text:
Talk:Brusilov offensive

Old talk
Moved from article by Kosebamse 06:55, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC):

(Instead of editing I would like to make my comments below).

I have heard the "specialized unit" put forth by James L. Stokesbury, but I can find now evidence of this. The reason that Bruisilov was successful was that he attacked along several points on his front so that the Austrians could not bring up reinforcements in advance. The reason he hit the weak points was that he asked each of his army Generals,(those of the 8th, 11th, 9th and 7th armies), to prepare an attack where they thought best. This was much better than just picking a spot on the map like Nivelle would have without knowing the terrain.

Brusilov also realized that the front lines had grown rather far apart so he had his men dig trenches all the way up to with in 75-100 yards of the enemy trenches, this is where the shock came from. He also hid his reinforcements well before the attack so that no one knew where each attack would come from.

General Brusilov also had his artilery preparation conducted sporadically. In other words the artillery would stop firing for a half hour and then start again. This way when they stopped for the last time,(i.e. when the troops where jumping off), the enemy soldiers were slow to get out of their trenches. This accounts partially for the large number of troops taken prisoner.

Thank you, Georgestuff2000@yahoo.com

 * Norman Stone also made the point that under Brusilov, the artillery cooperated much better with the infantry, rather than each blaming the other for lost battles, or blaming the logisticians for shell shortages, which had been the case up to Lake Naroch. --Wally Tharg (talk) 22:03, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Losses
Battlebox says 1.5 million Russian losses - article says 0.5 million. Which one is it?

--itpastorn 13:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Russian casualties during the Brusilov Offensive were around 0.5 million, although some sources list losses up to one million. The latter probably incoroporate the Lake Naroch Offensive as well, because both Russian offensives had the goal of relieving the pressure on Verdun. I am skeptical of the "exactness" of the current Russian casualty figures and the number of Russian divisions given in the battle box exceeds the total amout of Russian divisions the entire Eastern Front at that time. I think I'll just update the whole article. Kazak 07:20, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

On losses

It depends on the definition of what you call "Brusilov offensive". From the German/Austrian point of view there were 3 Brusilov offensives between June and December. Total losses (killed/wounded/missing/captured) were 350,000 for the Germans, 1,000,000 for the Austrians (includes 400,000 POW) and 1,500,000 for the Russians. In fact, the total Russian losses were so severe, that it destabilised Czarist Russia.

If you just focus on the first offensive, the loss ratio is MASSIVELY in favor of the Russians. Within the first three days alone app. 200,000 Austrians (actually Czechs and Ruthenians) surrendered hardly puting up resistance. 01. Feb 06

WTF..?

"Months later the Russian Federation established an order that states whom ever may alter the information stated in web pages regarding the Brusilov Offensive will be subject to severe punishment. Soon afterwards, the United Nations agreed to institute this law around the world, so that it may apply to everyone."

It doesn't matter how you count, you can't loose a million men from only 633.000 (573.000=60.000), let alone win the battle. Either the amount of men involved in the campaign must be higher, or the casualties must be lower. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.87.18.14 (talk) 21:32, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

I will remove this cr#p from 68.164.103.162 -enough said.Thanks everybody else for good-will,NPOV and tolerance.And btw,since this IP keeps vandalizing this page for some time,I'm adding this:

IP Address  : 68.164.103.162 [ h-68-164-103-162.mclnva23.covad.net ] ISP         : Covad Communications Organization : AC Micro Location    : US US, United States City        : Middletown, NY - Latitude    :  41°46'79" North Longitude    :  74°40'62" West

OrgName:   Covad Communications Co. OrgID:      CVAD Address:   2510 Zanker Rd. City:       San Jose StateProv: CA PostalCode: 95131 Country:   US

ReferralServer: rwhois://rwhois.covad.net:4321 NetRange:  68.164.0.0 - 68.167.255.255 CIDR:      68.164.0.0/14 NetName:   NETBLK-COVAD-IP-4-NET NetHandle: NET-68-164-0-0-1 Parent:    NET-68-0-0-0-0 NetType:   Direct Allocation NameServer: NS3.COVAD.COM NameServer: NS4.COVAD.COM Comment: RegDate:   2002-11-12 Updated:   2004-03-11

RAbuseHandle: CART-ARIN RAbuseName:  Covad abuse reporting team RAbusePhone: +1-703-376-2830 RAbuseEmail: abuse-isp@covad.com

Someone is trying to prove that Russian losses were upto 1,400,000.... This post is being repeatedly edited by him... I don't understand what's wrong with this person. It's ridiculous to believe that Russians suffered ~1.5 million casualties and still won. SabbirHossen177 (talk) 16:05, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

— Imo this article is in dire need of addressing the shakiness of the numbers aka should probably post more and explain where they come from. E.g. the German wiki has a third the Austrian and half the German losses while having double the Russian casualties. Both articles claim the same time frame as reference. Obviously everything can have a bias and different counting methodologies but this imo makes those numbers needing better context, e.g. what do the Russian archives say exactly, what do the German archives say exactly, are the Austrians different yet again? Possible reasons why? That would allow some objective assessment what has happened 82.135.68.222 (talk) 18:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Guinness Book of Records
According to the latest edition of the Guiness Book of Records the Brusilov Offensive was the bloodiest battle in world history. Colin4C 17:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Pure nonsense. --129.187.244.28 (talk) 06:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Request
Could an editor here check the (very short) summary of this offensive at World War I and provide some cites? Thank you.LeadSongDog come howl  20:47, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Metres to yards
I know that 100m is approx. 91 yards and 75m is approx. 69 yards, but these figures in metres have a very low level of statistical significance. Therefore I suggest using 90 and 70 yards instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.163.242.239 (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

You have the figures backwards. 100 yards is about 91.4 metres. 75 yards is 68.8 metres. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flanker235 (talk • contribs) 04:19, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Losses
The Oxford Companion to Military History says :

Although the Austrians eventually stopped the offensive, they lost 1.5 million killed and wounded to 0.5 million Russians

Paperspots12 (talk) 23:57, 8 June 2011 (UTC)
 * To avoid further misunderstanding we must agree on the time limits of Brusilov Offensive. I'll copy here my old comment from WP:MILHIST talk page:

 * "According to definition from Russian sources, Brusilov Offensive took place from 4 June to 13 August 1916, which was a planned operation. However, according to German/Austrian point of view it continued until 20 September or even later.
 * Russian sources place combined German-Austrian losses to 1.5 million (including 400,000-500,000 thousand POW, about 300,000 killed, the rest missing) and give a figure of about 500,000 Russian losses, and this seems to correspond to the June-August period. But German/Austrian sources, likely according to their extended definition of operation, give just about 750,000 German-Austrian losses and 1,000,000 or more Russian ones.

As far as I understand, the German definition includes a period of less successful Russian operations subsequent to the main planned offensive; also, by that later period Austrian-Hungarian army, disorganized by the main offensive, got into a better shape, possibly with some missing soldiers returning to the regular army."

It seems that The Oxford Companion to Military History supports figures related to the shorter period, and this seems to have more logic, since it was one single operation planned and led by Brusilov, rather than several actions. Of course, the subsequent history also should be taken into account in this article, but the infobox and lede section should focus on the primary operation. Grey Hood  Talk  13:46, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I just found this page and noticed some glaring inconsistencies immediately. They might be caused by the use of different sources, nevertheless the quality of this page suffers considerably. Somebody else mentioned that you cannot lose 1.5 Mil from 500,000! He/she posted the comment more than two years ago and nothing has happened. Using Russian sources to ascertain the losses of the axis powers is ludicrous. The results of the entire offensive seem to be negligible. I cannot recall it being mentioned nor any trench warfare in the east in the history books I read. It is my understanding that due to the vast distances trench warfare was impractical and the eastern front was far more fluid than the western one. The use of infiltration tactics was developed independently at multiple times on both sides of the war. In the end the Russians did not win but their war effort faltered not at the front but due to massive logistics problems and the rise of the communists. I (and probably most other readers) would appreciate it if this page was cleaned up.79.196.236.219 (talk) 12:02, 8 September 2011 (UTC)]

Losses
All those losses numbers are very likely to be massively inflated, as this offensive would be 3 times more bloody than e.g. Verdun. However as there are no better sources available we should use them. Some editors already pointed out, that there are 2 timeframes. The first was until July/August with the first Kerensky offensive. There the Russians had ~550.000 casualties and the central powers about 700,000. Most sources however count the following offensives too, which would make 1-1,5 million casualties for the Russians and up to 1,5 millions for the central powers. I added that. StoneProphet (talk) 16:05, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

 * Is it possible that some historians have added the 80,000 Russian and 16,000 Central Powers losses from the supporting Baranovichi Offensive as well? We also need to be careful that we define our terms ‘casualties’ and ‘losses’ accurately, otherwise we may inadvertently count the PoWs twice.  --Wally Tharg (talk) 21:49, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Interaction between Fronts
Apologies for slight spamming from the Lake Naroch page - not sure how often these Eastern Front pages get looked at. Do we have any evidence that Brusilov was intended to take the pressure off the British and French as the article currently claims? Haig's Despatches are clear that Brusilov was intended to divert attention from the A-H StrafOffensiv against Italy, which it did.

