tense situation on the Korean peninsula. These actions were planned more as an armed demonstration intended to strengthen the Chinese position in Korea, rather than as a preparation for war with Japan. On June 3, the Chinese government accepted the requests from the Korean government to send troops to help quell the rebellion, additionally they also informed the Japanese of the action. It was decided to send 2,500 men to Asan, about 70 km from the capital Seoul. The troops arrived in Asan on June 9 and were additionally reinforced by 400 more on June 25, a total of about 2,900 Chinese soldiers were at Asan.

From the very outset the developments in Korea had been carefully observed in Tokyo. Japanese government had soon become convinced that the Donghak Peasant Revolution would lead to Chinese intervention in Korea. As a result, soon after learning word about the Korean government's request for Chinese military help, immediately ordered all warships in the vicinity to be sent to Pusan and Chemulpo. On June 9, a formation of 420 rikusentai, selected from the crews of the Japanese warships was immediately dispatched to Seoul, where they served temporarily as a counterbalance to the Chinese troops camped at Asan. Simultaneously, the Japanese decided to send a reinforced brigade of approximately 8,000 troops to Korea. The reinforced brigade, included auxiliary units, under the command of General Oshima Yoshimasa was fully transported to Korea by June 27. The Japanese stated to the Chinese that they were willing to withdraw the brigade under General Oshima if the Chinese left Asan prior. However, when on 16 July, 8,000 Chinese troops landed near the entrance of the Taedong River to reinforce Chinese troops garrisoned in Pyongyang, the Japanese delivered Li Hongzhang an ultimatum, threatening to take action if any further troops were sent to Korea. Consequently, General Oshima in Seoul and commanders of the Japanese warships in Korean waters received orders allowing them to initiate military operations if any more Chinese troops were sent to Korea. Despite this ultimatum, Li, considered that Japanese were bluffing and were trying to probe the Chinese readiness to make concessions. He decided, therefore to reinforce Chinese forces in Asan with a further 2,500 troops, 1,300 of which arrived in Asan during the night of July 23–24. At the same time, in the early morning of July 23, the Japanese had taken control of the Royal Palace in Seoul and imprisoned King Gojong, forcing him to renounce ties with China.

During the almost two-month interval prior to the declaration of war, the two service staffs developed a two-stage operational plan against China. The army's 5th Division would land at Chemulpo to prevent a Chinese advance in Korea while the navy would engage the Beiyang fleet in a decisive battle in order to secure control of the seas. If the navy defeated the Chinese fleet decisively and secured command of the seas, the larger part of the army would undertake immediate landings on the coast between Shanhaiguan and Tianjin, and advance to the Zhili plain in order to defeat the main Chinese forces and bring the war to a swift conclusion. If neither side gained control of the sea and supremacy, the army would concentrate on the occupation of Korea and exclude Chinese influence there. Lastly, if the navy was defeated and consequently lost command of the sea, Japanese forces in Korea would be ordered to hang on and fight a rearguard action while the bulk of the army would remain in Japan in preparation to repel a Chinese invasion. This worst-case scenario also foresaw attempts to rescue the beleaguered 5th Division in Korea while simultaneously strengthening homeland defenses. The army's contingency plans which were both offensive and defensive, depended on the outcome of the naval operations.

Clashes between Chinese and Japanese forces at Pungdo and Seongwhan caused irreversible changes to Sino-Japanese relations and meant that a state of war now existed between the two countries. The two governments officially declared war on August 1. Initially, the general staff's objective was to secure the Korean peninsula before the arrival of winter and then land forces near Shanhaiguan. However, as the navy was unable to bring the Beiyang fleet into battle in mid-August, temporarily withdrew from the Yellow Sea to refit and replenish its ships. As a consequence, in late August the general staff ordered an advance overland to the Zhili plain via Korea in order to capture bases on the Liaodong Peninsula to prevent Chinese forces from interfering with the drive on Beijing. The First Army with two divisions was activated on September 1. In mid-September 17, the Chinese forces defeated at Pyongyang and occupied the city, as the remaining Chinese troops retreated northward. The navy's stunning victory in the Yalu on September 17, was crucial to the Japanese as it allowed the Second Army with three divisions and one brigade to land unopposed on the Liaodong Peninsula about 100 miles north of Port Arthur which controlled the entry to the Bohai Gulf, in mid-October. While, the First Army pursued the remaining Chinese forces from Korea across the Yalu River, Second Army occupied the city of Dairen on November 8 and then seized the fortress and harbor at Port Arthur on November 25. Farther north, the First army's offensive stalled and was beset by supply problems and winter weather.

Boxer Rebellion
In 1899–1900, Boxer attacks against foreigners in China intensified, resulting in the siege of the diplomatic legations in Beijing. An international force consisting of British, French, Russian, German, Italian, Austro-Hungarian, American, and Japanese troops was eventually assembled to relieve the legations. The Japanese provided the largest contingent of troops, 20,840, as well as 18 warships.

A small, hastily assembled, vanguard force of about 2,000 troops, under the command of British Admiral Edward Seymour, departed by rail, from Tianjin, for the legations in early June. On June 12, mixed Boxer and Chinese regular army forces halted the advance, some 30 miles from the capital. The road-bound and badly outnumbered allies withdrew to the vicinity of Tianjin, having suffered more than 300 casualties. The army general staff in Tokyo became aware of the worsening conditions in China and had drafted ambitious contingency plans, but the government, in light of the Triple Intervention refused to deploy large forces unless requested by the western powers. However, three days later, the general staff did dispatch a provisional force of 1,300 troops, commanded by Major General Fukushima Yasumasa, to northern China. Fukushima was chosen because his ability to speak fluent English which enabled him to communicate with the British commander. The force landed near Tianjin on July 5.

On June 17, with tensions increasing, naval Rikusentai from Japanese ships had joined British, Russian, and German sailors to seize the Dagu forts near Tianjin. Four days later, the Qing court declared war on the foreign powers. The British, in light of the precarious situation, were compelled to ask Japan for additional reinforcements, as the Japanese had the only readily available forces in the region. Britain at the time was heavily engaged in the Boer War, and, consequently, a large part of the British army was tied down in South Africa. Deploying large numbers of troops from British garrisons in India would take too much time and weaken internal security there. Overriding personal doubts, Foreign Minister Aoki Shūzō calculated that the advantages of participating in an allied coalition were too attractive to ignore. Prime Minister Yamagata likewise concurred, but others in the cabinet demanded that there be guarantees from the British in return for the risks and costs of a major deployment of Japanese troops. On July 6, the 5th Infantry Division was alerted for possible deployment to China, but without a timetable being set. Two days later, on July 8, with more ground troops urgently needed to lift the siege of the foreign legations at Beijing, the British ambassador offered the Japanese government one million British pounds in exchange for Japanese participation.

Shortly afterward, advance units of the 5th Division departed for China, bringing Japanese strength to 3,800 personnel, of the then-17,000 allied force. The commander of the 5th Division, Lt. General Yamaguchi Motoomi, had taken operational control from Fukushima. A second, stronger allied expeditionary army stormed Tianjin, on July 14, and occupied the city. The allies then consolidated and awaited the remainder of the 5th Division and other coalition reinforcements. In early August, the expedition pushed towards the capital where on August 14, it lifted the Boxer siege. By that time, the 13,000-strong Japanese force was the largest single contingent, making up about 40 percent of the approximately 33,000 strong allied expeditionary force. Japanese troops involved in the fighting had acquitted themselves well, although a British military observer felt their aggressiveness, densely packed formations, and over-willingness to attack cost them excessive casualties. For example, during the Tianjin fighting, the Japanese, while comprising less than one quarter (3,800) of the total allied force of 17,000, suffered more than half of the casualties, 400 out of 730. Similarly at Beijing, the Japanese, constituting slightly less than half of the assault force, accounted for almost two-thirds of the losses, 280 of 453.

Russo-Japanese War

The Russo–Japanese War (1904–1905) was the result of tensions between Russia and Japan, grown largely out of rival imperialist ambitions toward Manchuria and Korea. The Japanese army inflicted severe losses against the Russians; however, they were not able to deal a decisive blow to the Russian armies. Over-reliance on infantry led to large casualties among Japanese forces, especially during the siege of Port Arthur.

World War I
The Empire of Japan entered the war on the Entente side. Although tentative plans were made to send an expeditionary force of between 100,000 and 500,000 men to fight in France on the Western Front, ultimately among the few actions in which the Imperial Japanese Army was involved was the careful and well executed attack on the German concession of Qingdao in 1914 and the seizure of various other small German islands and colonies.

Siberian intervention

During 1917–18, Japan continued to extend its influence and privileges in China via the Nishihara Loans. During the Siberian Intervention, following the collapse of the Russian Empire after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Imperial Japanese Army initially planned to send more than 70,000 troops to occupy Siberia as far west as Lake Baikal. The army general staff came to view the Tsarist collapse as an opportunity to free Japan from any future threat from Russia by detaching Siberia and forming an independent buffer state. The plan was scaled back considerably due to opposition from the United States.

