text:
Johannes Valentinus Andreae

Johannes Valentinus Andreae (17 August 1586 – 27 June 1654), a.k.a. Johannes Valentinus Andreä or Johann Valentin Andreae, was a German theologian, who claimed to be the author of an ancient text known as the Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz anno 1459 (published in 1616, Strasbourg; in English Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz in 1459). This became one of the three founding works of Rosicrucianism, which was both a legend and a fashionable cultural phenomenon across Europe in this period.

Andreae was a prominent member of the Protestant utopian movement which began in Germany and spread across northern Europe and into Britain under the mentorship of Samuel Hartlib and John Amos Comenius. The focus of this movement was the need for education and the encouragement of sciences as the key to national prosperity. But like many vaguely-religious Renaissance movements at this time, the scientific ideas being promoted were often tinged with hermeticism, occultism and neo-Platonic concepts. The threats of heresy charges posed by rigid religious authorities (Protestant and Catholic) and a scholastic intellectual climate often forced these activists to hide behind fictional secret societies and write anonymously in support of their ideas, while claiming access to "secret ancient wisdom".

Life
Andreae was born at Herrenberg, Württemberg, the son of Johannes Andreae (1554–1601), the superintendent of Herrenberg and later the abbot of Königsbronn. His mother Maria Moser went to Tübingen as a widow and was court apothecary 1607–1617. The young Andreae studied theology and natural sciences 1604–1606. He befriended Christoph Besold who encouraged Andreae's interest in esotericism. Ca. 1605 he wrote the first version of "The Chemical Wedding of Christian Rosekreutz". He was refused the final examination and church service, probably for attaching a pasquill (offensive, libelous note) to the chancellor Enzlin's door, on the occasion of his marriage. After that, he taught young nobles and hiked with his students through Switzerland, France, Austria and Italy. He visited Dillingen, a bastion of the Jesuits, whom he regarded as the Antichrist. In 1608 he returned to Tübingen. He came to know Tobias Hess, a Paracelsian physician with an interest in apocalyptic prophecy. From 1610 till 1612 Andreae traveled.

In 1612 he resumed his theological studies in Tübingen. After the final examination in 1614, he became deacon in Vaihingen an der Enz, and in 1620 priest in Calw. Here he reformed the school and social institutions, and established institutions for charity and other aids. To this end, he initiated the Christliche Gottliebende Gesellschaft ("Christian God-loving Society"). In 1628 he planned a "Unio Christiana". He obtained funds and brought effective help for the reconstruction of Calw, which was destroyed in the Battle of Nördlingen (1634) by the imperial troops and visited by pestilence. In 1639, he became preacher at the court and councillor of the consistory (Konsistorialrat) in Stuttgart, where he advocated a fundamental church reform. He became also a spiritual adviser to a royal princess of Württemberg.

Among other things, he promoted the Tübinger Stift, a hall of residence and teaching which was a seminary owned and supported by the Evangelical-Lutheran Church in Württemberg, in South West Germany. The Stift was founded as an Augustinian monastery in the Middle Ages, but after the Reformation (in 1536), Duke Ulrich turned the Stift into a seminary which served to prepare Protestant pastors for Württemberg. A prominent student of the Stift during this period was Johannes Kepler.

In 1646, Andreae was made a member of the Fruchtbringende Gesellschaft ("Fruitbearing Society"), where he got the company-nickname der Mürbe ("the soft"). In 1650, he assumed direction of the monasterial school Bebenhausen, and in 1654, he became abbot of the evangelical monasterial school of Adelberg. He died in Stuttgart.

Rosicrucianism
His role in the origin of the Rosicrucian legend is controversial. In his autobiography he claimed that the Chymische Hochzeit ("Chymical Wedding of Christian Rosenkreutz") was one of his works—as a "ludibrium", possibly meaning "lampoon". In his Menippus (1617) he argued that he wrote this fake document in his youth, around 1605. In his later works, Andreae treated alchemy as a subject of ridicule and placed it with music, art, theatre and astrology in the category of the 'less serious' sciences. It is uncertain how to interpret these statements. Was Andreae under pressure from the authorities because of his official relations as a clergyman, or had he in the meantime converted to a more homodox form of Lutheranism?

In a later phase of his life, Andreae expressed himself as a pious, orthodox Lutheran theologian who had nothing at all to do with the two great manifestoes of the secret society—the Fama fraternitatis or the Confessio fraternitatis. His lifelong commitment appears to have been to found a Societas Christiana or utopian learned brotherhood of those dedicated to a spiritual life, in the hope that they would initiate a second Reformation.

His writings and efforts provided a potent stimulus to Protestant intellectuals at the beginning of the seventeenth century, and he appears to have inspired the foundation of the Unio Christiana which was established in Nuremberg during 1628 by a few patricians and churchmen under the impetus of Johannes Saubert the Elder. This utopian society was later revived in Stuttgart in the early 1660s and another utopian brotherhood known as Antilia (a communal society reminiscent of the monastery) developed in the Baltic during the Thirty Years' War. The founders were inspired by both Baconian belief in experimental science and by Andreae's tracts. They later attempted to establish a colony on a small island in the Gulf of Riga, and considered immigrating to Virginia.

Priory of Sion
During the 1960s, as part of a hoax claiming the existence of a medieval secret society, a set of documents of dubious authenticity, the Dossiers Secrets, was discovered in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF). One of the documents included an alleged list of "Grand Masters of the Priory of Sion", and Andreae was listed as the seventeenth Grand Master.