The Allies (UK, France, Italy & Russia) were committed to simultaneous offensives in the summer of 1916. Verdun kicked off at the end of February (which makes it unlikely that the Russians could have organised lake Naroch on the hoof so quickly), and there is no evidence that the French were asking the British for help until about May, when they finally realised they were in serious trouble, reserves being consumed, "Verdun sera prise" by early July, so the Somme kickoff was brought forward from mid-August. That's human nature for you - when a fire breaks out the panic and screaming doesn't start until it's too late. Before that, to British consternation, the French were talking of diverting resources to Salonika - which Britain had wanted abandoned and everybody had agreed should be wound down - and the British politicians were worried that the Russians would launch their offensive prematurely and require antics in the Balkans to help them when they got into trouble.

The main Russian offensive was supposed to be against the Germans (Brusilov v A-H was not supposed to be the main offensive). Not sure if Lake Naroch was supposed to be the main offensive, or was brought forward because of Verdun (possible but seems unlikely to me).

John Keegan does claim that Lake Naroch was launched to distract attention from Verdun, but doesn't go into it very deeply in a general history of the war, or it may just have been his reasonable but mistaken supposition - I have to say I'm dubious for the reasons listed above, but we have to go with what the books say. Norman Stone in his more detailed book on the Eastern Front doesn't mention it at all. Paulturtle (talk) 09:05, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Keegan is right - I've cross-checked with Doughty "Pyrrhic Victory" on France's role in WW1. However, the Brusilov Offensive was intended to be the prelude to a "main" offensive against the Germans later on - which as far as I'm aware did not take place.Paulturtle (talk) 21:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Brussilov-offensive
People, you are all in some debries of unclear informations and some lies, it's absolutely asonishing, how the questions about this offensive and about the Eastern Front could be at all so unprofessional. May be some time I try to add some sources in English (although my English is not perfect), but it is of sense to translate some informations about the happenings on the Eastern Front. It's really funny to see these statements in in the mainstream "something about 1000000 casualities". Are there no any exact informations in English about the Russians in the WWI? I see only proposals - somebody wrote somewhen, but we don't have any concrect informations. Farmount1989 (talk) 16:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Russian losses
Nelipovich researched this battle by the primary documents from Russian archive of First World War. This is the most authoritative expert on the First World War in Russia. All figures are calculated on the Russian archives. More authoritative source on the Russian losses not. I think we should use the losses of the Russian army from Nelipovich's book. This book is in the public domain. Yura2404 (talk) 22:16, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

I have the original of the telegram sent by Nicholas II to the king of Italy announcing the coming offensive. Want to upload the image but don´t know how. bigoteajeno@hotmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Quique47 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

NPOV
Hello Yura,

You deleted the following from the Battle of Smolensk with the comment "Delete soviet propaganda" Russian sources: 200.000–250.000 casualties

That is not how Wikipedia works. Wikipedia tries for a NPOV, and that usually involves listing the opinions of both sides as long as they are reliable sources. If you believe that Zolatarev is not a reliable source, then you should explain the reasons for that belief.

We do not want to end up with an unbalanced Wikipedia that lists the views of only one side. NPOV is an important goal of Wikipedia, and without it Wikipedia's reputation will suffer. Your edits to Brusilov Offensive have created a rather absurd article that says in the introduction "Brusilov Offensive of 1916 the worst crisis of World War I for Austria-Hungary and the Triple Entente's greatest victory" yet lists Russian casualties as twice of Austria-Hungary and Germany. Numerous edits made by you to articles involving Russia seem to violate NPOV.

Best,

JS (talk) 23:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Hello JS,

First, are you read the book: VA Zolotarev and al., Great Patriotic War 1941-1945? I read this book, i have this book in paper version, the figure of 200-250 thousand German causilites - without reference to the German documents. it's just a Soviet estimate without reliable confirmation. we have reliable German documents about German military losses.

Second, I removed the introduction "Brusilov Offensive of 1916 the worst crisis of World War I for Austria-Hungary and the Triple Entente's greatest victory" by mistake. I just do not agree with the figures of losses.

all the best, Yura2404 (talk) 01:41, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Why do you believe that including only German sources and ignoring Soviet sources is NPOV? Also do you understand the absurdity of having "Brusilov Offensive of 1916 the worst crisis of World War I for Austria-Hungary and the Triple Entente's greatest victory" and the casualties figures you have put in the Brusilov article? Depending upon the time period for which an event is assigned and the reliability of the source, you will get many different casualty figures. The goal is to give the reader the best possible NPOV view. Unfortunately your edits have all proceeded in one direction. JS (talk) 17:02, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

 * I including figures only from German sources? this is a joke? in the article about the battle of Smolensk and offensive of Brusilov: Russian and Soviet losses - according to Soviet sources, the German - from German sources. It is right!Yura2404 (talk) 03:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

 * This is your edit to the Battle of Smolensk []. After your edits German casualties stand at 70K, and Soviet casualties are 451K. The result of this battle is described as "Soviet Victory". This again makes this article look absurd. The Soviets are victorious and conquer territory but have 6 times as much casualties? This makes this article sound like military propaganda rather than NPOV. You deleted V.A. Zolotarev and al. reference which had German casualties at 200K to 250K calling it "Soviet Propaganda". What is your proof that Zolotarev is not a reliable source? If the Soviets really suffered 6X casualties how did they push the Germans and their allies all the way back to Berlin?

 * Also what about the Brusilov Offensive? No one can seriously believe that the Russians broke through the Austro-Hungarian lines, overran large amounts of territories creating the "worst crisis of World War I for Austria-Hungary" and yet managed to suffer twice as much casualties!!! These biased edits are really detrimental to Wikipedia's quality. JS (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

 * German losses from the official German military history of World War I, the Austro-Hungarian losses - from the official Austrian military history of the First World War. this is the most reliable sources.Yura2404 (talk) 03:40, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

First use of shock troops/infiltration tactics?
This article gives the impression that this was the first use of said tactics, that Brusilov inspired the use of small groups of infantry seeking out weak points as opposed to the massed assaults used previously - and that this was the inspiration for similar tactics being used on the western front later on.

However, the germans had been experimenting with the use of these kinds of tactics since 1915 - and had (rather famously) put them to use during the opening attacks at Verdun, 4 months BEFORE the Brusilov offensive began. The tactics can certainly be called innovative at the time, regardless of who used them. But giving the impression that the other parties in the war simply "picked this up" from the Brusilov offensive simply can't be right.

37.191.140.144 (talk) 20:53, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

 * I've reduced the scope of the claim. Brusilov's actions may have influenced infiltration tactics as they were later used -- hard to tell. I've left the citation needed tag.  If no one comes up with anything, this paragraph may be removed.  --A D Monroe III(talk)  03:40, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

 * After more than a year without any cite added, I've removed the questionable statement. (A vague version of this still exists in the Aftermath section.)  --A D Monroe III(talk)  14:34, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Casualties
I went ahead and added the casualties given by Keegan and Stevenson, which seems more reliable than the numbers given by Mernikov. --Wassersäufer (talk) 09:21, 7 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I, in turn, added all casualty estimates to the Aftermath section. Albergo Paradiso (talk) 15:55, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Aftermath
i found this "gem" in aftermath, "This helped to end the era of mass trench warfare in all but a few nations, most of them localized in Africa." Africa?? that is rubbish. north south korea, india pakistan, the wars in the middle east. all feature more and greater trenches than any african nation did in decades, ww2 was essentially entrenched, a lot of the white russian campaign was, even i am breaking my head trying to find a good example of trenchwarfare in africa, probably some of it occured in the states bordering south africa during decolonisation. to this day trenches are everywhere. syria, lebanon, gaza the first irak(-iran) war and more were characteristically trenchwarfare for a greater part than any war (except perhaps the alamein battle) ever was in africa, racist! 178.85.44.61 (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

 * I’m afraid we won’t get very far improving Wikipedia by calling each other racists ... we’ll improve it by making emotionally neutral edits that take information from peer-reviewed sources. --Wally Tharg (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Reference to Platon Lechitsky, and call for a Wiki bio page
I don’t often do this, but I’ve deliberately added a dead link to General Platon Lechitsky, Russian commander of 9 Army (the southernmost in this offensive, and according to Stone, one of the two most successful). He has dead links on a couple of other pages (on Russian units that he commanded beforehand). But before we do so, we’ll have to agree how we spell his name ...