In July 1918, the U.S. President, Woodrow Wilson, asked the Japanese government to supply 7,000 troops as part of an international coalition of 24,000 troops to support the American Expeditionary Force Siberia. After a heated debate in the Diet, the government of Prime Minister Terauchi Masatake agreed to send 12,000 troops, but under the command of Japan, rather than as part of an international coalition. Japan and the United States sent forces to Siberia to bolster the armies of the White movement leader Admiral Aleksandr Kolchak against the Bolshevik Red Army.

Once the political decision had been reached, the Imperial Japanese Army took over full control under Chief of Staff General Yui Mitsue; and by November 1918, more than 70,000 Japanese troops had occupied all ports and major towns in the Russian Maritime Provinces and eastern Siberia.

In June 1920, the United States and its allied coalition partners withdrew from Vladivostok, after the capture and execution of the White Army leader, Admiral Kolchak, by the Red Army. However, the Japanese decided to stay, primarily due to fears of the spread of communism so close to Japan and Japanese-controlled Korea. The Japanese Army provided military support to the Japanese-backed Provisional Priamurye Government, based in Vladivostok, against the Moscow-backed Far Eastern Republic.

The continued Japanese presence concerned the United States, which suspected that Japan had territorial designs on Siberia and the Russian Far East. Subjected to intense diplomatic pressure by the United States and Great Britain, and facing increasing domestic opposition due to the economic and human cost, the administration of Prime Minister Katō Tomosaburō withdrew the Japanese forces in October 1922.

Rise of militarism
In the 1920s the Imperial Japanese Army expanded rapidly and by 1927 had a force of 300,000 men. Unlike western countries, the Army enjoyed a great deal of independence from government. Under the provisions of the Meiji Constitution, the War Minister was held accountable only to the Emperor (Hirohito) himself, and not to the elected civilian government. In fact, Japanese civilian administrations needed the support of the Army in order to survive. The Army controlled the appointment of the War Minister, and in 1936 a law was passed that stipulated that only an active duty general or lieutenant-general could hold the post. As a result, military spending as a proportion of the national budget rose disproportionately in the 1920s and 1930s, and various factions within the military exerted disproportionate influence on Japanese foreign policy.

The Imperial Japanese Army was originally known simply as the Army (rikugun) but after 1928, as part of the Army's turn toward romantic nationalism and also in the service of its political ambitions, it re-titled itself the Imperial Army (kōgun).

In 1923, the army consisted of 21 divisions, but in accordance with the 1924 reform it was reduced to 17 divisions. Two leaps in the development of the military industry (1906–1910 and 1931–1934) made it possible to re-equip the armed forces.

Second Sino-Japanese War
In 1931, the Imperial Japanese Army had an overall strength of 198,880 officers and men, organized into 17 divisions. The Manchurian incident, as it became known in Japan, was a pretended sabotage of a local Japanese-owned railway, an attack staged by Japan but blamed on Chinese dissidents. Action by the military, largely independent of the civilian leadership, led to the invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and, later, to the Second Sino-Japanese War, in 1937. As war approached, the Imperial Army's influence with the Emperor waned and the influence of the Imperial Japanese Navy increased. Nevertheless, by 1938 the Army had been expanded to 34 divisions.

Conflict with the Soviet Union
From 1932 to 1945 the Empire of Japan and the Soviet Union had a series of conflicts. Japan had set its military sights on Soviet territory as a result of the Hokushin-ron doctrine, and the Japanese establishment of a puppet state in Manchuria brought the two countries into conflict. The war lasted on and off with the last battles of the 1930s (the Battle of Lake Khasan and the Battles of Khalkhin Gol) ending in a decisive victory for the Soviets. The conflicts stopped with the signing of the Soviet–Japanese Neutrality Pact on April 13, 1941. However, later, at the Yalta Conference, Stalin agreed to declare war on Japan; and on August 5, 1945, the Soviet Union voided their neutrality agreement with Japan.

World War II

In 1941, the Imperial Japanese Army had 51 divisions and various special-purpose artillery, cavalry, anti-aircraft, and armored units with a total of 1,700,000 people. At the beginning of the Second World War, most of the Japanese Army (27 divisions) was stationed in China. A further 13 divisions defended the Mongolian border, due to concerns about a possible attack by the Soviet Union. From 1942, soldiers were sent to Hong Kong (23rd Army), the Philippines (14th Army), Thailand (15th Army), Burma (15th Army), Dutch East Indies (16th Army), and Malaya (25th Army). By 1945, there were 6 million soldiers in the Imperial Japanese Army.

From 1943, Japanese troops suffered from a shortage of supplies, especially food, medicine, munitions, and armaments, largely due to submarine interdiction of supplies, and losses to Japanese shipping, which was worsened by a longstanding rivalry with the Imperial Japanese Navy. The lack of supplies caused large numbers of fighter aircraft to become unserviceable for lack of spare parts, and "as many as two-thirds of Japan's total military deaths [to result] from illness or starvation".

Salary
Compared to respective armies in Europe or America, soldiers in the Imperial Japanese Army received a rather meagre salary; however, the cost of living in Japan was also cheaper than in most Western nations. The below table gives figures from December 1941, when one Japanese yen was worth approximately $0.23.

For comparison, in 1942, an American private was paid approximately $50 per month (or 204 yen), meaning the lowest ranking soldier in the United States military was earning equivalent to the maximum salary of an Imperial Japanese major, or the base salary of an Imperial Japanese lieutenant colonel, and about 25 times as much as an Imperial Japanese soldier of the same rank. While disproportionate salary ranges were not uncommon between militaries during World War II, for example Australian enlistees could expect to receive roughly triple as much in pay as their counterparts fighting for the United Kingdom, by any standards, despite being widely considered a "first rate" or professional fighting force, men serving in the IJA were very poorly compensated.

Complicating matters further was that, by 1942, most Japanese soldiers were paid using the Japanese military yen (JMY), an unsupported currency that could not be redeemed for the regular Japanese yen. In territories under Japanese occupation, the military yen – or "Japanese invasion money", as it came to be known by the locals – was the only legal tender in circulation. The Japanese authorities seized or ordered surrendered all other bank notes in territories under their occupation and provided compensation at an "exchange rate" as they saw fit, in the form of JMYs. This had the effect of affording Japanese soldiers in many occupied territories a higher degree of return for their low pay than they otherwise would have received. However, at the end of the war, the Imperial Japanese ministry of finance cancelled all military bank notes, rendering the military yen worthless.

War crimes

Throughout the Second Sino-Japanese War and World War II, the Imperial Japanese Army had shown immense brutality and engaged in numerous atrocities against civilians, as well as prisoners of war – with the Nanjing Massacre being the most well known example. Other war crimes committed by the Imperial Japanese Army included rape and forced prostitution, death marches, using biological warfare against civilians, and the execution of prisoners of war. Such atrocities throughout the war caused many millions of deaths.

Ground Self-Defense Force
Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution renounced the right to use force as a means of resolving disputes. This was enacted by the Japanese in order to prevent militarism, which had led to conflict. However, in 1947 the Public Security Force was formed; later in 1954, in the early stages of the Cold War, the Public Security Force formed the basis of the newly created Ground Self-Defense Force. Although significantly smaller than the former Imperial Japanese Army and nominally for defensive purposes only, this force constitutes the modern army of Japan.

Continued resistance
Separately, some soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army continued to fight on isolated Pacific islands until at least the 1970s, with the last known Japanese soldier surrendering in 1974. Intelligence officer Hiroo Onoda, who surrendered on Lubang Island in the Philippines in March 1974, and Teruo Nakamura, who surrendered on the Indonesian island of Morotai in December 1974, appear to have been the last holdouts but there are reports of other Japanese holdout later then December 1974.