Works

 * Compendium Mathematicum (1614)
 * Chymische Hochzeit Christiani Rosencreutz Anno 1459 ("The chymical Wedding of Christian Rosencreutz"), published anonymously (1616)
 * Menippus (1617)
 * Invitatio Fraternitatis Christi (1617–1618)
 * Peregrini in patria errores (1618)
 * Reipublicae Christianopolitanae descriptio ("Description of the Republic of Christianopolis", "Beschreibung des Staates Christenstadt") (1619)
 * Turris Babel (1619)
 * De curiositatis pernicie syntagma (1620)

title: Johannes Valentinus Andreae


text:
User talk:Raul654/Plautus

Guys - Be careful when posting the time that stuff occured at. Make sure to give it in GMT, and not your local time. I need to change most of the entires here to fix that. →Raul654 06:05, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * My bad. I'll start fixing them as I go. --SheikYerBooty 03:25, Feb 28, 2004 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Raul654/Plautus


text:
List of battleships of Japan

Between the 1890s and 1940s, the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) built a series of battleships as it expanded its fleet. Previously, the Empire of Japan had acquired a few ironclad warships from foreign builders, although it had adopted the Jeune École naval doctrine which emphasized cheap torpedo boats and commerce raiding to offset expensive, heavily armored ships. To counter the Imperial Chinese Beiyang Fleet in the early 1890s, however, Japan ordered two Fuji-class battleships from Great Britain as Japan lacked the technology and capability to construct its own vessels. Combat experience in the First Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895 convinced the IJN that its doctrine was untenable, leading to a ten-year naval construction program that called for a total of six battleships and six armored cruisers (the Six-Six Fleet). The two ships of the Shikishima-class battleship and the battleships JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Asahi and JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Mikasa were also purchased from Great Britain. Aware that they could not outbuild the Americans or British, the IJN decided that their ships would always be qualitatively superior to offset their quantitative inferiority.

To counter reinforcement of the Russian Empire's Pacific Squadron as tensions rose between the Russians and the Japanese over control of Korea and Manchuria in the early 1900s, Japan ordered the two battleships of the Katori-class battleship in 1903, the last battleships ordered from abroad. To preempt further reinforcements before their own ships were completed, they began the Russo-Japanese War in 1904 with a surprise attack on the Russian base at Port Arthur. Shortly after the war began, the IJN ordered the two ships of the Satsuma-class battleship, the first battleships to be built in Japan. The Imperial Japanese Army captured Port Arthur, along with the surviving ships of the Pacific Squadron by the end of the year. The Russians had dispatched the bulk of their Baltic Fleet to relieve Port Arthur, which reached the Korea Strait in May 1905 and was virtually annihilated by the IJN in the Battle of Tsushima. During the war, Japan captured a total of five Russian pre-dreadnought battleships. They were repaired and commissioned into the Japanese fleet, two of which were later sold back to Russia during World War I, as the two countries were by then allies. The magnitude of the victory at Tsushima caused the leadership of the IJN to believe that a surface engagement between the main fleets was the only decisive battle in modern warfare and would be decided by battleships armed with the largest guns.

After the war, the Japanese Empire immediately turned its focus to the two remaining rivals for imperial dominance in the Pacific Ocean, Britain and the United States, believing that conflict would inevitably arise between Japan and at least one of its two main rivals. Accordingly, the 1907 Imperial Defense Policy called for the construction of a battle fleet of eight modern battleships and eight battlecruisers. This was the genesis of the Eight-Eight Fleet Program, the development of a cohesive battle line of sixteen capital ships. The launch of HMS Dreadnought (1906) in 1906 and the battlecruiser HMS Invincible (1907) the following year by the Royal Navy raised the stakes and complicated Japan's plans as they rendered all existing battleships and armored cruisers obsolete, forcing Japan to restart the Eight-Eight plan with dreadnought battleships and battlecruisers. This began with the Kawachi-class battleship in 1907, followed by the Fusō-class battleship and Ise-class battleshipes in the 1910s. Japan ordered its seventh and eighth dreadnoughts with the Nagato-class battleship in 1916 and 1917.

In 1919, American President Woodrow Wilson announced the resumption of the 1916 naval construction program and the Japanese ordered eight fast battleships of the Kii-class battleship and Number 13-class battleshipes in response. The prospect of a new massively expensive arms race between the United States, Britain and Japan after the war caused the three powers to agree to the Washington Naval Treaty which limited Japan to a ratio of 3:5:5 in battleship tonnage to the United States and Britain. The treaty forced the IJN to dispose of all of its pre-dreadnoughts and the oldest dreadnoughts; the ships then under construction had to be broken up or sunk as targets. Furthermore, the treaty mandated a building holiday that barred the construction of new battleships for ten years. During this period, opponents of the Washington Naval Treaty and its successors had taken control of the upper echelons of the IJN and rebuilt the Kongō-class battlecruisers into fast battleships and modernized the existing ships. Coupled with the growth of ultranationalism and dominance of the government by the military, the government decided to withdraw from the treaty regime when it expired in 1936. Planning by the Navy General Staff for the post-treaty era began in 1934 and included five large battleships armed with nine 460 mm guns; these ships became the Yamato-class battleship. While the Yamatos were under construction in the late 1930s, the IJN began designing a successor class, the Design A-150 armed with 51 cm guns, but never laid any down as they prepared for war and other ships had higher priority.

Fuji class

The two Fuji-class (Kanji: 富士型戦艦; Rōmaji: Fuji-gata) ships, Fuji and Yashima, were the IJN's first battleships, ordered from Britain in response to two new German-built Chinese ironclad warships. The ships were designed as smaller versions of the British Royal Sovereign class, although they were slightly faster and had a better type of armor.

As part of the 1st Fleet the Fujis participated in fighting off Port Arthur on 9–10 March 1904, wherein Fuji sustained light damage and Yashima was undamaged. On 15 May Yashima struck two naval mines and foundered. Fuji participated in the Battle of the Yellow Sea in August and was then slightly damaged during the Battle of Tsushima in May 1905. She was credited with the shot that caused the magazine explosion that destroyed the battleship Borodino. In October 1908, Fuji hosted the American ambassador to Japan and some senior officers of the Great White Fleet, and was later reclassified as a coast defense ship in 1910. The ship was disarmed and converted into an accommodation ship in 1922. Fuji was sunk by American aircraft in 1945 and scrapped in 1948.

Shikishima class

The Shikishima class (Kanji: 敷島型戦艦; Rōmaji: Shikishima-gata senkan) was designed as a more powerful version of the Royal Navy's Majestic-class battleship battleship. The ships were also assigned to the 1st Fleet before the Russo–Japanese War, were present at the Battle of Port Arthur and were slightly damaged during the action. JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Hatsuse struck one of the mines that the Russians laid in May 1904 and sank following a magazine explosion. Shikishima fought in the Battle of the Yellow Sea, only being damaged by a misfiring 12-inch shell, and then participated in the Battle of Tsushima where she was hit nine times, suffered another misfire from one of her main guns, and, together with the battleship JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Mikasa, sank the Russian battleship RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Oslyabya. Shikishima spent the duration of World War I assigned to the Sasebo Naval District, and was demilitarized after the Washington Naval Treaty was signed in 1922. She was used as a training hulk at Sasebo until she was broken up in 1948.