On the wider point, I think that any general who has risen to command a field army warrants a Wikipedia page. (Discuss: 10 marks.) --Wally Tharg (talk) 22:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Infobox Results BRD
TL;DR: I'm removing "decisive" from the infobox result per WP infobox battle guidelines. Please skip the rest unless this really interests you somehow.

Sigh. You've been warned.

In the infobox, I changed the result from "Decisive Russian victory" to "Russian victory", with the comment. An IP editor has reverted this change without comment. So, dutifully following WP:BRD, I'm starting this discussion to reach consensus on this matter.

This exact subject, adding a word or two to the results in battle infoboxes to give a more nuanced qualification the level of victory, has been debated countless times in thousands of articles. It's been realized that this is always subjective, plagued by nationalistic POV, and neither readers nor historians ever seem to agree, and (worst of all) neither do infobox editors. Infoboxes, by their specific purpose and design, will always be poor at nuance. As noted in my comment, it's been decided that qualifying the level of victory in battle infoboxes is not helpful to readers, and especially not helpful to maintaining Wikipedia. There is no reason to start this debate again here for this one article.

And, even without that, this particular battle wouldn't qualify as "decisive" anyway. Yes, Brusilov's significant yet under-appreciated military abilities were most amply demonstrated in this offensive, but that doesn't make it decisive in any way. Its actual goal was to relieve German pressure on the Western Front. In the end, as stated in this article's Aftermath section, the massive Russian losses in this offensive hastened the Russian Revolution and exit of Russia from the war, releasing the majority of German divisions from the Eastern Front to fight in the West in 1918, ultimately achieving the exact opposite of its goals. The long term-result result would better qualify as a "decisive German victory" rather than a Russian one.

So, per my comment, I will soon again remove "decisive" from the result unless someone can pretty quickly come up with any counter-argument for violating Infobox battle guidelines in this article. --A D Monroe III(talk) 15:37, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Per above, I have removed "Decisive" from results. --A D Monroe III(talk)  00:47, 13 April 2019 (UTC)

Ottoman Troops
Maybe not well known, but famous Ottoman 57. Regiment was sent here after the Gallipoli Campaign. Enver Pasha was eager to appease his German allies. Sources say they engaged Russians around September. About 1/3 perished. I could not find any references in the article. —Hudavendigar (talk • contribs) 19:49, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Cevat Pasha
Commander of the Ottoman 15. Army (I think) Cevat Pasha should be among the list of commanders. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.41.176.219 (talk) 00:50, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Russian losses
Tucker's estimations of Russian losses are way higher than anything I've read before. Has he counted them differently or something? NutteLarsson59 (talk) 01:06, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Tucker indicated absolutely correct numbers. back in the early 2000s Russian military historian Sergey Nelipovich, based on Russian military archives, calculated the losses of the Russian army in Brusilov’s offensive. From May to December 1916, Brusilov's Southwestern Front lost 1,440,000 killed, wounded and prisoners. Nelipovich has everything written out with links to archives. 500,000 men are the losses of the Russian Southwestern Front in just 1,5 months of the offensive. And during the May-October offensive, Brusilov's Southwestern Front received almost 1,500,000 soldiers as reinforcements.Vaclaw1990 (talk) 07:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 500,000 men are the losses that throughout the 20th century Soviet and Russian sources distributed as losses during the entire Brusilov offensive. Western researchers could not verify these figures. They were not allowed into Russian archives. Only Nelipovich in the 21st century indicated that real losses were almost 3 times greater.Vaclaw1990 (talk) 07:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Other sources that indicate Russian casualty figures of 500,000 or 1,000,000 during the Brusilov Offensive demonstrate ignorance of Nelipovich's work. His description of Brusilov’s offensive with a detailed analysis of Russian losses is available on the Internet in the public domain in Russian.Vaclaw1990 (talk) 07:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Brusilov offensive


text:
VIII Corps (United Kingdom)

VIII Corps was a British Army corps formation that existed during the First and Second World Wars. In the latter, it took part in the Normandy Campaign in 1944, where it was involved in Operation Epsom and Operation Goodwood. It would later play a supporting role in Operation Market Garden and finish the war by advancing from the Rhine to the Baltic Sea.

Prior to the First World War
In 1876, a Mobilisation Scheme was published for the forces in Great Britain and Ireland, which included eight army corps of the 'Active Army'. The '8th Corps' was to be headquartered at Edinburgh and was primarily militia formation. In 1880, its order of battle was as follows:

 * 1st Division (Edinburgh)
 * 1st Brigade (Edinburgh)
 * Kerry Militia (Tralee), Northumberland Militia (Alnwick), Fermanagh Light Infantry Militia (Enniskillen)
 * 2nd Brigade
 * Antrim Militia (Belfast), Cavan Militia (Cavan), Donegal Militia (Lifford)
 * Divisional Troops
 * 50th Foot (Edinburgh), Ayrshire Yeomanry (Ayr)
 * Artillery
 * O/2nd Brigade RA (Glasgow)
 * 2nd Division (Glasgow)
 * 1st Brigade (Glasgow)
 * Highland Borderers Militia (Stirling), Highland Rifles Militia (Dingwall), Scottish Borderers Militia (Dumfries)
 * 2nd Brigade (Hamilton)
 * Cumberland Militia (Carlisle), 1st Durham Militia (Barnard Castle), 2nd Durham Militia (Durham)
 * Divisional Troops
 * Queen's Own Lanarkshire Yeomanry (Glasgow)
 * 3rd Division (Melrose)
 * 1st Brigade (Melrose)
 * East York Militia (Beverley), North York Militia (Richmond), Westmoreland Militia (Carlisle)
 * 2nd Brigade
 * 5th Royal Lancashire Militia (Burnley), 6th Royal Lancashire Militia (Richmond), 7th Royal Lancashire Militia (Bury)
 * Divisional Troops
 * Northumberland and Newcastle Yeomanry (Newcastle)
 * Cavalry Brigade
 * Westmorland and Cumberland Yeomanry (Penrith), Lanark Yeomanry (Lanark), East Lothian Yeomanry (Dunbar)

This scheme had been dropped by 1881.

Gallipoli
VIII Corps was first formed at Gallipoli during the First World War. The main British battle front was at Cape Helles on the tip of the Gallipoli peninsula. As the battle became protracted, more British divisions arrived as reinforcements. In May 1915, these divisions were arranged as the British Army Corps, which was then redesignated as VIII Corps in June. The corps commander was Lieutenant-General Aylmer Hunter-Weston. When Hunter-Weston relinquished command due to illness, the corps was commanded on a temporary basis by General Francis Davies.

During the Gallipoli campaign, the corps contained the following units:
 * 29th Division - (moved to IX Corps at Suvla in August)
 * 42nd (East Lancashire) Infantry Division
 * 52nd (Lowland) Infantry Division
 * Royal Naval Division
 * 29th Indian Infantry Brigade - (moved to Australian and New Zealand Army Corps in August)
 * Corps of Royal Engineers - 13th Base Park Company, 254th Tunnelling Company and a Postal unit

Western Front
After the evacuation of Gallipoli, the corps was reformed in France in March 1916, once again under the command of Hunter-Weston, and participated in the Battle of the Somme.

VIII Corps was disbanded in June 1918 when Hunter-Weston moved to the XVIII Corps; however, this corps was then redesignated as VIII Corps in July 1918.

Home Defence
VIII Corps formed part of Home Forces in the UK during the early part of the Second World War. During the Autumn of 1940, it presided over the 3rd and 48th (South Midland) Divisions. Later, it would also command the 77th Infantry Division. It was based at Pyrland Hall near Cheddon Fitzpaine in Somerset and its mission was to command the defence of Somerset, Devon, Cornwall and Bristol.

North West Europe
VIII Corps fought on the western front in 1944 and 1945 as part of the Second Army. From 21 January to 27 November 1944, it was commanded by Lieutenant-General Richard O'Connor.

At the start of the Normandy Campaign, it comprised:
 * Guards Armoured Division (later transferred to XXX Corps)
 * 11th Armoured Division (later transferred to XXX Corps)
 * 15th (Scottish) Infantry Division (later transferred to XII Corps )
 * 6th Guards Tank Brigade
 * 8th Army Group Royal Artillery
 * 61st (Caernarvon & Denbigh Yeomanry) Medium Regiment, RA
 * 63rd (Midland) Medium Regiment, RA
 * 77th (Duke of Lancaster's Own Yeomanry) Medium Regiment, RA
 * 146th (Pembroke & Cardiganshire Yeomanry) Medium Regiment, RA
 * 53rd Heavy Regiment, RA
 * Corps Troops:
 * 2nd Household Cavalry Regiment
 * 91st (Argyll and Sutherland Highlanders) Anti-Tank Regiment, RA
 * 121st (Leicestershire Regiment) Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment, RA
 * 10th Survey Regiment, RA
 * VIII Corps Troops, Royal Engineers
 * VIII Corps Signals

It played a major role in Operations Epsom, Jupiter, Goodwood and Bluecoat, before being reduced in size and moved to the reserve prior to the breakout from Normandy.