Growth and organization of the IJA
Total military in August 1945 was 6,095,000 including 676,863 Army Air Service.
 * 1870: consisted of 12,000 men.
 * 1873: Seven divisions of c. 36,000 men (c. 46,250 including reserves)
 * 1885: consisted of seven divisions including the Imperial Guard Division.
 * In the early 1900s, the IJA consisted of 12 divisions, the Imperial Guard Division, and numerous other units. These contained the following:
 * 380,000 active duty and 1st Reserve personnel: former Class A and B(1) conscripts after two-year active tour with 17 and 1/2 year commitment
 * 50,000 Second line Reserve: Same as above but former Class B(2) conscripts
 * 220,000 National Army
 * 1st National Army: 37- to 40-year-old men from end of 1st Reserve to 40 years old.
 * 2nd National Army: untrained 20-year-olds and over-40-year-old trained reserves.
 * 4,250,000 men available for service and mobilization.
 * 1922: 21 divisions and 308,000 men
 * 1924: Post-WW1 reductions to 16 divisions and 250,800 men
 * 1925: Reduction to 12 divisions
 * 1934: army increased to 17 divisions
 * 1936: 250,000 active.
 * 1940: 376,000 active with 2 million reserves in 31 divisions
 * 2 divisions in Japan (Imperial Guard plus one other)
 * 2 divisions in Korea
 * 27 divisions in China and Manchuria
 * In late 1941: 460,000 active in
 * 41 divisions
 * 2 in Japan and Korea
 * 12 in Manchuria
 * 27 in China
 * plus 59 brigade equivalents.
 * Independent brigades, Independent Mixed Brigades, Cavalry Brigades, Amphibious Brigades, Independent Mixed regiments, Independent Regiments.
 * 1945: 5 million active in 145 divisions (includes three Imperial Guard), plus numerous individual units, with a large Volunteer Fighting Corps.
 * includes 650,000 Imperial Japanese Army Air Service.
 * Japan Defense Army in 1945 had 55 divisions (53 Infantry and two armor) and 32 brigades (25 infantry and seven armor) with 2.35 million men.
 * 2.25 million Army Labor Troops
 * 1.3 million Navy Labor Troops
 * 250,000 Special Garrison Force
 * 20,000 Kempetai

Casualties
Over the course of the Imperial Japanese Army's existence, millions of its soldiers were either killed, wounded or listed as missing in action.
 * Taiwan Expedition of 1874: 543 (12 killed in battle and 531 by disease)
 * First Sino-Japanese War: The IJA suffered 1,132 dead and 3,758 wounded
 * Russo-Japanese War: The number of total Japanese dead in combat is put at around 47,000, with around 80,000 if disease is included
 * World War I: 1,455 Japanese were killed, mostly at the Battle of Tsingtao
 * World War II:
 * Deaths
 * Between 2,120,000 and 2,190,000 Imperial Armed Forces dead including non-combat deaths (includes 1,760,955 killed in action),
 * KIA Breakdown by Theater:
 * Army 1931–1945: 1,569,661 [China: 435,600 KIA, Against U.S. Forces: 659,650 KIA, Burma Campaign: 163,000 KIA, Australian Combat Zone: 199,511 KIA, French Indochina: 7,900 KIA, U.S.S.R/Manchuria: 45,900 KIA, Others/Japan: 58,100 KIA]
 * Navy: 473,800 KIA All Theaters.
 * 672,000 known civilian dead,
 * 810,000 missing in action and presumed dead

Equipment used

 * Type 38 rifle
 * Type 99 rifle
 * Type 44 carbine
 * Nambu pistol
 * Type 97 grenade
 * Type 97 heavy tank machine gun
 * Type 99 light machine gun
 * Type 11 light machine gun
 * Type 100 submachine gun
 * MP 28 SMG
 * MP 34
 * Type 30 rifle
 * Type I rifle
 * Type 91 grenade
 * Type 4 70 mm AT rocket launcher
 * Type 93 flamethrower
 * Type 100 flamethrower
 * Type 89 machine gun
 * Type 92 heavy machine gun
 * Type 1 heavy machine gun
 * Type 26 revolver
 * Murata rifle
 * Type 35 rifle
 * Type 3 heavy machine gun
 * Type 30 bayonet
 * Guntō
 * Hino–Komuro pistol
 * Sugiura pistol
 * Type 97 sniper rifle
 * Type 38 carbine
 * Type 99 sniper rifle
 * Karabiner 98k
 * Vz. 24
 * Type 10 grenade
 * Type 98 grenade
 * Type 99 grenade
 * Type 3 grenade
 * Type 4 grenade
 * Lunge mine

title: Imperial Japanese Army


text:
Prix Suzanne Bianchetti

The Prix Suzanne Bianchetti is an award in French cinema given annually since 1937 to the most promising young film actress.

The award was created by writer and actor René Jeanne (1887–1969) who served as the director of L'Etablissement Cinématographique des Armées. When his wife, the actress Suzanne Bianchetti, died in 1936 at the age of 47, he established an award dedicated to her memory to be given annually to the most promising young actress.

The award was given for the first time in 1937 to actress Junie Astor for her performance in the film Women's Club. The award comes in the form of a medallion engraved with Suzanne Bianchetti's image. Since its inception, the Prix Suzanne Bianchetti has been awarded to many of the greatest names in French cinema who went on to national and international stardom.

List of winners (incomplete)

 * 1937 – Junie Astor (Women's Club, 1936)
 * 1938 – Janine Darcey
 * 1939 – Sylvia Bataille
 * 1940 – Micheline Presle (Girls in Distress, 1939)
 * 1941–1945 no award due to World War II
 * 1947 – Simone Signoret (Macadam, 1946)
 * 1948 – Odile Versois
 * 1949 – Arlette Thomas
 * 1950 – Christiane Lenier
 * 1951 – Nadine Alari
 * 1952 – Nadine Basile
 * 1953 – Etchika Choureau (L'Envers du paradis, 1953)
 * 1954 – Marina Vlady
 * 1955 – Geneviève Kervine
 * 1956 – Annie Girardot (L'Homme aux clefs d'or, 1956)
 * 1957 – Anne Doat
 * 1958 – Pascale Petit (One Life, 1957)
 * 1959 – Roger Dumas (awarded to a male actor)
 * 1960 – Perrette Pradier
 * 1961 – Renée Marie Potet
 * 1962 – Corinne Marchand
 * 1963 – Marie Dubois
 * 1964 – Colette Castel
 * 1965 – Macha Méril
 * 1966 – Geneviève Bujold (Le voleur)
 * 1967 – Caroline Cellier (awarded for a stage performance in Pygmalion)
 * 1968 – Danièle Evenou
 * 1970 – Ludmila Mikaël
 * 1972 – Bulle Ogier
 * 1974 – Isabelle Adjani (La Gifle, 1974)
 * 1976 – Isabelle Huppert (The Judge and the Assassin, 1976)
 * 1980 – Dominique Laffin
 * 1986 – Juliette Binoche (Mauvais Sang, 1986)
 * 1988 – Marianne Basler
 * 1990 – Dominique Blanc
 * 1991 – Anouk Grinberg
 * 1993 – Charlotte Kady
 * 1994 – Isabelle Carré
 * 1995 – Clotilde Courau
 * 1996 – Sandrine Kiberlain
 * 1998 – Virginie Ledoyen
 * 2000 – Audrey Tautou
 * 2001 – Barbara Schulz
 * 2002 – Françoise Gillard
 * 2003 – Mélanie Doutey
 * 2004 – Sara Forestier and Sophie Quinton
 * 2005 – Chloé Lambert
 * 2006 – Nathalie Boutefeu
 * 2007 – Déborah François
 * 2008 – Clotilde Hesme
 * 2009 – Àstrid Bergès-Frisbey
 * 2010 – Elodie Navarre
 * 2011 – Anaïs Demoustier
 * 2012 – Marie Kremer
 * 2013 – Pauline Étienne
 * 2014 – Adèle Haenel
 * 2015 – Marine Vacth
 * 2016 – Camille Cottin
 * 2017 – Suliane Brahim
 * 2018 – Camélia Jordana
 * 2019 – Rebecca Marder
 * 2020 – Mame Sane
 * 2021 – Celeste Brunnquell
 * 2022 – Luàna Bajrami
 * 2023 – Mallory Wanecque

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

title: Prix Suzanne Bianchetti


text:
Journey Back to Youth

Journey Back to Youth (Путешествие в юность, Puteshestvie v yunost) is a 2001 documentary film by Russian film makers Alexander Gutman and Sergey Litvyakov. The film is an interview of four German women (Charlotte Kaufmann, Traute Sommer, Adelheid Imhof, Dora Birk) who tell the story of four young German girls from East Prussia placed into a Soviet labor camp at the end of World War II according the Yalta Conference decision about mobilization of Germans for reconstruction works in the USSR as a form or war reparations by the Germany, implemented according to the Soviet top secret Order 7161.

The film won the Platinum Award at the 34th International Independent Film Festival (Worldfest) in Houston, Texas, in 2001 and the "Gold Camera Award" at the US International Film and Video Festival in 2001.

Film history
The film maker, Gutman, said that he got the idea for the film when he learned that the Heinrich Böll Foundation funded a monument in Petrozavodsk, Karelia at the graveyard of German women who died in the local GULAG camp.

title: Journey Back to Youth


text:
User:Eloquence/Wikinfo import script

Copy this from the source, not from here.

This is the first pre-release of the new import script. It runs as a webserver on 8450 and does some cool stuff:
 * 1) Filters Special:Newpages for new articles that are not "from Wikipedia"
 * 2) Does not require a cookies.txt - uses its own account. Works with Wikinfo's new login requirement
 * 3) Auto-generates diffs of new articles that exist in both Wikinfo and Wikipedia
 * 4) Strips signatures from titles when importing

Note that to do all this it has to load quite a few pages, which takes some time for a full set of 500 new pages.