Asahi

Asahi was a slightly improved version of the British Formidable-class battleship battleships. She became the flagship of the IJN's Standing Fleet and was later assigned to the 1st Fleet when the Combined Fleet reformed in 1903. At the start of the Russo–Japanese War, Asahi took part in the Battle of Port Arthur and was not damaged by Russian fire. At the Battle of the Yellow Sea, the ship was moderately damaged, although she hit and damaged RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Poltava and RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Tsesarevich in return. Asahi struck a mine two months later near Port Arthur, but was repaired in time for the Battle of Tsushima. There, she helped disable the battleship RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Knyaz Suvorov and dueled with the battleships Borodino and RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Oryol, taking no damage.

She was a gunnery training ship for most of World War I until being rearmed in 1917 in time to escort troop transports during Japan's intervention in the Russian Civil War. Asahi was converted into a noncombat vessel during the 1920s and was then made a repair ship in 1937. On the night of 25–26 May 1942, Asahi was torpedoed and sunk by the submarine USS Salmon (SS-182) off modern-day Vietnam.

Mikasa

Mikasa was also an improved version of the Formidable-class battleships and only differed in minor respects from Asahi. The ship served as the 1st Fleet flagship throughout the Russo-Japanese War. She participated in the Battle of Port Arthur on the second day of the war and the Battles of the Yellow Sea and Tsushima. During the latter battle, the ship was hit many times, but was only lightly damaged. Days after the end of the war, Mikasa's magazine accidentally exploded and sank the ship. She was salvaged and her repairs took over two years to complete. Afterward, the ship served as a coast-defense ship during World War I and supported Japanese forces when they intervened in the Russian Civil War. After the Washington Naval Treaty was ratified in 1922 Mikasa was preserved as a museum ship. She was badly neglected during the post-World War II occupation of Japan and required extensive refurbishing in the late 1950s, but has only partially been restored. Mikasa is the only surviving example of a pre-dreadnought battleship in the world.

Tango

Tango was laid down as the Russian battleship Poltava (Полтава), the second of three Petropavlovsk-class battleship pre-dreadnought battleships. The ship was assigned to the Pacific Squadron shortly after her completion and based at Port Arthur from 1901. During the Russo-Japanese War, she participated in the Battle of Port Arthur and was heavily damaged during the Battle of the Yellow Sea. Sunk by Japanese artillery during the subsequent Siege of Port Arthur in December 1904, she was refloated by the IJN after the war and subsequently renamed Tango. During World War I, she bombarded German fortifications during the Siege of Tsingtao. The Japanese government sold Tango back to the Russians in 1916. She was renamed Chesma (Чесма) as her former name had been given to a new ship. Her crew declared for the Bolsheviks in October 1917, but saw no action in the Russian Civil War owing to her poor condition, and she was ultimately scrapped in 1924.

Sagami and Suwo

Sagami and Suwo were originally the Russian Peresvet-class battleship battleships RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Peresvet (Пересвет) and RUSSIAN BATTLESHIP Pobeda (Победа) respectively. The design of the Peresvet class was inspired by the British second-class battleships of the Centurion-class battleship. The British ships were intended to defeat commerce-raiding armored cruisers like the Russian ships RUSSIAN CRUISER Rossia and RUSSIAN CRUISER Rurik, and the Peresvet class was designed to support their armored cruisers.

The sisters were sunk during the Siege of Port Arthur and were salvaged by the IJN afterward. Because of their lighter armament than the other captured battleships, they were rated as coastal-defense ships. During World War I, Suwo was the flagship of the Japanese squadron during the Siege of Tsingtao and then of the 2nd Fleet before becoming a gunnery-training ship in 1916. Sagami was sold back to the Russians that same year and resumed her former name. While en route to northern Russia, the ship struck two mines in the Mediterranean and sank. Suwo was disarmed in 1922 in accordance with the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty and was probably scrapped afterward.

Hizen

Hizen, originally Retvizan (Ретвизан), was a Russian pre-dreadnought battleship built in America before the Russo-Japanese War because Russian shipyards were already at full capacity. The ship was torpedoed during the Battle of Port Arthur, but was repaired in time to participate in the Battle of the Yellow Sea, during which she was lightly damaged. She was sunk during the Siege of Port Arthur and salvaged by the IJN. During World War I, Hizen was sent to reinforce the weak British squadron off British Columbia, but diverted to Hawaii after reports of a German gunboat there were received. The ship was unsuccessfully sent to search for other German ships after the Americans interned the gunboat in November 1914. After the war she supported the Japanese intervention in the Russian Civil War and was disarmed in 1922 as required by the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty. Hizen was sunk as a target in 1924.

Iwami

Iwami was built shortly before the Russo-Japanese War for the Imperial Russian Navy as Oryol (Орёл), one of five Borodino-class battleships. Together with three of her sisters, she voyaged half-way around the world to participate in the Battle of Tsushima. Moderately damaged during the battle, the ship was surrendered to the IJN the following day. The Japanese rebuilt her from 1905 to 1907 and she was assigned to the 1st Fleet, although the ship was reclassified as a coast defense ship in 1912. Iwami participated in the Siege of Tsingtao in 1914 after Japan declared war on Imperial Germany and then became a guardship. She became the flagship of the 5th Division of the 3rd Fleet in 1918 and supported the Japanese intervention in the Russian Civil War. Iwami briefly became a training ship before she was disarmed in 1922 and was sunk as a target two years later.

Katori class

The pair of Katori-class pre-dreadnoughts were the last Japanese battleships to be built overseas. The design of the Katori class was a modified and improved version of the Royal Navy's King Edward VII-class battleship battleships. Completed after the end of the Russo–Japanese War, the ships never saw combat. Katori had a major fire in one of her secondary-gun turrets in 1907 that killed 34 men and wounded 8 others. While they saw no action during World War I, they both participated in Japan's intervention in Siberia in 1918. In 1921, the sisters carried Crown Prince Hirohito on his tour of Europe where he met King George V. Under the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty, both ships were disarmed and scrapped between 1923 and 1925.