The Corps fought in a supporting role during Operation Market Garden on the east flank of XXX Corps with XII Corps to the west of XXX Corps, capturing the Dutch towns of Deurne and Helmond, and took part in the advance on Venray and Venlo. Then in Operation Constellation beginning on 12 October 1944.

From early December 1944 VIII Corps, was commanded by Lieutenant-General Evelyn Barker, and took part in Operation Plunder, crossing the Rhine 28th March 1945. Following the crossing, the corps was reactivated and allocated the 2nd Army’s right flank for the advance into Germany. By April 1945 the principal formations of the corps were, 11th Armoured Division and 6th Airborne Division reinforced by 6th Guards Armoured Brigade and 1st Commando Brigade. The 15th Scottish Infantry Division joined the Corps on the 4th April. The following weeks were filled with many short but intense battles and fighting across Northern Germany. The Corps crossed the Elbe Operation Enterprise at midnight 30th April advanced north east and occupied Plön in Schleswig-Holstein. The fighting continued until the unconditional surrender by German forces on the 7th May 1945.

Post-war
In the immediate post-war period, the corps formed VIII Corps District in Schleswig-Holstein before being disbanded in 1946. Its final composition was:

 * 4th Armoured Brigade
 * Jewish Infantry Brigade
 * 7th Armoured Division
 * 22nd Armoured Brigade
 * 131st Infantry Brigade (detached to Berlin)
 * 13th Infantry Brigade (attached from 5th Division)
 * 15th (Scottish) Infantry Division
 * 46th Infantry Brigade

General Officers Commanding
Commanders included:
 * 24 May – 17 Jul 1915 Lieutenant-General Sir Aylmer Hunter-Weston
 * 17 Jul – 24 Jul 1915 Lieutenant-General Sir Frederick Stopford (temporary)
 * 24 Jul – 8 Aug 1915 Major-General William Douglas (acting)
 * 8 Aug 1915 – 27 Jan 1916 Lieutenant-General Sir Francis Davies

 * 18 Mar 1916 – 22 Jun 1918 Lieutenant-General Sir Aylmer Hunter-Weston

 * 2 Jul 1918 Lieutenant-General Sir Aylmer Hunter-Weston

 * Jul 1940 – May 1941 Lieutenant-General Harold Franklyn
 * May–Nov 1941 Lieutenant-General Kenneth Anderson
 * Nov 1941 – Jan 1943 Lieutenant-General Arthur Edward Grasett
 * Jan–Jul 1943 Lieutenant-General Herbert Lumsden
 * Jul–Aug 1943 Lieutenant-General Sir Richard McCreery
 * Nov 1943 – Jan 1944 Lieutenant-General John Harding
 * Jan–Nov 1944 Lieutenant-General Sir Richard O'Connor
 * Dec 1944 – Apr 1946 Lieutenant-General Evelyn Barker

External sources

 * The Long, Long Trail
 * Royal Artillery 1939-45
 * Regiments.org

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

title: VIII Corps (United Kingdom)


text:
Peter Gent

George Davis Peter Gent (August 23, 1942 – September 30, 2011) was a wide receiver in the National Football League (NFL) for the Dallas Cowboys. He became a novelist after his retirement, authoring the best-seller North Dallas Forty. He played college basketball at Michigan State University.

Early life
Gent attended Bangor High School in Michigan, where he was a standout four-sport athlete (football, basketball, baseball and track). In basketball he led the Bangor Vikings team to the 1960 state Class C Championship, while accumulating a 22.6 scoring average. The team was known as the Cardiac Kids for their late-game wins in District, Regional, Quarter-Final and Semi-Final games. The final game against top-ranked Grand Rapids Lee was no exception: it was tied 41–41 after three quarters and Bangor went on to win 57–45. Gent led the team with 21 points, and was named to the All-Tourney Team which was chosen from schools of all sizes throughout the state.

College career
Gent was a center/forward with the Michigan State basketball team from 1962 to 1964. He became the first Spartan to lead the team in scoring for three consecutive seasons. In his senior year, Gent averaged 21 points per game, and left as MSU's second career scorer, with a total of 1,146 points, averaging 17.4 points per game. He was third team All-Big Ten in 1963 and second team in 1964.

In 1964, Gent was awarded the Big Ten Conference Medal of Honor, which is given annually to a male and female athlete at each of the Big Ten institutions, who demonstrates the greatest proficiency in scholarship and athletics. He graduated from MSU with a BA in advertising.

Gent was the recipient of the 2005 Distinguished Alumnus Award.

Dallas Cowboys
Although Gent never played a down of college football, the Dallas Cowboys were impressed by his athleticism and offered him a tryout. He went to training camp in the summer of 1964 to receive the $500 they were paying to players who attended.

As with Cornell Green whom the team had converted two years earlier, he was first tried at defensive back, but at 6ft 4in and 210 lb, he was not agile enough to play in the secondary. The coaches decided that Gent's best chance was at wide receiver, where he wound up making the team and turning down a contract offer from the NBA's Baltimore Bullets, who had selected him in the fourteenth round of the 1964 NBA draft.

Gent became a valuable wide receiver by his second year in 1965, splitting time with Buddy Dial and playing opposite Bob Hayes. He caught sixteen passes for 233 yards and two touchdowns. In 1966, he had ten starts over Dial, registering 27 receptions (third on the team) for 474 yards (averaging 17.6 yard per catch) and one touchdown as the Cowboys won their first division title (Eastern Conference) to qualify for the NFL championship game, but lost to the Green Bay Packers at the Cotton Bowl.

In 1967, with the arrival of Lance Rentzel and health problems, Gent was moved to tight end and played in only seven games (one start). In 1968, he played in ten games (one start), posting sixteen receptions for 194 yards.

Gent's five-season NFL career was marred by injury, as he underwent knee operations and endured constant back problems. He was known for his intelligence, soft hands, and height. He caught passes mostly from quarterback Don Meredith, with whom he enjoyed a close friendship off the field.

New York Giants
On June 13, 1969, Gent was traded to the New York Giants in exchange for a draft choice (not exercised), and waived on September 8.

Writing career
After leaving professional football, Gent wrote several novels dealing with the sport. His first and most famous book, a semi-autobiographical novel entitled North Dallas Forty, was published in 1973. Its main characters, a quarterback and a wide receiver, are widely considered to be based on Don Meredith and Gent, respectively. The novel was one of the first to examine the NFL's hypocrisy regarding drug use.

North Dallas Forty was made into a movie of the same name in 1979 starring Nick Nolte, Mac Davis, G. D. Spradlin, and Dayle Haddon. Gent wrote the screenplay for the film. During the making of the film, he experienced creative difficulties with producer Frank Yablans. After seeing the movie, his old friend and teammate Meredith commented, "If I'd known Gent was as good as he says he was, I would have thrown to him more."

Gent made his home in Texas for many years, where he befriended many of that state's significant creative minds of the day, including Larry L. King, Billy Lee Brammer, Gary Cartwright, Bud Shrake, Jerry Jeff Walker, and Dan Jenkins. They called themselves the Mad Dogs.

Gent also explored the corruption in modern professional sports in a sequel volume entitled North Dallas After 40, published in 1989, and in two unrelated football novels — Texas Celebrity Turkey Trot (1979) and The Franchise (1983).

Gent also wrote a novel about college basketball entitled The Conquering Heroes (1994). Bill Walton’s cover blurb states that the book is the "North Dallas Forty of college basketball. But it’s much more, it’s about a whole generation of kids who came of age in an America that I grew up in."

Personal life
Gent had two children, Holly Gent and Carter Davis Gent. He resided in Bangor, Michigan at the time of his death from a pulmonary disease on September 30, 2011, and was working on another novel.

title: Peter Gent


text:
VIII Corps

8th Corps, Eighth Corps, or VIII Corps may refer to:
 * VIII Corps (Grande Armée), a unit of the Imperial French army during the Napoleonic Wars
 * VIII Army Corps (German Confederation)
 * VIII Corps (German Empire), a unit of the Imperial German Army prior to and during World War I
 * VIII Reserve Corps (German Empire), a unit of the Imperial German Army during World War I
 * 8th Air Corps (Germany)
 * VIII Army Corps (Wehrmacht), Germany
 * VIII Corps (Ottoman Empire)
 * 8th Army Corps (Russian Empire)
 * 8th Air Defence Corps, Soviet Union and Russia
 * 8th Cavalry Corps (Soviet Union)
 * 8th Mechanized Corps (Soviet Union)
 * 8th Estonian Rifle Corps a unit of the Soviet Army
 * 8th Army Corps (Ukraine)
 * VIII Corps (United Kingdom)
 * VIII Corps (United States)
 * VIII Corps (Union Army), a unit in the American Civil War
 * Eighth Army Corps (Spanish–American War)
 * 8th Corps (Yugoslav Partisans)
 * VIII Corps, part of Ground Operations Command, South Korea

title: VIII Corps


text:
Bengt I. Samuelsson

Bengt Ingemar Samuelsson (21 May 1934 – 5 July 2024) was a Swedish biochemist. He shared with Sune K. Bergström and John R. Vane the 1982 Nobel Prize for Physiology or Medicine for discoveries concerning prostaglandins and related substances.