To do:
 * Cache previous runs in wikinfo.db so we don't have to wait 60 seconds
 * Use Special:Export

If you want to use this in some way or another, make sure you install all the used modules first using CPAN.

use LWP::UserAgent; use HTTP::Cookies; use HTTP::Daemon; use HTTP::Status; use HTTP::Response; use URI::Escape; use Text::ParagraphDiff; use GDBM_File ; tie %storage, 'GDBM_File', "wikinfo.db", &GDBM_WRCREAT, 0640; $SIG{INT} = \&catch_zap; # best strategy $WKPREFIX="WIKINFO_"; $WKSPREFIX="WIKINFOSIZE_"; $LCPREFIX="LASTCHECK_"; $WPPREFIX="WIKIPEDIA_"; $DIPREFIX="DIFF_";
 * 1) !/usr/bin/perl

$browser=LWP::UserAgent->new;

$browser->cookie_jar( {} ); @ns_headers = (  'User-Agent' => 'Mozilla/4.76 [en] (Win98; U)',   'Accept' => 'image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg,        image/pjpeg, image/png, */*',   'Accept-Charset' => 'iso-8859-1,*,utf-8',   'Accept-Language' => 'en-US', ); $browser->post("http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Userlogin&action=submit",@ns_headers,Content=>[wpName=>"Testuser",wpPassword=>"testpass",wpRemember=>"1",wpLoginAttempt=>"LOG IN"]); $browser->post("http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Userlogin&action=submit",@ns_headers,Content=>[wpName=>"Testuser",wpPassword=>"testpass",wpRemember=>"1",wpLoginAttempt=>"LOG IN"]);

$d=new HTTP::Daemon(LocalHost=>'localhost', LocalPort => '8450', Reuse=>1); print "Please contact me at: ".$d->url. "\n"; @ns_headers = (  'User-Agent' => 'Mozilla/4.76 [en] (Win98; U)',   'Accept' => 'image/gif, image/x-xbitmap, image/jpeg,        image/pjpeg, image/png, */*',   'Accept-Charset' => 'iso-8859-1,*,utf-8',   'Accept-Language' => 'en-US', );
 * 1) get_wikinfo_new;
 * 2) exit 0;

while ($c = $d->accept) { $r = $c->get_request; my $html; $html.= <

Wikinfo Import Script HTML

if ($r) { if ($r->method eq 'GET' and $r->url->path eq "/") {

my $re=new HTTP::Response; $re->header("content_type"=>"text/html"); $html.= <content($html); $c->send_response($re);

} elsif($r->method eq 'GET' and $r->url->path ne "/") {

my $re=new HTTP::Response; $re->header("content_type"=>"text/html");

$page=substr($r->url->path,1); $html.=import_wikinfo($page); $html.=" "; $re->content($html); $c->send_response($re); }	 else { $c->send_error(RC_FORBIDDEN) }     }      $c = undef;  # close connection }

sub get_wikinfo_new {

my $response = $browser->get(	"http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Newpages&limit=500&offset=0",	@ns_headers); $response->content=~m/(.*?)<\/ol>/s; @lines=split(//i,$1); print $#lines; my @checklines;

foreach $line(@lines) { if($line=~m/(.*?)()(.*?)(<\/a>).*?\((.*?) bytes\)/i) { $date=$1; $linkopen=$2; $linktitle=$3; $linkclose=$4; $bytes=$5; if($line=~m/ \((.*)\)<\/em>/i) { $comment=$1; } else { $comment="";

}			$wikititle=to_url($linktitle); $pediatitle=to_url(strip_sig($linktitle));

if(!($comment=~m/from wikipedia \(note changes here\)/i)) { push @checklines,$linkopen; push @checklines,$linktitle; push @checklines,$linkclose; push @checklines,$bytes; push @checklines,$comment;

$tryurl="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=".$pediatitle. "&action=edit"; $response=$browser->get($tryurl,@ns_headers); $response->content=~m/(.*)<\/textarea>/is; $pediasource=$1; if(($pediasource=~m/\w+/)) {

push @checklines,"$pediatitle";

if(1) { $tryurl="http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=". $wikititle. "&action=edit"; $response=$browser->get($tryurl,@ns_headers); $response->content=~m/(.*)<\/textarea>/is; $wikinfosource=$1; $diff=text_diff($pediasource, $wikinfosource, {string=>1, plain=>1, escape=>1}); $diff=~m/ (.*)<\/p>/si; $diff=$1; $diff=~s/ size="\+1">/>/gi; push @checklines, $diff; } else { push @checklines, "N/A"; }					push @checklines, "N/A"; # exists, no import possible

} else {

push @checklines, "N/A"; # no Wikipedia URL push @checklines, "N/A"; # no diff $importurl=$d->url.$wikititle; $importlink="Go!"; push @checklines,$importlink;

}

}

}	}

return @checklines; }

sub import_wikinfo {

my $title=shift; my $editurl="http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=".$title."&action=edit"; my $viewurl="http://www.wikinfo.org/wiki.phtml?title=".$title; my $response = $browser->get($editurl,@ns_headers); my $rv; $pagetitle=to_wiki($title); $pediaurl=to_url(strip_sig($pagetitle));

$response->content=~m/<textarea.*?>(.*)<\/textarea>/is; $source=$1; $source=~s/\"/"/gi; # unescape	$source=~s/\>/>/gi;	$source=~s/\</</gi;	$source=~s/\&/\&/gi;	if(!($source=~m/\w+/)) {	$rv.= "The page with the specified title was not found: $viewurl (edit)";	return $rv;	}
 * 1) 	print "Full:\n".$response->content;
 * 1) 	print "Source:\n".$source;

$source.="\n\nAdapted from the Wikinfo article [$viewurl $pagetitle], licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.";

$rv.="Checking for duplicate of $viewurl..
";

$tryurl="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/".$pediaurl; $response=$browser->get($tryurl,@ns_headers); if($response->content=~m/There is currently no text in this page/) {

$rv.="Posted new article to $tryurl!
"; $wpurl="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=".$pediaurl."&action=submit"; $browser->post($wpurl,@ns_headers,Content=>		[ 		wpTextbox1=>$source, 		wpSave=>"Save page", 		wpSummary=>"Imported from Wikinfo via User:Eloquence/Wikinfo import script"		]); } else {

$rv.="Page already exists on Wikipedia: $tryurl! You have to merge by hand. :-("

}

return $rv;

}

sub catch_zap { my $signame = shift; untie %storage; die "Program terminated: Received $signame"; }

sub strip_sig { my $title=shift; @names=( "Levan Urushadze", "Fred Bauder"); while ($name=shift(@names)) { $title=~s/(.*) by $name$/$1/g; }	return $title; }

sub to_url { my $title=shift; $title=~s/ /_/gi; $title=uri_escape($title); $title=~s/\'/\%27/gi; return $title; }

sub to_wiki { my $title=shift; $title=uri_unescape($title); $title=~s/\%27/\'/gi; $title=~s/_/ /gi; return $title; }

title: User:Eloquence/Wikinfo import script


text:
Anne Applebaum

Anne Elizabeth Applebaum (born July 25, 1964) is an American journalist and historian. She has written extensively about the history of Communism and the development of civil society in Central and Eastern Europe. Applebaum also holds Polish citizenship.

She has worked at The Economist and The Spectator, and was a member of the editorial board of The Washington Post (2002–2006). Applebaum won the Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction in 2004 for Gulag: A History published the previous year. She is a staff writer for The Atlantic and a senior fellow at The Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies.

Early life and education
Applebaum was born in Washington, D.C., the eldest of three daughters of Harvey M. and Elizabeth Applebaum. Her father, a Yale alumnus, is senior counsel at Covington & Burling's Antitrust and International Trade Practices. Her mother was a program coordinator at the Corcoran Gallery of Art. According to Applebaum, her great-grandparents immigrated to America during the reign of Alexander III of Russia from what is now Belarus.

Applebaum has stated that she was brought up in a "very reform" Jewish family. After attending the Sidwell Friends School in Washington, D.C., Applebaum entered Yale University, where during the Fall 1982 semester she studied Soviet history under Wolfgang Leonhard. As an undergraduate, she spent the summer of 1985 in Leningrad, Soviet Union (now Saint Petersburg, Russia), an experience she credits with helping shape her opinions.

Applebaum received her BA from Yale in 1986 summa cum laude in history and literature, and was the recipient of a two-year Marshall Scholarship at the London School of Economics, where she earned a master's degree in international relations (1987). She also studied at St Antony's College, Oxford, before becoming a correspondent for The Economist and moving to Warsaw, Poland, in 1988.

In November 1989, Applebaum drove from Warsaw to Berlin to report on the collapse of the Berlin Wall.

Career
As foreign correspondent for The Economist and The Independent, she covered the fall of the Berlin Wall and the fall of communism. In 1991 she moved back to England to work for The Economist, and was later hired as the foreign and later deputy editor of The Spectator, and later the political editor of the Evening Standard.