Satsuma class

The Satsuma-class battleships, Satsuma and Aki, were the first battleships to be built in Japan. They marked a transitional stage in battleship design, as the sisters were intended to mount a dozen 12 in guns. Material shortages in Japan and the expense of construction led to a redesign that armed the sisters with four 12-inch and a dozen 10 in guns. If built as planned, the Satsuma class would have been the world's first "all big-gun" battleships. Satsuma was powered traditionally with two vertical triple-expansion engines, but Aki was the first Japanese battleship to use steam turbines.

The introduction of HMS Dreadnought (1906) in 1906 ensured that the Satsuma class was obsolete before the ships were even launched. Nevertheless, Aki was launched on 15 November, while Satsuma followed on 15 April 1907. Satsuma would go on to serve as Rear Admiral Tatsuo Matsumura's flagship in the Second South Seas Squadron as it seized the German possessions of the Caroline and the Palau Islands in October 1914 in the opening months of World War I. Satsuma would later be refitted at Sasebo Naval Arsenal in 1916 and served with the 1st Squadron for the rest of the war. Aki was also assigned to the 1st Squadron until she was transferred to the 2nd Battleship Squadron in 1918. Both ships were sunk as targets by JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Nagato and JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Mutsu in 1924.

Kawachi class

The Kawachi class (Kanji: 河内型戦艦; Rōmaji: Kawachi-gata senkan), Kawachi and Settsu, were a pair of dreadnought battleships ordered in the Navy's Warship Supplement Program after the Russo-Japanese War. They were the IJN's first dreadnoughts and marked one of the first steps in achieving Japan's recently adopted Eight-Eight Fleet Program. The sisters were armed with four 50-caliber 12-inch and eight 45-caliber 12-inch main guns, arranged in the hexagonal layout used by the German dreadnoughts of the Nassau-class battleship and Helgoland-class battleshipes. They had originally been designed with a dozen 45-caliber guns, but after the IJN received word that the Royal Navy had adopted the more powerful and expensive 50-caliber guns, it upgraded the four centerline guns to the longer caliber as it could not afford to upgrade all of them.

Settsu and Kawachi bombarded German fortifications at Tsingtao during the Battle of Tsingtao in 1914, but saw no other combat in World War I. Kawachi sank in 1918 after an explosion in her ammunition magazine with the loss of over 600 officers and crewmen. Settsu was disarmed in 1922 and converted into a target ship. She was heavily damaged in 1945 by American carrier aircraft and eventually beached to avoid sinking. The ship was subsequently scrapped in 1946–1947.

Fusō class

The Fusō-class battleships (扶桑型戦艦), Fusō and Yamashiro, were a pair of dreadnoughts built for the IJN during World War I. Both patrolled briefly off the coast of China before being placed in reserve at the war's end. Although they were extensively modernized during the 1930s, the sisters were considered obsolescent by the eve of World War II, and neither saw significant action in its early years. Fusō and Yamashiro briefly served as troop transports in 1943, but mostly served as training ships that year. They were the only two Japanese battleships at the Battle of Surigao Strait in October 1944, the southernmost action of the Battle of Leyte Gulf, and were sunk by torpedoes and naval gunfire during the night battle with the loss of almost all of their crews.

Ise class

The Ise-class battleships (伊勢型戦艦) were another pair of dreadnoughts built during World War I. Both ships carried supplies for the survivors of the Great Kantō earthquake in 1923. They were modernized in the interwar period with improvements to their armor and machinery and a rebuilt superstructure in the pagoda mast style. Afterward they played a minor role in the Second Sino-Japanese War.

Despite the expensive reconstructions, both vessels were considered obsolete by the eve of the Pacific War, and neither saw significant action in the early years of the war. Following the loss of most of the IJN's large aircraft carriers during the Battle of Midway in mid-1942, they were rebuilt with a flight deck replacing the rear pair of gun turrets to give them the ability to operate an air group of floatplanes. A lack of aircraft and qualified pilots, however, meant that they never actually operated their aircraft in combat. While awaiting their air group, the sister ships were occasionally used to ferry troops and material to Japanese bases. They participated in the Battle off Cape Engaño in late 1944, where they decoyed the American carrier fleet supporting the invasion of Leyte away from the landing beaches. Afterward, both ships were transferred to Southeast Asia; in early 1945 they participated in Operation Kita, where they transported petrol and other strategic materials to Japan. The sisters were then reduced to reserve until they were sunk during American airstrikes in July. After the war, they were scrapped in 1946–1947.

Nagato class

The Nagato-class battleships (長門型戦艦) were the third pair of dreadnoughts built during World War I, although they were not completed until after the end of the war. Both ships carried supplies for the survivors of the Great Kantō earthquake in 1923. Modernized during the 1930s, Nagato and her sister ship Mutsu briefly participated in the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937 and Nagato was the flagship of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto during the attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 that began the Pacific War.

The sisters participated in the Battle of Midway in June 1942, although they did not see any combat. Mutsu participated in the Battle of the Eastern Solomons in August before returning to Japan in early 1943. One of her magazines exploded in June, destroying the ship. Nagato spent most of the first two years of the war training in home waters. She was transferred to Truk in mid-1943, but did not see any combat until the Battle of the Philippine Sea in mid-1944 when she was attacked by American aircraft. Nagato did not fire her main armament against enemy vessels until the Battle of Leyte Gulf in October 1944. She was lightly damaged during the battle and returned to Japan the following month for repairs. The IJN was running out of fuel by this time and decided not to fully repair her. Nagato was converted into a floating anti-aircraft platform and assigned to coastal defense duties. After the war, the ship was a target for US nuclear weapon tests during Operation Crossroads in mid-1946. She survived the first test with little damage, but was sunk by the second test.

Tosa class

The Tosa-class battleships (土佐型戦艦) were ordered during the early 1920s. They were larger versions of the preceding Nagato class, and carried an additional twin-gun 41 cm turret. Both ships were launched in late 1921, but the first ship, JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Tosa, was cancelled in accordance with the terms of the Washington Naval Treaty before she could be completed, and was used in experiments testing the effectiveness of its armor scheme before being scuttled. The hull of the second ship, JAPANESE AIRCRAFT CARRIER Kaga, was converted into an aircraft carrier to replace an Amagi-class battlecruiser that had been wrecked by the Great Kanto earthquake of 1923. The carrier supported Japanese troops in China during the Second Sino-Japanese War and took part in the attack on Pearl Harbor and the invasion of Rabaul in the Southwest Pacific in January 1942. The following month her aircraft participated in a combined carrier airstrike on Darwin, Australia, during the Dutch East Indies campaign. She was sunk during the Battle of Midway in 1942.