Education and early life
Samuelsson was born in Halmstad in southwest Sweden, studied at Lund University, and was a professor in medical and physiological chemistry at Karolinska Institute in Stockholm in 1973. He was president of Karolinska Institute from 1982 to 1995 and chairman of the Nobel Foundation from 1993 to 2005.

Research and career
Discussing the role of prostaglandins in the body, Samuelsson explained, "It's a control system for the cells that participates in many biological functions. There are endless possibilities of manipulating this system in drug development."

His research interests were originally in cholesterol metabolism with importance to reaction mechanisms. Following the structural work on prostaglandins along with Sune Bergström he was interested mainly in the transformation products of arachidonic acid. This has led to the identification of endoperoxides, thromboxanes and the leukotrienes, and his group has chiefly been involved in studying the chemistry, biochemistry and biology of these compounds and their function in biological control systems. This research has implications in numerous clinical areas, especially in thrombosis, inflammation, and allergy.

This field has grown enormously since those days. Between 1981 and 1995, about 3,000 papers per year were published that specifically used the expression "prostaglandins," or related terms such as "prostacyclins," "leukotrienes," and "thromboxanes," in their labels and titles.

Samuelsson had served as a director on the boards of Pharmacia AB, NicOx SA, and Schering AG, and was an advisor to the venture capital fund HealthCap.

Death
Samuelsson died on 5 July 2024, at the age of 90.

Awards and honours
In 1975, Samuelsson was awarded the Louisa Gross Horwitz Prize from Columbia University together with Sune K. Bergström. He was elected a Foreign Member of the Royal Society (ForMemRS) in 1990.

title: Bengt I. Samuelsson


text:
117 (number)

117 (one hundred [and] seventeen) is the natural number following 116 and preceding 118.

In mathematics
117 is the smallest possible length of the longest edge of an integer Heronian tetrahedron (a tetrahedron whose edge lengths, face areas and volume are all integers). Its other edge lengths are 51, 52, 53, 80 and 84.

117 is a pentagonal number.

In other fields
117 can be a substitute for the number 17, which is considered unlucky in Italy. When Renault exported the R17 to Italy, it was renamed R117.

Chinese dragons are usually depicted as having 117 scales, subdivided into 81 associated with yang and 36 associated with yin.

In the Danish language the number 117 (hundredesytten) is often used as a hyperbolic term to represent an arbitrary but large number.

The atomic number of tennessine is 117.

title: 117 (number)


text:
Nile Delta

The Nile Delta (دلتا النيل, Delta an-Nīl or simply الدلتا, ad-Delta ) is the delta formed in Lower Egypt where the Nile River spreads out and drains into the Mediterranean Sea. It is one of the world's larger deltas—from Alexandria in the west to Port Said in the east; it covers 240 km of the Mediterranean coastline and is a rich agricultural region. From north to south the delta is approximately 160 km in length. The Delta begins slightly down-river from Cairo.

Geography

From north to south, the delta is approximately 160 km in length. From west to east, it covers some 240 km of coastline. The delta is sometimes divided into sections, with the Nile dividing into two main distributaries, the Damietta and the Rosetta, flowing into the Mediterranean at port cities with the same name. In the past, the delta had several distributaries, but these have been lost due to flood control, silting and changing relief. One such defunct distributary is Wadi Tumilat.

The Suez Canal is east of the delta and enters the coastal Lake Manzala in the north-east of the delta. To the north-west are three other coastal lakes or lagoons: Lake Burullus, Lake Idku and Lake Mariout.

The Nile is considered to be an "arcuate" delta (arc-shaped), as it resembles a triangle or flower when seen from above. Some scholars such as Aristotle have written that the delta was constructed for agricultural purposes due to the drying of the region of Egypt.

In modern day, the outer edges of the delta are eroding, and some coastal lagoons have seen increasing salinity levels as their connection to the Mediterranean Sea increases. Since the delta no longer receives an annual supply of nutrients and sediments from upstream due to the construction of the Aswan Dam, the soils of the floodplains have become poorer, and large amounts of fertilizers are now used. Topsoil in the delta can be as much as 70 ft in depth.

History

People have lived in the Nile Delta region for thousands of years, and it has been intensively farmed for at least the last five thousand years. The delta was a major constituent of Lower Egypt, and there are many archaeological sites in and around the delta. Artifacts belonging to ancient sites have been found on the delta's coast. The Rosetta Stone was found in the delta in 1799 in the port city of Rosetta (an anglicized version of the name Rashid). In July 2019 a small Greek temple, ancient granite columns, treasure-carrying ships, and bronze coins from the reign of Ptolemy II, dating back to the third and fourth centuries BC, were found at the sunken city of Heracleion, colloquially known as Egypt's Atlantis. The investigations were conducted by Egyptian and European divers led by the underwater archaeologist Franck Goddio. They also uncovered a devastated historic temple (the city's main temple) underwater off Egypt's north coast.

In January 2019 archaeologists led by Mostafa Waziri working in the Kom Al-Khelgan area of the Nile Delta discovered tombs from the Second Intermediate Period and burials from the Naqada II era. The burial site contained the remains of animals, amulets and scarabs carved from faience, round and oval pots with handles, flint knives, broken and burned pottery. All burials included skulls and skeletons in the bending position and were not very well-preserved.

Ancient branches of the Nile

Records from ancient times (such as by Ptolemy) reported that the delta had seven distributaries or branches, (from east to west):
 * the Pelusiac
 * the Tanitic
 * the Mendesian
 * the Phatnitic or Phatmetic (later the Damietta)
 * the Sebennytic
 * the Bolbitine (later the Rosetta)
 * the Canopic (also called the Herakleotic, Agathodaemon)

George of Cyprus list

 * Alexandrian (Schedia canal)
 * Colynthin (Canopic)
 * Agnu (Rosetta)
 * Parollos (Burullus)
 * Chasmatos (Baltim)
 * Tamiathe (Damietta)
 * Tenese (Tinnis)

Modern Egyptologists suggest that in the Pharaonic era there were at a time five main branches: The first three have dried up over the centuries due to flood control, silting and changing relief, while the last two still exist today. The Delta used to flood annually, but this ended with the construction of the Aswan Dam.
 * the Pelusiac
 * the Sebennytic
 * the Canopic
 * the Damietta
 * the Rosetta

Population

About 39 million people live in the Delta region. Outside of major cities, population density in the delta averages 1,000 PD/sqkm or more. Alexandria is the largest city in the delta with an estimated population of more than 4.5 million. Other large cities in the delta include Shubra El Kheima, Port Said, El Mahalla El Kubra, Mansura, Tanta, and Zagazig.

Wildlife

During autumn, parts of the Nile River are red with lotus flowers. The Lower Nile (North) and the Upper Nile (South) have plants that grow in abundance. The Upper Nile plant is the Egyptian lotus, and the Lower Nile plant is the Papyrus Sedge (Cyperus papyrus), although it is not nearly as plentiful as it once was, and is becoming quite rare.

Several hundred thousand water birds winter in the delta, including the world's largest concentrations of little gulls and whiskered terns. Other birds making their homes in the delta include grey herons, Kentish plovers, shovelers, cormorants, egrets and ibises.

Other animals found in the delta include frogs, turtles, tortoises, mongooses, and the Nile monitor. Nile crocodiles and hippopotamus, two animals which were widespread in the delta during antiquity, are no longer found there. Fish found in the delta include the flathead grey mullet and soles.

Climate
The Delta has a hot desert climate (Köppen: BWh) as the rest of Egypt, but its northernmost part, as is the case with the rest of the northern coast of Egypt which is the wettest region in the country, has relatively moderate temperatures, with highs usually not surpassing 31 °C in the summer. Only 100 - 200 mm of rain falls on the delta area during an average year, and most of this falls in the winter months. The delta experiences its hottest temperatures in July and August, with a maximum average of 34 °C. Winter temperatures normally range from 9 °C at nights to 19 °C in the daytime. With cooler temperatures and some rain, the Nile Delta region becomes quite humid during the winter months.