In 1994, she published her first book Between East and West: Across the Borderlands of Europe, a travelogue that described the rise of nationalism across the new states of the former Soviet Union. In 2001, she interviewed prime minister Tony Blair. She also undertook historical research for her book Gulag: A History (2003) on the Soviet prison camp system, which won the 2004 Pulitzer Prize for General Non-Fiction. It was also nominated for a National Book Award, for the Los Angeles Times book award and for the National Book Critics Circle Award.

She has been a member of The Washington Post editorial board. She was a columnist at The Washington Post for seventeen years. Applebaum was an adjunct fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank.

Her second history book, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944–56, was published in 2012 by Doubleday in the US and Allen Lane in the UK; it was nominated for a National Book Award, shortlisted for the 2013 PEN/John Kenneth Galbraith Award.

From 2011 to 2016, she created and ran the Transitions Forum at the Legatum Institute, an international think tank and educational charity based in London. Among other projects, she ran a two-year program examining the relationship between democracy and growth in Brazil, India and South Africa, created the Future of Syria and Future of Iran projects on future institutional change in those two countries, and commissioned a series of papers on corruption in Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine.

Together with Foreign Policy magazine she created Democracy Lab, a website focusing on countries in transition to, or away from, democracy and which has since become Democracy Post at The Washington Post. She also ran Beyond Propaganda, a program examining 21st century propaganda and disinformation. Started in 2014, the program anticipated later debates about "fake news". In 2016, she left Legatum because of its stance on Brexit following the appointment of Euroskeptic Philippa Stroud as CEO and joined the London School of Economics as a Professor of Practice at the Institute for Global Affairs. At the LSE, she ran Arena, a program on disinformation and 21st century propaganda. In the autumn of 2019 she moved the project to the Agora Institute at Johns Hopkins University.

In October 2017, she published her third history book, Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine, a history of the Holodomor. The book won the Lionel Gelber Prize and the Duff Cooper Prize, making her the only author to ever win the Duff Cooper Prize twice.

In November 2019, The Atlantic announced that Applebaum was joining the publication as a staff writer starting in January 2020. She was included in the 2020 Prospect list of the top-50 thinkers for the COVID-19 era.

In July 2020, Twilight of Democracy: The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism was published. Partly a memoir and partly political analysis, it was a Der Spiegel and New York Times bestseller.

Also in July 2020, Applebaum was one of the 153 signers of the "Harper's Letter" (also known as "A Letter on Justice and Open Debate") that expressed concern that "the free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of a liberal society, is daily becoming more constricted."

In November 2022, Applebaum was one of 200 US citizens sanctioned by Russia for "promotion of the Russophobic campaign and support for the regime in Kyiv."

Applebaum is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. She is on the board of the National Endowment for Democracy and Renew Democracy Initiative. She was a member of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting's international board of directors. She was a Senior Adjunct Fellow at the Center for European Policy Analysis (CEPA) where she co-led a major initiative aimed at countering Russian disinformation in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). She was on the editorial board for The American Interest and the Journal of Democracy.

Soviet Union and Russia
According to Sheila Fitzpatrick, "Applebaum has been active as a political commentator highly critical of Russia and Putin’s regime." Ivan Krastev asserts that the 1989 fall of the Berlin Wall "was the point of departure of everything that Applebaum did in the following three decades...For her, the end of the Cold War was not a geopolitical story; it was a moral story, a verdict pronounced by history itself."

Applebaum has been writing about the Soviet Union and Russia since the early 1990s. In 2000, she described the links between the then-new president of Russia, Vladimir Putin, with the former Soviet leader Yuri Andropov and the former KGB. In 2008, she began speaking about "Putinism" as an anti-democratic ideology, though most at the time still considered the Russian president to be a pro-Western pragmatist.

Applebaum has been a vocal critic of Western conduct regarding the Russian military intervention in Ukraine. In an article in The Washington Post on March 5, 2014, she maintained that the US and its allies should not continue to enable "the existence of a corrupt Russian regime that is destabilizing Europe", noting that the actions of President Vladimir Putin had violated "a series of international treaties". On March 7, in another article on The Daily Telegraph, discussing an information war, Applebaum argued that "a robust campaign to tell the truth about Crimea is needed to counter Moscow's lies". At the end of August, she asked whether Ukraine should prepare for "total war" with Russia and whether central Europeans should join them.

In 2014, writing in The New York Review of Books she asked (in a review of Karen Dawisha's Putin's Kleptocracy) whether "the most important story of the past twenty years might not, in fact, have been the failure of democracy, but the rise of a new form of Russian authoritarianism". She has described the "myth of Russian humiliation" and argued that NATO and EU expansion have been a "phenomenal success". In July 2016, before the US election, she wrote about connections between Donald Trump and Russia and wrote that Russian support for Trump was part of a wider Russian political campaign designed to destabilize the West. In December 2019, she wrote in The Atlantic that "in the 21st century, we must also contend with a new phenomenon: right-wing intellectuals, now deeply critical of their own societies, who have begun paying court to right-wing dictators who dislike America."

Central Europe
Applebaum has written about the history of central and eastern Europe, Poland in particular. In the conclusion to her book Iron Curtain, Applebaum argued that the reconstruction of civil society was the most important and most difficult challenge for the post-communist states of central Europe; in another essay, she argued that the modern authoritarian obsession with civil society repression dates back to Vladimir Lenin. She has written essays on the Polish film-maker Andrzej Wajda, on the dual Nazi–Soviet occupation of central Europe, and on why it is inaccurate to define "Eastern Europe" as a single entity.

Disinformation, propaganda and fake news
In 2014, Applebaum and Peter Pomerantsev launched Beyond Propaganda, a program examining disinformation and propaganda, at the Legatum Institute. Applebaum wrote about a 2014 Russian smear campaign aimed at her when she was writing heavily about the Russian annexation of Crimea. She stated that dubious material posted on the web was eventually recycled by semi-respectable American pro-Russian websites. Applebaum argued in 2015 that Facebook should take responsibility for spreading false stories and help "undo the terrible damage done by Facebook and other forms of social media to democratic debate and civilized discussion all over the world". Applebaum has been a member of the advisory panel of the Global Disinformation Index.

Nationalism
In March 2016, eight months before the election of President Donald Trump, Applebaum wrote a Washington Post column asking, "Is this the end of the West as we know it?", which argued that "we are two or three bad elections away from the end of NATO, the end of the European Union and maybe the end of the liberal world order". Applebaum endorsed Hillary Clinton's campaign for president in July 2016 on the grounds that Trump is "a man who appears bent on destroying the alliances that preserve international peace and American power".

Applebaum's March 2016 Washington Post column prompted the Swiss newspaper Tages-Anzeiger and the German magazine Der Spiegel to interview her. The articles appeared in December 2016 and January 2017. She argued very early on that the international populist movement which had frequently been identified as "far right" or "alt right" were in truth not conservative in nature in a way that the term "conservative" had long been defined. She wrote that populist groups in Europe share "ideas and ideology, friends and founders", and that, unlike Burkean conservatives, they seek to "overthrow the institutions of the present to bring back things that existed in the past—or that they believe existed in the past—by force." Applebaum has underlined the danger of a new "Nationalist International", a union of xenophobic, nationalist parties such as Law and Justice in Poland, the Northern League in Italy, and the Freedom Party in Austria.

In January 2022, Applebaum was invited to testify before the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee hearing entitled "Bolstering Democracy in the Age of Rising Authoritarianism".

Israel
In January 2002, Applebaum wrote a Slate opinion piece "Kill the Messenger" criticizing Israeli attacks on Palestinian Authority targets as ineffective and harmful, arguing instead for a focus on the Palestinian Authority's official media which she believes perpetuate anti-American sentiment and support for terrorism, thereby worsening the conflict.

Applebaum has critiqued Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's judicial overhaul and its impact on Israeli society. She argues that Netanyahu's efforts to change the judiciary have created deep divisions within Israel, which have implications for national security. This internal discord, she suggests, might have emboldened groups like Hamas to launch attacks, perceiving Israel as weakened by its internal strife

Personal life
In 1992, Applebaum married Radosław Sikorski, who later served as Poland's Defence Minister, Foreign Minister, Marshal of the Sejm, and a member of the European Parliament. Since 2023, he serves again as Minister of Foreign Affairs. The couple have two sons, Aleksander and Tadeusz. She became a Polish citizen in 2013. She speaks Polish and Russian in addition to English.