Kii class
The Kii-class battleship was a planned class of four fast battleships to be built during the 1920s. Only two of the ships received names. They were intended to reinforce Japan's "Eight-Eight fleet" of eight battleships and eight battlecruisers after the United States announced the reinitiation of a major naval construction program in 1919. However, after the signing of the Washington Naval Treaty in 1922, work on the ships was suspended; one pair was cancelled in November 1923 and the other in April 1924.

Number 13 class

The Number 13-class battleship was a planned class of four fast battleships to be built after the Kii class during the 1920s. The ships never received any names, being known only as Numbers 13–16. They were intended to reinforce Japan's "Eight-Eight Fleet" of eight battleships and eight battlecruisers after the United States announced the reinitiation of a major naval construction program in 1919. The Number 13 class was designed to be superior to all other existing battleships, planned or building. After the signing of the Washington Naval Treaty in 1922, they were cancelled in November 1923 before construction could begin.

Kongō-class battlecruiser

The Kongō-class battlecruisers were rebuilt as fast battleships during the 1920s and '30s. Their turbines and boilers were replaced by lighter, more powerful models, they were bulged to improve their underwater protection, their horizontal armor was increased and the range of their guns was increased.

The Kongōs were the most active capital ships of the IJN during the Pacific War, participating in most of the major engagements. Hiei and Kirishima acted as escorts during the attack on Pearl Harbor, while Kongō and Haruna supported the Dutch East Indies Campaign. All four participated in the Battles of Midway and Guadalcanal. Hiei and Kirishima were both sunk during the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal in November 1942, while Haruna and Kongō jointly bombarded Henderson Field on Guadalcanal. The two remaining sisters spent most of 1943 shuttling between Japanese naval bases before participating in the major naval campaigns of 1944. They helped to sink two American destroyers and an escort carrier during the Battle of Leyte Gulf. Kongō was torpedoed and sunk by the submarine USS Sealion in November, while Haruna was sunk at her moorings by an air attack on Kure Naval Base in late July 1945; she was raised and scrapped in 1946.

Yamato class

The Yamato-class battleships (大和型戦艦) were built at the beginning of the Pacific War. The ships were the largest and most heavily armed battleships ever constructed. Two ships, (JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Yamato and JAPANESE BATTLESHIP Musashi) were completed as battleships, while a third (JAPANESE AIRCRAFT CARRIER Shinano) was converted to an aircraft carrier during construction. A fourth ship was scrapped while still under construction and a planned fifth ship was never begun.

Due to the threat of American submarines and aircraft carriers and worsening fuel shortages, both Yamato and Musashi spent the majority of their careers in naval bases at Brunei, Truk, and Kure—deploying on several occasions in response to American raids on Japanese bases—before participating in the Battle of Leyte Gulf in October 1944, as part of Vice Admiral Kurita's Center Force. Musashi was sunk during the battle by American airplanes. Shinano was sunk ten days after her commissioning in November 1944 by the American submarine USS Archerfish (SS-311) while Yamato was sunk by US carrier aircraft in April 1945 during Operation Ten-Go.

Design A-150
"Design A-150", popularly known as the Super Yamato class, was a planned class of battleships. In keeping with the IJN's long-held doctrine of qualitative superiority, they were designed to be the most powerful battleships afloat. As part of this, the class would have been armed with six 51 cm guns, the largest weapons carried aboard any warship in the world. Design work on the A-150s began after the preceding Yamato class was mostly finished by early 1941, when the Japanese began focusing on aircraft carriers and other smaller warships in preparation for the coming conflict. No A-150 would ever be laid down, and many details of the class' design were destroyed near the end of the war.

Journals

 * (contact the editor at lars.ahlberg@halmstad.mail.postnet.se for subscription information)
 * (contact the editor at lars.ahlberg@halmstad.mail.postnet.se for subscription information)

title: List of battleships of Japan


text:
Shuto Expressway

Shuto Expressway (首都高速道路) is a network of toll expressways in the Greater Tokyo Area of Japan. It is operated and maintained by the Metropolitan Expressway Company Limited (首都高速道路株式会社).

Most routes are grade-separated (elevated roads or tunnels) and central routes have many sharp curves and multi-lane merges that require caution to drive safely. The speed limit is 60 km/h on most routes, but 80 km/h on the Bayshore Route, and 50 km/h on the Inner Circular Route.

All trips on the expressway require a toll be paid. As of 2014, the cash toll for a standard-size car is ¥1300 regardless of distance traveled. Vehicles using the ETC toll-collection system pay a distance-based toll ranging from ¥300 to ¥1300 for ordinary vehicles (see toll price) – in some cases substantially less than the previous fixed-rate toll. Lower cash rates exist for certain radial routes (where there are only a few kilometers of expressway remaining) and ETC users have various time-of-day discounts. For large vehicles, the toll is doubled.

Routes
There are 24 routes currently in operation:

Circular (loop) routes

 * C1 Inner Circular Route
 * C2 Central Circular Route — loop incorporating the Yamate Tunnel.
 * Y Yaesu Route — via Tokyo Expressway

Bayshore route

 * B Bayshore Route (Higashi-Kanto-Expressway – ) Chidori-cho – Sachiura / Namiki ( – Yokohama–Yokosuka Expressway)

Radial routes

 * No. 1 Ueno Route Edobashi JCT – Iriya
 * No. 1 Haneda Route Hamazakibashi JCT – Haneda ( – Route K1)
 * No. 2 Meguro Route Ichinohashi JCT – Togoshi
 * No. 3 Shibuya Route Tanimachi JCT – Yoga ( – the Tomei Expressway)
 * No. 4 Shinjuku Route Miyakezaka JCT – Takaido ( – the Chuo Expressway)
 * No. 5 Ikebukuro Route Takebashi JCT – Bijogi JCT ( – Route S5)
 * No. 6 Mukojima Route Edobashi JCT – Horikiri JCT ( – Route C2)
 * No. 6 Misato Route Kosuge JCT – Misato JCT ( – Tokyo Gaikan Expressway)
 * No. 7 Komatsugawa Route Ryogoku JCT – Ichinoe ( – Keiyo Road)
 * No. 9 Fukagawa Route Hakozaki JCT – Tatsumi JCT ( – Bayshore Route)
 * No. 10 Harumi Route Ariake JCT – Harumi
 * No. 11 Daiba Route Shibaura JCT – Ariake JCT (Tokyo Rainbow Bridge)
 * S1 Kawaguchi Route (Route C2 – ) Kohoku JCT – Kawaguchi JCT ( – Tokyo Gaikan Expressway)