Sea level rise
Egypt's Mediterranean coastline experiences significant loss of land to the sea, in some places amounting to 100 yd a year. The low-lying Nile Delta area in particular is vulnerable to sea level rise associated with global warming. This effect is exacerbated by the lack of sediments being deposited since the construction of the Aswan Dam. If the polar ice caps were to melt, much of the northern delta, including the ancient port city of Alexandria, could disappear under the Mediterranean. A 30 cm rise in sea level could affect about 6.6% of the total land cover area in the Nile Delta region. At 1 m sea level rise, an estimated 887 thousand people could be at risk of flooding and displacement and about 100 km2 of vegetation, 16 km2 wetland, 402 km2 cropland, and 47 km2 of urban area land could be destroyed, flooding approximately 450 km2. Some areas of the Nile Delta's agricultural land have been rendered saline as a result of sea level rise; farming has been abandoned in some places, while in others sand has been brought in from elsewhere to reduce the effect. In addition to agriculture, the delta's ecosystems and tourist industry could be negatively affected by global warming. Food shortages resulting from climate change could lead to seven million "climate refugees" by the end of the 21st century. Nevertheless, environmental damage to the delta is not currently one of Egypt's priorities.

The delta's coastline has also undergone significant changes in geomorphology as a result of the reclamation of coastal dunes and lagoons to form new agricultural land and fish farms as well as the expansion of coastal urban areas.

Governorates and large cities
The Nile Delta forms part of these 10 governorates:

 * Alexandria
 * Beheira
 * Kafr el Sheikh
 * Gharbiya
 * Minufiya
 * Qalyubiya
 * Dakahlia
 * Damietta
 * Sharqiyah
 * Port Said

Large cities located in the Nile Delta:

 * Abusir
 * Alexandria
 * Avaris
 * Bilbeis
 * Bubastis
 * Canopus
 * Damanhur
 * Desouk
 * Damietta
 * El Mahalla El Kubra
 * Kafr El Sheikh
 * Leontopolis
 * Mendes
 * Mit Abu El Kom
 * Mansoura
 * Naucratis
 * Pelusium
 * Port Said
 * Rosetta
 * Sais
 * Tanis
 * Tanta
 * Zagazig

title: Nile Delta


text:
User:Dargonlord

This is an old account and I'm afraid that it has had little use. I hope someday to be able to contribute to Wikipedia however I simply do not have enough knowledge or time for it to be worth it now.

My hope is that, by actually remembering I have this page, I can be a more active user of the internet. -Layth

title: User:Dargonlord


text:
Bogey

Bogey may refer to:

People

 * Nickname
 * Humphrey Bogart (1899–1957), American actor
 * Xander Bogaerts (born 1992), Aruban professional baseball player
 * Wilton Gaynair (1927–1995), Jamaican jazz musician
 * Lionel Protip Sen (1910–1981), Indian Army lieutenant-general
 * Surname
 * Robert Bogey (born 1935), French former long-distance runner

Arts and entertainment

 * Bogey (comics), a character in Spanish comics
 * Bogey Orangutan, a character in the Shirt Tales cartoons
 * Bogey, a villain in the English-language French animated series A.T.O.M

Sports

 * Bogey (golf), a score of one over par on a hole in the sport of golf
 * Bogey, another name for a gravity racer

Other uses

 * "Bogey", a multiservice tactical brevity code for an unidentified radar or visual air contact
 * "Bogey", an RAF Second World War code name for an unidentified aircraft
 * Bogey, an Australian Aboriginal word for bath
 * Bogey, slang for dried nasal mucus
 * Bogey Hole, an ocean pool in Newcastle, Australia
 * Bogey or Bogeyman, a mythical monster
 * Another word for devil

title: Bogey


text:
118 (number)

118 (one hundred [and] eighteen) is the natural number following 117 and preceding 119.

In mathematics
There is no answer to the equation φ(x) = 118, making 118 a nontotient.

Four expressions for 118 as the sum of three positive integers have the same product:
 * 14 + 50 + 54 = 15 + 40 + 63 = 18 + 30 + 70 = 21 + 25 + 72 = 118 and
 * 14 × 50 × 54 = 15 × 40 × 63 = 18 × 30 × 70 = 21 × 25 × 72 = 37800.

118 is the smallest number that can be expressed as four sums with the same product in this way.

Because of its expression as 118 = 35 − 53, it is a Leyland number of the second kind.

118!! - 1 is a prime number, where !! denotes the double factorial (the product of even integers up to 118).

In other fields

 * There are 118 known elements on the Periodic Table, the 118th element being oganesson.

title: 118 (number)


text:
Hirudo medicinalis

Hirudo medicinalis, or the European medicinal leech, is one of several species of leeches used as medicinal leeches.

Other species of Hirudo sometimes also used as medicinal leeches include H. orientalis, H. troctina, and H. verbana. The Asian medicinal leech includes Hirudinaria manillensis, and the North American medicinal leech is Macrobdella decora.

Medicinal leech populations were reduced significantly in many countries during the 19th century due to the high demand in medical contexts, and remain endangered in many countries today.

Morphology
The general morphology of medicinal leeches follows that of most other leeches. Fully mature adults can be up to 20 centimeters in length, and are green, brown, or greenish-brown with a darker tone on the dorsal side and a lighter ventral side. The dorsal side also has a thin red stripe. These organisms have two suckers, one at each end, called the anterior and posterior suckers. The posterior is used mainly for leverage, whereas the anterior sucker, consisting of the jaw and teeth, is where the feeding takes place. Medicinal leeches have three jaws (tripartite) that resemble saws, on which are approximately 100 sharp edges used to incise the host. The incision leaves a mark that is an inverted Y inside of a circle. After piercing the skin, they suck out blood while injecting anticoagulants (hirudin). Large adults can consume up to ten times their body weight in a single meal, with 5–15 mL being the average volume taken. These leeches can live for up to a year between feedings.

Medicinal leeches are hermaphrodites that reproduce by sexual mating, laying eggs in clutches of up to 50 near (but not under) water, and in shaded, humid places. A study done in Poland found that medicinal leeches sometimes breed inside the nests of large aquatic birds, noting that conservation efforts directed at bird habitats may also indirectly help preserve dwindling leech populations.

Range and ecology
Their range extends over almost the whole of Europe and into Asia as far as Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. The preferred habitat for this species is muddy freshwater pools and ditches with plentiful weed growth in temperate climates.

Over-exploitation by leech collectors in the 19th century has left only scattered populations, and reduction in natural habitat through drainage has also contributed to their decline. Another factors include the replacement of horses - medicinal leeches' preferred host species - by motor vehicles and mechanical farming equipment, and the provision of artificial water supplies for cattle. As a result, this species is now considered near threatened by the IUCN, and European medicinal leeches are legally protected through nearly all of their natural range. They are particularly sparsely distributed in France and Belgium, and in the UK there may be as few as 20 remaining isolated populations (all widely scattered). The largest, located at Lydd, England, is estimated to contain several thousand individuals; 12 of these areas have been designated Sites of Special Scientific Interest. There are small, transplanted populations in several countries outside their natural range, including the USA. The species is protected under Appendix II of CITES meaning international trade (including in parts and derivatives) is regulated by the CITES permitting system.

Beneficial secretions
Medicinal leeches have been found to secrete saliva containing about 60 different proteins. These achieve a wide variety of goals useful to the leech as it feeds, helping to keep the blood in liquid form and increasing blood flow in the affected area. Several of these secreted proteins serve as anticoagulants (such as hirudin), platelet aggregation inhibitors (most notably apyrase, collagenase, and calin), vasodilators, and proteinase inhibitors. It is also thought that the saliva contains an anesthetic, as leech bites are generally not painful.

Historically
The first recorded use of leech therapy was 3,500 years ago in Ancient Egypt. The next recorded uses of leeches in medicine come in the last few centuries BCE, by the Greek physician Nicander in Colophon and in the ancient Sanskrit text Sushruta Samhita. Leech therapy is mentioned a few hundred years later in Shennong Ben Cao Jing, a 3rd-century CE book of traditional Chinese medicine.

Medical use of leeches was discussed by Avicenna in The Canon of Medicine (1020s), and by Abd al-Latif al-Baghdadi in the 12th century.

These sources indicated leech therapy for a wide variety of ailments, including edema,. "blood stasis", and skin diseases.

In medieval and early modern European medicine, the medicinal leech (Hirudo medicinalis and its congeners H. verbana, H. troctina, and H. orientalis) was used to remove blood from a patient as part of a process to balance the humors that, according to Galen, must be kept in balance for the human body to function properly. (The four humors of ancient medical philosophy were blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile.) Any sickness that caused the subject's skin to become red (e.g. fever and inflammation), so the theory went, must have arisen from too much blood in the body. Similarly, any person whose behavior was strident and sanguine was thought to be suffering from an excess of blood. Leeches, by removing blood, were thought to help with these kinds of conditions — a wide range which included illnesses like polio and laryngitis. Leeches were often gathered by leech collectors and were eventually farmed in large numbers. A unique 19th-century "Leech House" survives in Bedale, North Yorkshire on the bank of the Bedale Beck, used to store medicinal leeches until the early 20th century.