Awards and honors

 * 1992 Charles Douglas-Home Memorial Trust Award
 * 2003 National Book Award Nonfiction, finalist, Gulag: A History
 * 2003 Duff Cooper Prize for Gulag: A History
 * 2004 Pulitzer Prize (General Non-Fiction), Gulag: A History
 * 2008 Estonian Order of the Cross of Terra Mariana third class
 * 2008 Lithuanian Millenium Star
 * 2010 Petőfi Prize
 * 2012 Officer's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Republic of Poland
 * 2012 National Book Award (Nonfiction), finalist, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944–1956
 * 2013 Cundill Prize in Historical Literature, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944–1956
 * 2013 Duke of Westminster's Medal for Military Literature, Iron Curtain: The Crushing of Eastern Europe 1944–1956
 * 2017 Doctor of Humane Letters Honoris Causa, Georgetown University
 * 2017 Honorary Doctorate, National University of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy
 * 2017 Duff Cooper Prize for her book Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine
 * 2017 Antonovych Prize
 * 2018 Lionel Gelber Prize for her book Red Famine: Stalin's War on Ukraine
 * 2018 Honorary Fritz Stern Professor, University of Wrocław
 * 2019 Premio Nonino "Maestro del nostro tempo" ("Master of our Time")
 * 2019 Order of Princess Olga, third class
 * 2021 National Magazine Awards finalist in categories "Essays and Criticism" and "Columns and Commentary"
 * 2021 Premio Internacional de Periodismo de EL MUNDO
 * 2022 Order of Princess Olga, second class
 * 2024 Friedenspreis des Deutschen Buchhandels

title: Anne Applebaum


text:
Antonio de la Rúa

Antonio de la Rúa Pertiné (born 7 March 1974) is an Argentine lawyer, and the son of former president Fernando de la Rúa (who governed Argentina from 1999 to 2001) and Inés Pertiné. He was an advisor to his father during his father's presidency and one of the heads of his father's presidential campaign. He is Shakira's ex-boyfriend.

Politics
Though de la Rúa held no formal position in his father's government, he was the chief architect of his father's election campaign; his success led his father to continue to turn to him for political advice after his assumption of the presidency. He was pointed to as the leader of the "Sushi set" (El grupo sushi), a group of young officials so-called due to their alleged preference for expensive Japanese cuisine; they were sometimes criticised for their influence on politics. After the collapse of the de la Rúa presidency, de la Rúa focused his energies on philanthropy and distanced himself from politics, thus marking the end of the influence of the "Sushi Group".

Personal life
De la Rúa was a target of paparazzi coverage after his father became president. In 2000, he started dating the Colombian singer Shakira. On 10 January 2011, Shakira announced on her website that after 11 years together, she and de la Rúa had separated in August 2010 after making "a mutual decision to take time apart from [their] romantic relationship." She wrote that the couple "view this period of separation as temporary and as a time of individual growth as [they] continue to be partners in [their] business and professional lives", with de la Rúa overseeing Shakira's "business and career interests as he has always done." In September 2012, he filed a lawsuit for $250 million against Shakira. His lawsuit was dismissed by a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge in August 2013.

ALAS
In December 2006, de la Rúa, together with a group of prominent Latin American businessmen and artists, founded ALAS Foundation. Foundation ALAS is a non-profit organization that promotes Early Childhood Development in Hispanic America.

Foundation ALAS had Nobel Prize winner Gabriel García Márquez as its Honorary President. Its founding members include de la Rúa, Carlos Slim, and Alejandro Bulgheroni among others.

On 22 February 2010, Antonio de la Rúa and Shakira were invited to the White House where they discussed with President Barack Obama the importance of investing in Early Childhood Development Policies.

title: Antonio de la Rúa


text:
Jefferson Bible

The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, commonly referred to as the Jefferson Bible, is one of two religious works constructed by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson compiled the manuscripts but never published them. The first, The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth, was completed in 1804, but no copies exist today. The second, The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, was completed in 1820 by cutting and pasting, with a razor and glue, numerous sections from the New Testament as extractions of the doctrine of Jesus. Jefferson's condensed composition excludes all miracles by Jesus and most mentions of the supernatural, including sections of the four gospels that contain the Resurrection and most other miracles, and passages that portray Jesus as divine.

Early draft
In an 1803 letter to Joseph Priestley, Jefferson stated that he conceived the idea of writing his view of the "Christian System" in a conversation with Benjamin Rush during 1798–99. He proposes beginning with a review of the morals of the ancient philosophers, moving on to the "deism and ethics of the Jews", and concluding with the "principles of a pure deism" taught by Jesus, "omitting the question of his deity". Jefferson explains that he does not have the time, and urges the task on Priestley as the person best equipped to accomplish it.

Jefferson accomplished a more limited goal in 1804 with The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth, the predecessor to The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth. He described it in a letter to John Adams dated October 12, 1813:

"In extracting the pure principles which he taught, we should have to strip off the artificial vestments in which they have been muffled by priests, who have travestied them into various forms, as instruments of riches and power to them. We must dismiss the Platonists & Plotinists, the Stagyrites & Gamalielites, the Eclectics the Gnostics & Scholastics, Logos & Demi-urgos, Aeons & Daemons male & female, with a long train of Etc. Etc. Etc. or, shall I say at once, of Nonsense. We must reduce our volume to the simple evangelists, select, even from them, the very words only of Jesus, paring off the Amphibologisms into which they have been led, by forgetting often, or not understanding, what had fallen from him, by giving their own misconceptions as his dicta, and expressing unintelligibly for others what they had not understood themselves. There will be found remaining the most sublime and benevolent code of morals which has ever been offered to man. I have performed this operation for my own use, by cutting verse by verse out of the printed book, and arranging the matter which is evidently his, and which is as easily distinguishable as diamonds in a dunghill. The result is an 8vo of 46 pages of pure and unsophisticated doctrines"

Jefferson wrote that "The doctrines which flowed from the lips of Jesus Himself are within the comprehension of a child". He explained these doctrines were such as were "professed & acted on by the unlettered apostles, the Apostolic fathers, and the Christians of the 1st century". In a letter to Reverend Charles Clay, he described his results:

"Probably you have heard me say I had taken the four Evangelists, had cut out from them every text they had recorded of the moral precepts of Jesus, and arranged them in a certain order; and although they appeared but as fragments, yet fragments of the most sublime edifice of morality which had ever been exhibited to man."

Jefferson never referred to his work as a Bible, and the full title of this 1804 version was The Philosophy of Jesus of Nazareth, being Extracted from the Account of His Life and Doctrines Given by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; Being an Abridgement of the New Testament for the Use of the Indians, Unembarrased [uncomplicated] with Matters of Fact or Faith beyond the Level of their Comprehensions.

Jefferson frequently expressed discontent with this earlier version, which was merely a compilation of the moral teachings of Jesus. The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth represents the fulfillment of his desire to produce a more carefully assembled edition which includes what, in his estimation, can be known of the life of Jesus, whose deeds were the embodiment of his teachings.

Content
Using a razor and glue, Jefferson cut and pasted his arrangement of selected verses from a 1794 bilingual Latin/Greek version using the text of the Plantin Polyglot, a French Geneva Bible and the King James Version of the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in chronological order—putting together excerpts from one text with those of another to create a single narrative. Thus he begins with Luke 2 and Luke 3, then follows with Mark 1 and Matthew 3. He provides a record of which verses he selected, and of the order he chose in his Table of the Texts from the Evangelists employed in this Narrative and of the order of their arrangement.

Consistent with his naturalistic outlook and intent, most supernatural events are not included in Jefferson's heavily edited compilation. Paul K. Conkin states that "For the teachings of Jesus he concentrated on his milder admonitions (the Sermon on the Mount) and his most memorable parables. What resulted is a reasonably coherent, but at places oddly truncated, biography. If necessary to exclude the miraculous, Jefferson would cut the text even in mid-verse." Historian Edwin Scott Gaustad explains, "If a moral lesson was embedded in a miracle, the lesson survived in Jeffersonian scripture, but the miracle did not. Even when this took some rather careful cutting with scissors or razor, Jefferson managed to maintain Jesus' role as a great moral teacher, not as a shaman or faith healer."

Therefore, The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth begins with an account of Jesus' birth without references to angels (at that time), genealogy, or prophecy. Miracles, references to the Trinity and the divinity of Jesus, and Jesus' resurrection are also absent from his collection.

The work ends with the words: "Now, in the place where He was crucified, there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulchre, wherein was never man yet laid. There laid they Jesus. And rolled a great stone to the door of the sepulchre, and departed." These words correspond to the ending of John 19 in the Bible.

Purpose
Commenting on how Jefferson's interest in Jesus and the Bible changed over time, Mark Holowchak writes that "[t]here is what might be called his literary-criticism phase of his salad years and his naturalized-religion phase of his later, more mature years. In his literary-criticism phase, Jefferson's interest in the Bible is critical... The Bible is a significant work of literature that is taken literally by millions, in spite of numerous hyperboles and absurdities. Thus, it is as good a book as any, and much better than most, on which to hone one's critical skills." Here Jefferson follows the lead of Lord Bolingbroke whose religious views Jefferson commonplaced abundantly earlier in life in his Literary Commonplace Book.