Kanagawa routes

 * K1 Yokohane Route (Route 1 – ) Haneda - Ishikawa-cho JCT ( – Route K3)
 * K2 Mitsuzawa Route Kinko JCT – Mitsuzawa ( – Yokohama Shindo Road and Daisan Keihin Road)
 * K3 Kariba Route Honmoku JCT – Kariba ( – Yokohama Shindo Road and Yokohama-Yokosuka Expressway)
 * K5 Daikoku Route (Route K1 – ) Namamugi JCT - Daikoku JCT ( – Bayshore Route)
 * K6 Kawasaki Route Tonomachi – Kawasaki-Ukishima JCT ( – Bayshore Route and Tokyo Bay Aqua Line)
 * K7 Yokohama North Route (Route K1 and Route K5 – ) Namamugi JCT - Yokohama Kōhoku JCT ( – Daisan Keihin Road and Route K7)
 * K7 Yokohama Northwest Route (Route K7 and Daisan Keihin Road – ) Yokohama Kōhoku JCT – Yokohama-Aoba JCT ( – Tōmei Expressway)

Saitama routes

 * S2 Saitama Shintoshin Route (Route S5) Yono – Saitama-Minuma
 * S5 Ōmiya Route (Route 5 – ) Bijogi JCT – Yono ( – Route S2)

History
The Metropolitan Expressway was first built between Kyobashi Exit in Chūō, Tokyo and Shibaura Exit in Minato, Tokyo in 1962 for the purpose of increasing traffic flow efficiency in the Tokyo Metropolitan Area, thus optimizing and improving the functionality of the traffic system. Since then, 280 kilometers of highway network has been built in the Tokyo metropolitan area; 30 kilometers more of highway are either constructed or planned, making the Metropolitan Expressway a vast network of urban expressways in the Tokyo region.

Pillion passenger ban on motorcycles
Japan allows a person aged at least 20 who has held a motorcycle driver's license for at least three years to carry a pillion passenger on expressways, however, the Shuto Expressway in the central parts of Tokyo prohibit carrying pillion passengers due to poor road geometry. The ban does not apply if the motorcycle is equipped with a sidecar. The segments with a pillion ban include the important C1 Inner Circular route and adjoining central Tokyo routes.

With the opening of the C2 Yamate Tunnel, motorcycles with a pillion passengers can finally pass through the Shuto Expressway from the national expressways such as Tōmei Expressway to other expressways using the C2 route, although this can be a much longer drive in some cases.

Parking areas
There are 21 parking areas scattered throughout the Shuto Expressway system. In general these are much smaller than the service areas available every 30 km or so on inter-city expressways. In some cases there are no more than toilets, a few vending machines, and a handful of parking spaces. None have fuel – drivers must exit the system (and pay the toll again on re-entry) to use a service station.

Street racing
Like other expressways in Japan including the Tōmei Expressway, the Shuto line has become a common street racing road. One of the lines, the Bayshore Route (also known as the Wangan route), received worldwide notoriety during the 1990s as the home course for the Mid Night Club, one of the most notorious street racing clubs, who were known for their 300 km/h, sometimes 320 km/h exploits. These exploits and street racing culture on the Shuto Expressway have made it a well-known location for street racing and speed records.

Due to this infamy, the Wangan is the setting for several entertainment franchises, such as the manga and arcade game Wangan Midnight, video games Shutokou Battle and Gran Turismo 5, 6, Sport and 7 (as the street circuit) and the movie series Shuto Kousoku Trial. Numerous car enthusiast magazines and DVDs, like Best Motoring, also highlight races and activities on the Wangan.

Ohashi Junction

Ohashi Junction (大橋ジャンクション) is a One-quadrant Interchange in Shuto Expressway system in Tokyo. It connects Shibuya Route and Central Circular Route. It's built in 2010 partially, and fully completed in 2015. It's an indoor type Interchange and covered in concrete walls.

It is designed as compact as possible and environmentally friendly. Shibuya Route is an eleveted highway and Central Circular Route is an underground one. So, it is Helixshaped and you would drive in circle 4 times to transfer. There is "Meguro Sky Garden" and chimney on the roof.

Dimensions

 * Above ground : 35m
 * Under ground : 36m
 * Diameter : 175m - 130m
 * Meguro Sky Garden : 7000m2

title: Shuto Expressway


text:
Ōoku (2003 TV series)

Ōoku (大奥) is a Japanese drama produced by FujiTV. The story is set in the Edo period and is fiction set against a background of historical fact. The Ōoku was the part the ladies lived in Edo Castle.

The popularity of the show has produced six series (1968, 1983, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2024) as well as a 2006 film, Oh! Oku.

Summary
The story is set in Edo period in Ōoku, a place where thousands of women work for one general. The story is told from the point of view of Maru, a girl from a merchant family. At that time, working in Ōoku was popular among girls. Maru was curious about Ōoku and took a job there out of curiosity. Other workers tended to bully her. One day, Tokuko, wife of a Tokugawa shogun(御台所 midaidokoro) saved Maru from the bullying. Maru and Tokuko become very close friends, even though there were from different ranks in society.

Tokuko was born into a high-class samurai family in Satsuma. She had a boyfriend, Tougo, who she wanted to marry, but for political reasons had to marry Iesada Tokugawa and lived her whole life in Ōoku. Tokuko is clever, tough, and self-confident, and always wanted to escape from Ōoku. Maru helps Tokuko adjust to her surroundings. Tokuko didn't like the system and rules of Ōoku, so she was defiant toward Takiyama, the woman who administrates the Ōoku.

Takiyama is the woman with the strongest authority in Ōoku, and is able to speak with the shogun equally. She is very strict to everyone, especially Tokuko and Maru, who are considered outsiders. She was born into a very poor family but, because of her beauty, she got a job in Ōoku. She worked hard to protect Ōoku because it is the only place she can live.