Manchester Royal Infirmary used 50,000 leeches a year in 1831. The price of leeches varied between one penny and threepence halfpenny each. In 1832 leeches accounted for 4.4% of the total hospital expenditure. The hospital maintained an aquarium for leeches until the 1930s. The use of leeches began to become less widespread towards the end of the 19th century.

Current
Medicinal leech therapy (also referred to as Hirudotherapy or Hirudin therapy) made an international comeback in the 1970s in microsurgery, used to stimulate circulation in tissues threatened by postoperative venous congestion, particularly in finger reattachment and reconstructive surgery of the ear, nose, lip, and eyelid. Other clinical applications of medicinal leech therapy include varicose veins, muscle cramps, thrombophlebitis, and osteoarthritis, among many varied conditions. The therapeutic effect is not from the small amount of blood taken in the meal, but from the continued and steady bleeding from the wound left after the leech has detached, as well as the anesthetizing, anti-inflammatory, and vasodilating properties of the secreted leech saliva. The most common complication from leech treatment is prolonged bleeding, which can easily be treated, but more serious allergic reactions and bacterial infections may also occur. Leech therapy was classified by the US Food and Drug Administration as a medical device in 2004.

Because of the minuscule amounts of hirudin present in leeches, it is impractical to harvest the substance for widespread medical use. Hirudin (and related substances) are synthesized using recombinant techniques. Devices called "mechanical leeches" that dispense heparin and perform the same function as medicinal leeches have been developed, but they are not yet commercially available.

title: Hirudo medicinalis


text:
Critical path

Critical path may refer to:
 * The longest series of sequential operations in a parallel computation; see analysis of parallel algorithms
 * Critical path method, an algorithm for scheduling a set of project activities
 * Critical Path (book), by Buckminster Fuller
 * The Critical Path: An Essay on the Social Context of Literary Criticism, a 1971 book by Northrop Frye
 * The Critical Path, a podcast by Horace Dediu
 * Critical Path (video game), an interactive movie computer game
 * Critical Path, Inc., a provider of messaging services
 * Critical Path Institute, an organization for improvement of the drug development process
 * Critical Path Project, a video archive
 * Critical Path Project, early source of HIV/AIDS information founded by Kiyoshi Kuromiya

title: Critical path


text:
Talk:Medicinal Leech

If this aspect isn't covered fully at Leech, that where readers will find information. I suggest this be deleted and any material be transferred. Wetman 07:12, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'd have thought the reverse - if there's information about medicinal leeches at the Leech page which is not in this article it should be transferred here. Can't see why an article on leeches in general should contain much specific information about medicinal leeches other than a link. Trewornan 15:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Picture of Leech
Is the picture of a medicinal leech, or another kind? If it is a medicinal leech then this should be specified, otherwise the picture should be removed. chiefhoser 20:27, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

merge Medicinal leech to Leech
This is not the medicinal leech. I would say this is Haemopis sanguisuga, the horse leech.

This would make a nice section to the Leech article. Good too have all our leech material on one page and we could make this a redirect. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim  01:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

There are different species of leeches, though, so wouldn't it make more sense for the Leech page to be more generalized with links to other types of leeches? I mean, the other species aren't covered yet, but that doesn't mean they won't be added later--DurinsBane87 02:45, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree, this is not the first time a merger had been suggested but it seems totally inappropriate for me. There are roughly 650 species of leech are you going to create a section on each in leech? I feel that the amount of information specific to medicinal leeches in the general leech article is not helpful and should be reduced to just a link.Trewornan (talk) 20:23, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Merge?
There is a question at hirudotherapy's talk page about a possible merger. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:43, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Medicinal Leech


text:
Talk:Sicilian Vespers

Untitled
''According to legend, the rebellion started after a Sicilian woman went to a church in Palermo to look for her young daughter, who had spent the whole day there praying, only to find her being raped in the church by a French soldier - whereupon the mother then ran into the streets, shouting Ma fia! Ma fia! (meaning "My daughter! My daughter!" in medieval Sicilian dialect). Some have claimed that this tale provides a plausible explanation as to where the word "Mafia" might have originated.'' Part of my "Legend has it..." collection. This hasn't been checked against any published etymology of "Mafia," I surmise. Oh well.

This entry needs work. Wetman 07:15, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * I am having a lot of trouble working out whether this event took place on 30 March or 31 March of 1282. It could well be because the event took place immediately after the bells sounding at midnight (is that what traditionally happens during the vespers?).  So if that is true, didn't the event actually start on  31 March?  Certainly, some of the nationalistic Sicilian organisations celebrate the event on 31 March.  Finally, this bit about ma fia! and "Mafia" might be an interesting quirky story, but I warrant that no other serious history article in wikipedia would tolerate such unconfirmed and unsubstantiated hogwash.  Considering what an important event this was in European history (at the time), you do this article a serious disservice by retaining it.  Especially since much of the article is based on Runciman's excellent book, by far the most authoritative account written in English.  There are also excellent accounts written in Sicilian and Italian much closer to the date, none of which mention this particular story.  As usual, certain elements of the world population are accorded more dignity and respect than others, which is totally at odds with the principles and philosophy of Wikipedia.  As always, Sicily and Sicilians are on the receiving end.  ρ¡ρρµ δ→θ∑ -  (waarom? jus'b'coz!)  03:48, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Chickpea
According to a travel video I saw, the Sicilians executed anyone who could not pronounce the Sicilian word for "chickpea". This is how they picked out the French and other non-natives. The word sounded like "ciccero", but I'm no expert. Can anyone else shed some light on this? - Mcasey666 18:03, 29 July 2006 (UTC) My grandfather immigrated with his family to the USA in 1890. My father at the time was 5 years old.He was drafted into the Army for World War I He was in France and was in may battles e.g. Argonne forest etc, where he war wounded and received the Purple Heart. I remember speaking Sicilian with my Grandfather (who lived to be 101 yrs and he told me the story of Chickpeas (Cici Beans) or in Sicilian (Phonetical) shishira, as singular or shishiri as plural. The French were hated by the Sicilians for their atrocities and assault upon Sicilian women.The insurection started in Palermo and in order to ferret out the French soldiers and residents . The Sicilians held a Cici bean in front of the individual and demanded that it be identified. The French would pronounce it as kiki beans and subsequently would be disposed of as O.J Simpson did his wife. I am 80 years old Salfin 19:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)––—19:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC)Salfin

 * Do you have other fairy tales to tell us? The "French" left Sicily 750 years ago. Your grandpa sure had a very good memory. If you were 80, your grandpa must have been at least 115 then. He was thus 60 years old when he bravely served in WWII? Get outta here. Your story doesn't check out. Phony. Or, as they say in old Sicilian dialect, Phoni. Phone in plural. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.230.30.143 (talk) 12:36, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

 * LOL trollbait is you. Jersey John (talk) 17:36, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Two images
I added a second image, and one editor reverted because they were the same. ??? Same painter; because they were part of a series, same title, but not same image. Goldfritha 00:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Sorry, my fault. Looked the same at first. -- Stbalbach 13:43, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Sicilian Vespers weren`t patriotic.
The Risorgimento has created many myths. For example the idea that the Sicilian Vespers were patriotic because they were against the French. This is nonsense. It was a separatistic revolt against the legitimate King of Naples (legitimated by the Pope!), who was of French origin but he had nothing to do with the "Kingdom of France". The Sicilian revolt had its good reasons but it was "separatistic" not "patriotic" because it weakened the South Italian Kingdom, the only Italian monarchy similar to the other European kingdoms.
 * And if the Sicilians didn't consider themselves Italians but Sicilians? One's definition of patriotism must be dependant on one's definition of one's nation.  Goldfritha 01:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

What you say is true, but the Risorgimento considered the revolt as a symbol of the "Italian" patriotism and not of the "Sicilian" patriotism. This is the problem.

Guelphs and Ghibellines
Weren't the Vespers part of the struggle between these two factions? Shouldn't this be expressly stated and linked?--Major Bonkers (talk) 01:14, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Seconded. JoshNarins (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

The Vespers as the Beginning of the Spanish Empire
The Vespers was the beginning of what would eventually become the Spanish Empire, the first Empire on which the sun never set. After making Sicily a hereditary possession, and after the principal kingdoms on the Iberian penninsula Aragon, Murcia, Valencia, and Castille were united, it took Spain about two hundred years to dominate the commerce on the island and use to its advantage military and commercial possibilities that the island's central location in the Med. offered. In 1442 Spain expanded her empire again and took control of the mainland part of the Kingdom, unifying them under the ridiculous name of the Kingdom of the two Sicilies. Thereafter nothing was ridiculous, Spain grew very wealthy on her new unified kingdom. By 1492 she was rich enough to finance an insane mission by an explorer who suggested he could find India by sailing West and going around the globe. His name was Columbus, and the riches he brought to Spain further enhanced its ability to build colonies all around the world. And it all began with the Vespers.