In a letter to Bishop James Madison (31 Jan. 1800), cousin to the politician and future president of the same name, Jefferson expresses keen interest in Jesus as philosopher. He writes of the beliefs of German philosopher and founder of Illuminism, Adam Weishaupt. "Wishaupt [sic] ...is among those (as you know the excellent Price and Priestly [sic] also are) who believe in the indefinite perfectibility of man. he thinks he may in time be rendered so perfect that he will be able to govern himself in every circumstance so as to injure none, to do all the good he can, to leave government no occasion to exercise their powers over him, & of course to render political government useless. ...Wishaupt believes that to promote this perfection of the human character was the object of Jesus Christ. that his intention was simply to reinstate natural religion, & by diffusing the light of his morality, to teach us to govern ourselves. his precepts are the love of god & love of our neighbor. and by teaching innocence of conduct, he expected to place men in their natural state of liberty & equality. he says, no one ever laid a surer foundation for liberty than our grand master, Jesus of Nazareth." As president, he expresses those sentiments in a letter to Robinson over a year later (23 Mar. 1801). "The Christian religion, when divested of the rags in which they have enveloped it, and brought to the original purity and simplicity of its benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind." The letters intimate great appreciation of the life and words of Jesus as the true cynosure of republican government.

It is understood by some historians that Jefferson composed it for his own satisfaction, supporting the Christian faith as he saw it. Gaustad states, "The retired President did not produce his small book to shock or offend a somnolent world; he composed it for himself, for his devotion, for his assurance, for a more restful sleep at nights and a more confident greeting of the mornings."

There is no record of this or its successor being for "the Use of the Indians", despite the stated intent of the 1804 version being that purpose. Although the government long supported Christian activity among Indians, and in Notes on the State of Virginia Jefferson supported "a perpetual mission among the Indian tribes", at least in the interest of anthropology, and as President sanctioned financial support for a priest and church for the Kaskaskia Indians, Jefferson did not make these works public. Instead, he acknowledged the existence of The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth to only a few friends, saying that he read it before retiring at night, as he found this project intensely personal and private.

Ainsworth Rand Spofford, Librarian of Congress (1864–1894) stated: "His original idea was to have the life and teachings of the Saviour, told in similar excerpts, prepared for the Indians, thinking this simple form would suit them best. But, abandoning this, the formal execution of his plan took the shape above described, which was for his individual use. He used the four languages that he might have the texts in them side by side, convenient for comparison. In the book he pasted a map of the ancient world and the Holy Land, with which he studied the New Testament."

Some speculate that the reference to "Indians" in the 1804 title may have been an allusion to Jefferson's Federalist opponents, as he likewise used this indirect tactic against them at least once before, that being in his second inaugural address, or that he was providing himself a cover story in case this work became public. Also referring to the 1804 version, Jefferson wrote, "A more beautiful or precious morsel of ethics I have never seen; it is a document in proof that I am a real Christian, that is to say, a disciple of the doctrines of Jesus."

Jefferson's claim to be a Christian was made in response to those who accused him of being otherwise, due to his unorthodox view of the Bible and conception of Christ. Recognizing his rather unusual views, Jefferson stated in a letter (1819) to Ezra Stiles Ely, "You say you are a Calvinist. I am not. I am of a sect by myself, as far as I know."

Publication history
After completion of the Life and Morals, about 1820, Jefferson shared it with a number of friends, but he never allowed it to be published during his lifetime.

The most complete form Jefferson produced was inherited by his grandson, Thomas Jefferson Randolph, and was acquired in 1895 by the National Museum in Washington. The book was later published as a lithographic reproduction by an act of the United States Congress in 1904. Beginning in 1904 and continuing every other year until the 1950s, new members of Congress were given a copy of the Jefferson Bible. Until the practice first stopped, copies were provided by the Government Printing Office. A private organization, the Libertarian Press, revived the practice in 1997.

In January 2013, the American Humanist Association published an edition of the Jefferson Bible, distributing a free copy to every member of Congress and President Barack Obama. A Jefferson Bible For the Twenty-First Century adds samples of passages that Jefferson chose to omit, as well as examples of the "best" and "worst" from the Hebrew Bible, the Quran, the Bhagavad Gita, the Buddhist Sūtras, and the Book of Mormon.

The Smithsonian published the first full-color facsimile of the Jefferson Bible on November 1, 2011. Released in tandem with a Jefferson Bible exhibit at the National Museum of American History, the reproduction features introductory essays by Smithsonian Political History curators Harry R. Rubenstein and Barbara Clark Smith, and Smithsonian Senior Paper Conservator Janice Stagnitto Ellis. The book's pages were digitized using a Hasselblad H4D50-50 megapixel DSLR camera and a Zeiss 120 macro lens, and were photographed by Smithsonian photographer, Hugh Talman.

The entire Jefferson Bible is available to view, page-by-page, on the Smithsonian National Museum of American History's website. The high-resolution digitization enables the public to see the minute details and anomalies of each page.

The text is in the public domain and is thus freely available on the Internet.

Recent history
In 1895, the Smithsonian Institution under the leadership of librarian Cyrus Adler purchased the original Jefferson Bible from Jefferson's great-granddaughter Carolina Randolph for $400. A conservation effort commencing in 2009, led by Senior Paper Conservator Janice Stagnitto Ellis, in partnership with the museum's Political History department, allowed for a public unveiling in an exhibit open from November 11, 2011, through May 28, 2012, at the National Museum of American History. Also displayed were the source books from which Jefferson cut his selected passages, and the 1904 edition of the Jefferson Bible requested and distributed by the United States Congress. The exhibit was accompanied by an interactive digital facsimile available on the museum's public website. On February 20, 2012, the Smithsonian Channel premiered the documentary Jefferson's Secret Bible.

Editions in print

 * Facsimile
 * The Jefferson Bible, Smithsonian Edition: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth (2011) Smithsonian Books hardcover: ISBN 978-1588343123
 * Jefferson's Extracts from the Gospels: 'The Philosophy of Jesus' and 'The Life and Morals of Jesus': The Papers of Thomas Jefferson: Second Series (1983) Princeton University Press hardcover: ISBN 0691046999, paperback: ISBN 0691102104
 * THE Jefferson Bible (1964) Clarkston N. Potter, Inc hardcover:
 * The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth (1904) United States Government Printing Office

 * Text
 * Thomas Jefferson's Bible, With Introduction and Critical Commentary, Berlin: DeGruyter, 2017. ISBN 978-3110617566
 * The Jefferson Bible: What Thomas Jefferson Selected as the Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth: ISBN 978-1936583218
 * The Jefferson Bible: The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth (2006) Dover Publications paperback: ISBN 0486449211
 * The Jefferson Bible, (2006) Applewood Books hardcover: ISBN 1557091846
 * The Jefferson Bible, introduction by Cyrus Adler, (2005) Digireads.com paperback: ISBN 1420924923
 * The Jefferson Bible, introduction by Percival Everett, (2004) Akashic Books paperback: ISBN 1888451629
 * The Jefferson Bible, introduction by M. A. Sotelo, (2004) Promotional Sales Books, LLC paperback
 * Jefferson's "Bible": The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, introduction by Judd W. Patton, (1997) American Book Distributors paperback: ISBN 0929205022
 * A Jefferson Bible for the Twenty-First Century, 2013, Humanist Press, paperback ISBN 978-0931779299, ebook ISBN 978-0931779305

title: Jefferson Bible


text:
Arkansas RiverBlades

The Arkansas RiverBlades were a professional ice hockey team located in North Little Rock, Arkansas. The RiverBlades were an expansion franchise that entered the East Coast Hockey League for the 1999–2000 season. Their home games were played at the newly opened Alltel Arena.

The team logo was unveiled in February 1998 and the Canadian brothers Dave Berryman and Tim Berryman were granted a lease for Alltel Arena in March. The ECHL franchise was granted in May 1998. The team was originally named the "Arkansas RazorBlades" and adopted a razorback hog as its mascot. The University of Arkansas objected to the name and symbology and pressed the team to finally agree to a name change. In October 1998, a contest was held to establish a new name and "RiverBlades" was chosen. In May 1999, the team selected the slogan "Greatest Game on Ice". Little Rock's minor league baseball team, the Arkansas Travelers, objected to the slogan which is similar to their long standing "Greatest Game on Dirt" slogan.

The RiverBlades played their home opener on October 28, 1999, after moving the date due to construction delays at Alltel Arena. The RiverBlades competed with the cross-town Arkansas GlacierCats who were in their second season. The two teams played on the same nights in many cases and each developed their own fan following. The next year, the GlacierCats folded after only two seasons of play, unable to compete with the RiverBlades and their new arena.

In October 2001, the ECHL approved the sale of Dave Berryman's 51 percent stake of the team to Equity Broadcasting, which also owned the Arkansas Twisters arena football team. During the 2000–01 season, the team hosted the ECHL All-Star game at Alltel Arena.

In the summer of 2002, the Fayetteville Force, a Central Hockey League team out of North Carolina offered to switch franchises with Berryman who turned the offer down.

In early 2003, rumors began to circulate that the RiverBlades would not return for the 2003–04 season, but the company denied the rumors. In June 2003, Equity Broadcasting ended the lease with Alltel Arena and announced that it would attempt to sell the team.