Takiyama disliked Tokuko, not only because she was from Satsuma, but because she envied Tokuko being Iesada Tokugawa's wife. Takiyama used to be Iesada's lover, but they couldn't marry or even love each other officially because of the distinction between their ranks. Iesada's feeling toward Tokuko grew when he married her, but Takiyama still couldn't forget about Iesada and was especially strict toward Tokuko. Takiyama asks one of her workers to poison Tokuko.

One day, Tokuko fell flat suddenly when she was eating. Someone had poisoned her dinner. Tokuko narrowly escaped death and started doubting Takiyama, but Takiyama ignored her doubts. Tokuko found poison in the kitchen, and asked Takiyama what the poison was. Takiyama said that it was a medicine for not having a baby. Tokuko was Iesada's wife, but he already had a child who would become the next shogun. Therefore, it was better for Tokuko to not have any children. Tokuko was shocked by Takiyama's story.

Tokuko was in the depths of despair. Having children was her only hope in Ōoku. If she could have a baby, she would have a hope for living. Though, as Takiyama said, she was not allowed to have a baby; thus she completely lost her hope for living. At the same time, Iesada's body was eaten up by unknown illness.

One day, there was a fire in Edo castle and Ōoku was also damaged. Ōoku was in panic. Maru took Tokuko somewhere safe, but Tokuko suddenly went to the opposite side. Maru ran to Iesada to tell about Tokuko. Iesada went inside Ōoku again to find Tokuko. Takiyama tried to stop him but he won't listen. Though, he fell down spitting blood. Tokuko was found by Maru and heard about Iesada. She stayed beside him, but there was nothing Tokuko can do. Iesada died taking Tokuko's hand.

Tokuko's lover, Tougo, came from Satsuma to help Tokuko escape from Ōoku, but she refused his offer. Tokuko decided to live in Ōoku and do what she can. She told Tougo that she learned lot of things from Iesada. Takiyama hears this conversation and changes her image of Tokuko.

Iesada Tokugawa's age had ended. Tokuko later took a tonsure, who would be later named "Tenshoin".

1st season (2003)

 * Miho Kanno as Atsuko
 * Yuko Asano as Takiyama
 * Chizuru Ikewaki as Maru
 * Yumi Adachi as Kazunomiya
 * Ryuji Harada as Tougo
 * Kazuki Kitamura as Tokugawa Iesada, the 13th Shōgun
 * Shingo Katsurayama as Tokugawa Iemochi, the 14th Shōgun
 * Machiko Washio as Kuzuoka
 * Kaori Yamaguchi as Yoshino
 * Maki Kubota as Urao
 * Kyōko Kishida as Murase
 * Yōko Nogiwa as Jitsujōin

2nd season (2004)

 * Yuki Matsushita as Lady Kasuga
 * Reiko Takashima as Oeyo (Sūgen'in)
 * Asaka Seto as Oman (Eikō'in), a concubine of Iemitsu
 * Hidetoshi Nishijima as Tokugawa Iemitsu, the 3rd Shōgun
 * Mari Hoshino as Otama (Keishō'in), a concubine of Iemitsu and the mother of Tokugawa Tsunayoshi.
 * Tae Kimura as Takako
 * Kotomi Kyono as Oran (Hōju'in)
 * Maho Nonami as Onatsu (Junshō'in)
 * Ikkei Watanabe as Tokugawa Hidetada, the father of iemitsu
 * Machiko Washio as Kuzuoka
 * Kaori Yamaguchi as Yoshino
 * Maki Kubota as Urao
 * Kenta Suga as Tokumatsu (later Tokugawa Tsunayoshi)
 * Meiko Kaji as Asahina
 * Makoto Fujita as Tokugawa Ieyasu, the grandfather of iemitsu

3rd season (2005)

 * Rina Uchiyama as Yasuko
 * Shōsuke Tanihara as Tokugawa Tsunayoshi, the 5th Shōgun
 * Eiko Koike as Oden
 * Saki Takaoka as Lady Emon'nosuke
 * Kazuki Kitamura as Yanagisawa Yoshiyasu
 * Shinobu Nakayama as Ōsuke
 * Shihori Kanjiya as Someko
 * Kimiko Yo as Otowa
 * Ren Osugi as Tokugawa Mitsukuni
 * Machiko Washio as Kuzuhara
 * Kaori Yamaguchi
 * Maki Kubota
 * Kyoko Enami as Keishō'in, the mother of Tsunayoshi
 * Norika Fujiwara as Nobuko

Film (2006)

 * Yukie Nakama as Ejima
 * Haruka Igawa as Gekkō-in
 * Reiko Takashima as Ten'ei-in
 * Kimura Tae as Hoshi-in
 * Yuko Asano as Takigawa
 * Yuki Matsushita as Denjoin
 * Takeru Shibuya as Tokugawa Ietsugu, the 7th Shōgun
 * Mitsuhiro Oikawa as Manabe Akifusa

TV special (2016)

 * Erika Sawajiri as Omiyo and Ume
 * Hiroki Narimiya as Tokugawa Ienari, the 11th Shōgun
 * Mayu Watanabe (AKB48) as Oshima
 * Misako Renbutsu as Uta
 * Machiko Washio as Kuzuoka
 * Kaori Yamaguchi as Yoshino
 * Maki Kubota as Urao
 * Rantarō Mine as Tokugawa Ieharu, the 10th Shōgun
 * Toshiyuki Aono as Tanuma Okitsugu
 * Yūko Asano as Lady Ōsaki

TV special: Ōoku the Final (2019)

 * Fumino Kimura as Kume
 * Takao Osawa as Tokugawa Yoshimune, the 8th Shōgun
 * Eiko Koike as Gekkō-in
 * Honami Suzuki as Ten'ei-in
 * Minami Hamabe as Takehime
 * Yoko Minamino as Takase
 * Yukino Kishii as Taki
 * Keiko Matsuzaka as Jōen-in
 * Yūko Asano as Yoshiko
 * Kazuki Kitamura as Tokugawa Muneharu
 * Shōsuke Tanihara as Manabe Akifusa
 * Houka Kinoshita as Tokugawa Ienobu, the 6th Shōgun
 * Shingo Katsurayama
 * Yukie Nakama as Narrator