We should also find a place for Goethe's famous comment "Italy without Sicily cannot be understood; here lies the key to all." From "Italienische Reise" or "Italian Journey"

It seems that the article simply does not flow well, with historical references necessary for understanding the causes of the Vespers being located within the aftermath. I sugest we start with a rewrite and rearangement of some of the paragraphs, begining with a simple synopsis of the Vespers for those who are not inclined to read the whole story set in its mid-13th Century context. Then we next move on to the events that preceded and were causal to the revolt, and then finally give its aftermath and repercussions. The latter would include:

1. Sicily was as island of very "mixed blood". Norman, Eastern Rite Greek, Jews, Latin Christians, Roman Christians and Arabs all had been there for centuries, a mosiac that Runciman describes, as it is located in the center of the Med and provides an optimal military and trading location. '''The fact that people of such a varied cultural background could join together to strike a blow for their freedom seems to me to be the first known attempt to establish a nascent form of what we today call a free multi-cultural "Nation-State" rather than a feudal Kingdom. I know of no source that has incorporated this obvious fact into a peer reviewed book or journal. Am I the first to notice this?'''

2. Had Charles succeeded in his conquest of Constantinople, he would have created an empire as large as any seen since the age of Justinian. Many more people would be speaking French today if he had won.

Cipolla also notes the opposite, in Arba Sicula Vol XXV, he ruminates that if Charles had lost at Benvenuto or Tagliacozzo to the Imperialists, Italy would be speaking Sicilian, and Tuscan-Italian considered a dialect.

3. Sicily was the first significant possession Aragon gained, the first stepping stone towards what would eventually become her empire. After the unification of Spain's various kingdoms on the Iberian peninsula, in 1442 she took the mainland part of the Sicilian Kingdom, thus increasing her wealth many fold. With this wealth, her naval expertise grew and this would eventually lead Spain's famed Armada, and with the wealth it generated it financed Columbus' journey to New World. I believe that is approximately the view of Gaetano Cipolla, proferror at St. Johns in NY, and I agree with it, although I don't remember which vol. Cipolla published this in Arba Sicula, and he is P.O. at me so he is not answering my e-mails. Could someone else please e-mail him for the volume number.

4. The Vespers rearranged the constellation of of power in Europe. After he as unable to retake the island over the course of several years, Charles knew that it was the beginning of the end for him in Western Europe. He had gone deeply in debt to pay for the fleet that he intended to use to take Constantinople. The burning of the fleet in Messina and the taking of the remainder of the fleet by the excellent admiral Roger of Lauria made Charles much less feared and respected. After it became apparent that he would not live to see the island retaken, his famous quote was roughly "Please God, if I must fall, let it come in small steps." Even his heirs tried to take the island many times, and always failed. But it was just the beginning of Spain's rise, as aforesaid.

5. Given the oral history of the mafia on the island and information gleaned from testimony of members located within the United States, such as "The Valachi Papers" and Keafauer (phonetic) Commission hearings, the Gotti trials, the orgaization is best described as a feudel type organization of serf to vassal. Virtually all members cooperating with the government in Sicily and the US, have testified that by oral tradition they were told of the organization's origin in the "rape of a woman in a church" although most did not cite the name as the Vespers. I'm sure I can write a short non-offensive paragraph on this, or place it in the Notes section.Siciliano99 (talk) 04:09, 16 November 2009 (UTC)Siciliano99 —

Rephrasing the description of the Hohenstaufen inheritance
Would anyone mind if I substutited the following paragraphs in lieu of the existing one describing how the Howhenstaufen came to control the Kingdom of Sicily? I think it gives a better sense of the rivalry between the Papacy and the Imperialists. It would read as follows:

Frederick I, King of Germany, King of the Romans and Emperor of the West was known to the world as Barbarossa. He had been the most powerful member of the Hohenstaufen dynasty, he often quarreled with the Pope and he often won these quarrels with a large army of Teutonic knights as his persuasive force. His ancestor Henry IV had fought with Pope Gregory VII over the issue of “lay investiture”, i.e...the authority of Kings to appoint Bishops and high church officials within their realm, which derived from their position as permanent Papal Legates. When Henry ignored the Pope’s prohibition of the practice he was excommunicated; in turn his vassals withdrew their support until he had reconciled his differences with the Pope. In order to maintain his crown he appeared at Canossa in a penitent’s sackcloth to ask forgiveness from the Pope. Gregory made him wait outdoors three days and nights in freezing weather, then relented and demanded Henry make a public promise that he would obey the Pope in all things before the he lifted the ban. This humiliation was not easily forgotten by the Hohenstaufen. (See Robinson, infra @ p. 6-7) Barbarossa’s son Henry VI was married to Constance of Sicily, a daughter of the Norman King Roger II. William II King of Sicily died in 1189 leaving Constance his lawful heir, but at that time her husband was in Germany acting as regent for his father who was on crusade, she was therefore unable to assert her rights. Barbarossa died during the Third Crusade in 1190, Henry was crowned Emperor at Rome in 1191. After restoring order in Germany, in 1194 Henry marched troops to claim the Sicilian crown for his wife, whose hereditary claim had been admitted by a Parliament at the time of her engagement to Henry; so there was no doubt of legality of Henry's claim. (See Runciman, at p. 10) After some negotiation and promises to William’s heirs, they deferred their claim to Constance and Henry was crowned King of Sicily at the cathedral in Palermo on Christmas Day 1194, thus bringing the Kingdom of Sicily under Hohenstaufen control. Constance was delayed on the mainland in labor, she gave birth the very next day to Fredrick II; many years later, upon his majority and ascension to the throne he would be known to the world as Antichrist, because of his immoral and blasphemous behavior.(Runciman, supra at p.11) Upon receiving news of the death of Antichrist, the Holy Roman Emperor Fredrick II, the previous December 1250, Pope Innocent IV rejoiced. Now was the chance for the church to forever separate the Hohenstaufen from the Kingdom of Sicily, which stretched from the southern suburbs of Rome, down the entire Italian boot and included the Island of Sicily. (See Runciman @ p.16) 74.108.17.78 (talk) 03:21, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Siciliano9974.108.17.78 (talk) 03:33, 14 September 2009 (UTC)Siciliano99

majpor rewrite commencing
Ok, I'm gonna do a major rewrite here. Main planks of the plan: remove duplicate and unnecessary background, neutralize the tone. Bazuz (talk) 10:22, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

74.101.225.242 (talk) 20:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Majpor, Thanks for the re-write. I didn't have time for it, nor time to learn the footnotes insertion system...usually I dictate and my secretary does that stuff for me, but I did credit Runcimanin the body of the text so I thought it was unfair for the comments section to state that I had not cited sources. I think the article as it now stands should be a bit expanded so that the reader understands that this event initiated a rivalry/war that lasted a hundred years and was the start of a major changes in Mediteranean politics. Even if you end it at the Treaty of Caltabellotta, the Angivin-Aragon rivalry rivalry still went on for another two hundred years, and it was the Vespers that secured Spain's first step in her ascent to Empire. A great source for some of this is Benjamin, Sandra, "Sicily: Three Thousand Years of Human History" ISBN 13:978-1-58642-101-4 @ p.185, et seq. These are important lessons to be garnered as part of the Spain Project, Sicily Project and other history projects that Wiki is trying to put together. Vespers 128274.101.225.242 (talk) 20:56, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Missunderstanding
The text mentions the Kingdom of Aragon as a belligerent, however by that time the Kingdom of Aragon belonged to the Crown of Aragon, which is the combination of the Kingdom of Aragon, Catalan Counties and the Kingdom of Valencia. So, I think it should be changed to Crown of Aragon. In the Spanish and Catalan page it is refered as Crown of Aragon aswell.--Byblios (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2012 (UTC)Byblios

Contradiction
It is first stated in the Background section that the Sicilians rebelled although "Charles' rule was quite just"...

Then, you can read: "Charles' island officials were far removed from his oversight; he did not see the avarice, the abusive behavior manifesting itself as rape, theft and murder, nor did he see the high taxes levied against the meager possessions of the peasants, which kept them impoverished, but made no improvement in their lives."

The article contradicts itself. --82.49.188.222 (talk) 14:11, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 06:06, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Michael VIII's comments on the Sicilian Vespers
Under the section for Michael Palaiologos' commentary, it states that he gave the cited quote years later, in his own autobiography. However, Michael died the same year that the Revolt of the Sicilian Vespers began, in 1282. Moreover, I don't know of any autobiography he ever wrote. Does anybody know where the quote comes from? 202.24.81.201 (talk) 21:41, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sicilian Vespers


text:
User:DO'Neil

I don't really have the time for Wikipedia these days. It's been fun, even if I haven't really edited seriously for about two years. Thank you, everyone! —DO'Neil 05:00, 4 November 2007

title: User:DO'Neil