In 2008, rumors began to circulate about a new season in 2010–11, however these rumors could neither be confirmed nor denied. Additionally, with the December 8, 2008, filing of chapter 11 bankruptcy by Equity Media Holdings Corporation, this became unlikely.

Playoffs

 * 1999–00: Did not qualify.
 * 2000–01: Defeated Baton Rouge 2-0 in qualifying round; lost to South Carolina 3-1 in first round.
 * 2001–02: Did not qualify.
 * 2002–03: Lost to Louisiana 3-0 in first round.

title: Arkansas RiverBlades


text:
Arkansas GlacierCats

The Arkansas GlacierCats were a short-lived minor-league hockey team located in Little Rock, Arkansas.

The Arkansas GlacierCats were a Western Professional Hockey League (WPHL) franchise in Little Rock, Arkansas. The team was owned by Ed Novess and Dan Hart of Austin, Texas and they played in the WPHL during the 1998–99 and 1999–2000 seasons. Home games were played at the old Barton Coliseum.

The GlacierCats were popular in their first year but were forced to suspend operations permanently in April 2000 largely due to competition by the Arkansas RiverBlades of the East Coast Hockey League who played at the newly opened ALLTEL Arena in North Little Rock, directly across the Arkansas River from downtown Little Rock.

title: Arkansas GlacierCats


text:
Bill Bergey

William Earl Bergey (born February 9, 1945) is an American former football linebacker who played professionally for 12 seasons, most notably with the Philadelphia Eagles of National Football League (NFL). He was drafted by the Cincinnati Bengals of the American Football League (AFL) in 1969, the year before the AFL–NFL merger was completed, and continued to play with the Bengals in the NFL until 1973. Bergey subsequently signed with the Eagles the following year, where he played seven seasons until retiring in 1981.

During his career, Bergey was named to five Pro Bowls, was a two-time first-team All-Pro, and made one Super Bowl appearance in Super Bowl XV, his final professional game. He is an inductee of the Eagles Hall of Fame and the Philadelphia Sports Hall of Fame.

Early life and education
Bergey was born in South Dayton, New York, in 1945. He graduated from Pine Valley Central High School in South Dayton in 1964, and graduated from Arkansas State University (ASU), where he was an All-American for the Arkansas State Indians and has since been voted by fans the Top Player in Arkansas State history. He was a charter member of Delta Eta chapter of Kappa Alpha Order at ASU. He graduated in 1969 with a Bachelor of Science degree in physical education.

At Arkansas State, Bergey set records for best tackling average in a season, most fumble recoveries in a season, most tackles in a game, most tackles in a season, and most career tackles. In 1968, Bergey averaged 19.6 tackles per game. He played in three post-season all-star games during his ASU career; he was selected to the All-Southland Conference team three times and to the Southland Conference All-First Decade Team. Bergey's jersey number 66 was retired by ASU.

Cincinnati Bengals
Bergey was drafted by the American Football League's Cincinnati Bengals in the second round of the 1969 NFL Draft and was an AFL All-Star in his first year with two interceptions. For his efforts as a rookie, he was named the AFL Defensive Rookie of the Year by the Associated Press, the final selections made for the AFL as a league prior to the merger. He recorded three interceptions in the 1970 season, the first for the team in the NFL; the Bengals made the postseason that year, but Bergey did not record an statistic. He recorded a fumble recovery to go with an unofficial "sack". He recorded an interception in his next two combined seasons. In his final season with Cincinnati in 1973, he had three interceptions and recovered three fumbles.

Florida Blazers and trade to Philadelphia Eagles
Bergey signed a personal service contract on April 17, 1974 with the Washington Capitols, the owner of the World Football League (WFL)'s Virginia Ambassadors, which would later become the Florida Blazers once the circuit began play in July of that year. He was to have joined the WFL team in May 1976, after his contract with the Cincinnati Bengals expired following the 1975 season. However, the Bengals filed suit against Bergey for breach of contract and a temporary restraining order against the WFL and its franchises two days later on April 19. In the hearing, which began on April 29 and was adjudicated 15 days later on May 14, the court concluded that Bergey had not breached his contract and the Bengals' motion for a temporary injunction was denied.

Bergey never received any compensation from the Blazers and was released from his WFL contract. He was traded from the Bengals to the Philadelphia Eagles for a 1977 first-round selection, Wilson Whitley, and first- and second-round picks in 1978, Ross Browner and Ray Griffin respectively, on July 10, 1974.

In July 1974, Bergey signed a five‐year contract with the Eagles. The Blazers ceased operating following the 1974 season, and the WFL itself ceased business in 1975.

Philadelphia Eagles
Bergey played a key role in the Eagles' subsequent rise, culminating in the trip to Super Bowl XV. With the Eagles, Bergey, a four-time All-Pro, set the NFL record for most interceptions by a linebacker and became the highest-paid defensive player in the league with a four-year contract for $1 million. He earned Eagles MVP status three times. Bergey recorded 234 tackles in a single season with the Eagles. He was a popular player who was the foundation of the "Gang Green" defense that brought the Eagles back to the playoffs in 1978, 1979, and to the Super Bowl in 1980.

Bergey had conflicts with guard Conrad Dobler of the Eagles' NFC East rival St. Louis Cardinals, who once spit on him while he was downed and injured. His and Dobler's volatile relationship was ranked by NFL Films at #9 on the NFL Top 10 list of feuds.

Bergey retired from professional football in 1981. He was inducted into the Eagles Roll of Honor in 1988. In 2012, the Professional Football Researchers Association named Bergey to the PFRA Hall of Very Good Class of 2012.

Personal life
During his playing days, Bergey served as a lieutenant in the U.S. Army Reserve.

Bergey served as a color commentator on radio broadcasts of the Philadelphia Eagles from 1982 to 1983, and now does pre-game and post-game radio and television commentary for the team during the season.

Bergey currently lives in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania, with his wife Micky. He is a member of the Greater Buffalo Sports Hall of Fame. His son Jake Bergey is a retired lacrosse player for the Philadelphia Wings of the National Lacrosse League and his son Josh Bergey is a retired lacrosse player for the Chesapeake Bayhawks of the Major League Lacrosse. Bill's brother Bruce Bergey was a standout player for the Portland Storm of the WFL.

title: Bill Bergey


text:
Bill Davidson (American football, born 1935)

Bill "Bull" Davidson (January 21, 1935 – May 2, 1999) was an American football player and coach and college athletics administrator. He served as the head football coach at Arkansas State University from 1971 to 1978, compiling a record of 51–32–1. Davidson coached his 1975 team to a perfect season during its first year at the NCAA Division I level and was later inducted into the Arkansas Sports Hall of Fame.

Playing career
Davidson attended high school at Manila, Arkansas where he played baseball and basketball since Manila did not have a football team at the time. In 1953, he enrolled at Arkansas State and went out for the football team. During his career as a player, he lettered three times as a center and linebacker.

Coaching career
After graduating from college, Davidson coached high school football and earned a 28–7 record at Earle, Arkansas from 1957 to 1959 and a 28–5–1 record at Jonesboro High School from 1960 to 1962. He took the offensive coordinator and offensive line coach positions at Arkansas State in 1963.

Davidson amassed a 51–32–1 record as head coach of the Arkansas State Indians, now the Red Wolves, football team from 1971 to 1978. This record included a perfect 11–0 season in 1975. Davidson also participated in an 11–0 perfect season as an assistant coach in 1970, with the team earning the NCAA College Division national championship. When head coach Bennie Ellender headed to his alma mater Tulane, Davidson was elevated to the head coaching job. ASU's record with Davidson as an assistant coach from 1963 to 1970 was 52–20–4. Davidson coached 11 All-Americans during his tenure.

During Davidson's tenure, ASU gained a reputation as a physically tough and intimidating team. In 1975, ASU moved to NCAA Division I and dominated all eleven teams they faced that year by a combined score of 355–81. Davidson's team trailed only twice after half-time the entire year and never in the fourth quarter. ASU led the nation in rushing that year at 340.5 yards per game and ranked in the national top ten in seven defensive categories. Davidson's team took 13 of 22 slots on the Southland Conference's all conference team. Nearly 20 of Davidson's players from the 1975 perfect team were signed by NFL teams. Davidson earned the Southland Conference Coach of the Year that year and the team established the nation's longest winning streak (15 games) at the time. The 1975 season was almost unimaginable for a small college in its first year at the Division I level.

Administrative career
Davidson retired as Arkansas State head coach in 1978 due to health problems. Davidson earned the Southland Conference Coach of the Year trophy again in his last year. Davidson returned to work in the 1980s when he served as an associate athletic director for the school.

Adapted from the article Bill Davidson, from Wikinfo, licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License.


text:
César Award for Best Supporting Actor

List of winners and nominees of the César Award for Best Supporting Actor (César du meilleur second rôle masculin).

Multiple wins and nominations
The following individuals received two or more Best Supporting Actor awards:

The following individuals received three or more Best Supporting Actor nominations:

title: César Award for Best Supporting Actor