4th season (2024)

 * Fuka Koshiba as Isonomiya Tomoko
 * Kazuya Kamenashi (KAT-TUN) as Tokugawa Ieharu, the 10th Shōgun
 * Nanase Nishino as Oshina
 * Aoi Morikawa as Ochiho
 * Ryōta Miyadate (Snow Man) as Matsudaira Sadanobu
 * Masatō Ibu as Tokugawa Yoshimune, the 8th Shōgun
 * Katsunori Takahashi as Tokugawa Ieshige, the 9th Shōgun
 * Takanori Jinnai (Special appearance) as Tayasu Munetake
 * Chiaki Kuriyama as Lady Matsushima
 * Ken Yasuda as Tanuma Okitsugu
 * Fuku Suzuki as Tokugawa Ienari, the 11th Shōgun

title: Ōoku (2003 TV series)


text:
The Long Love Letter

The Long Love Letter (ロング・ラブレター〜漂流教室〜) is a 2002 Japanese television drama series based on the manga The Drifting Classroom by Kazuo Umezu.

Plot
One day, Yuka Misaki, a daughter of a flower shop owner meets Akio Asami, a college student. They are both attracted to each other, but they have no way to get in touch with each other at that time.

One year later, Yuka begins a job at her father's flower shop and Akio becomes a mathematics teacher at Motokura High School. One day in November, Yuka goes to the Motokura High School to collect money for the flowers and meets Akio again. However, they can't get along well. In January, Yuka gets a call from Ryuta Fujisawa and they promise to meet that afternoon. In the morning, Yuka goes to the school again to collect money that she couldn't collect before.

Akio finds Yuka in the playground and calls out to her. At that moment, a large earthquake occurs. By the time it stops, their school is surrounded by dry and sandy desert. Not only Yuka and Akio, but other students including Tadashi Otomo, Shou Takamatsu, Fumiya Ikegaki are in the school that day.

The students begin to panic, but Yuka and Akio try to calm them. At first, the students are pessimistic because there is not enough food and water. However, they begin to accept what happened to them. Many strange things happen in the desert. They see a total eclipse of the sun that they can't see in 2002. They see a train which should not exist in 2002. From those two things, they notice that they are in the future.

They start to think that they have to survive in that world and change the "future." Otherwise, there will be no "future." They begin to think about the reasons why they are transferred to the future. That is because they are chosen to change the future.

At the same time, they write a letter to them in the past. Everyone says that people have to live "now" at the best they can.

One day, an eruption occurs and the earth gets its natural sources back. In the past, they were spoiling the sources a lot without noticing. However, they learn the importance of the natural resources by now. They decide to save them and will not spoil them again.

Also, they use water to water flowers to raise the flowers and grasses. Several years later, the earth revive again and the school building is surrounded by grasses instead of deserts. They tried their best to live in the future and the future is changed.

Cast

 * Takako Tokiwa as Yuka Misaki
 * Yōsuke Kubozuka as Akio Asami
 * Tomohisa Yamashita as Tadashi Otomo
 * Takayuki Yamada as Shou Takamatu
 * Emi Suzuki as Midori Gamou
 * Ren Osugi as Shigeo Misaki
 * Satoshi Tsumabuki as Ryuta Fujisawa
 * Hiromi Nakajima as Noriko Sekiya
 * Kei Ishibashi as Jyunko Nakazawa
 * Asami Mizukawa as Kaoru Ichinose
 * Asahi Uchida as Shinichi Yamada
 * Kana Fujii as Mizuho Nippa

title: The Long Love Letter


text:
Talk:Ephrath

Text
Former text:

''Ephrath or Ephratah is a biblical city in what is now modern Israel. It is on the road between Bethel and Bethlehem, at a short distance from the latter place. It is sometimes associated directly with the city of Bethlehem. In Micah 5:2, the birth of Jesus Christ was predicted to be at the city of "Bethlehem Ephratah." People who traced their lineage to King David came to the area of this town during the census that was taken when Jesus Christ was born.''

King James Version: Micah 5:2 "But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."

''The town of Ephrata, Pennsylvania was named after this town. The modern Israeli city of Efrat is located in roughly the same place.''

I'm posting this here because citation and interpretation were too thoroughly mixed to edit. Comments? Wetman 06:18, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

This page should be joined with Efrat, as they are both referring to the same place. 129.98.196.159

Which Melbourne?
"The town of Ephratah, Melbourne was also named after this town." The other cities are obviously in the US, but where is this one? If you know the answer, add the info and return it to the article. — Moilleadóir 01:27, 18 July 2005 (UTC) (who lives in Melbourne which doesn't contain an Ephratah as far as he knows)

Cleanup
There's still plenty to be done, including citations for the scholarly opinions.  Tewfik Talk 03:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Where has User:Tewfik placed the deleted text? --Wetman 07:14, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I deleted the text I did because I believe that I expressed the same ideas in clearer language, though of course all contributions towards excellence are welcomed. Like in all Wikipedia articles, previous versions are available in the edit history. Cheers,  Tewfik Talk 14:01, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I've fixed the missing linkings that tie together Ephrath, Ephrata and Efrat, for the sake of the Wikipedia reader. Restored deleted sourced information and reference. It was unintentionally obscure. If the ancient site and the modern city are not the same site, that is part of the story, as is the mention in Micah that is important to Christians, though not, apparently, to everyone. --Wetman 07:31, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I apologise for not being clearer to begin with, but the reason for most of my deletions was that the information was referring to the modern Efrat, which no one believes is in the same place as the biblical site[s]. There is no ancient Ephrath, other than perhaps Bethlehem or another location near Ramallah. I replaced the prophecy section, even though it's not so relevant to Ephrath per say. The "Encyclopedia" section's main point is expressed much clearer in the beginning, though I sourced the statement to a similar passage (I couldn't find the original in a non-WP source). Cheers,  Tewfik Talk 08:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Neither 1 Samuel 10:2 nor Jeremiah, 31:14 say anything about Ephrath or Bethel. Can someone help me out here? 128.187.122.157 (talk) 19:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ephrathite is never once used to refer to Ephraim. I didn't change the wording because I figure one of the regulars can correct it. Ephrathites are a clan within Yehudah.

The Book of 1 Chronicles 2:50-51 King James Version: reflects that their was a person named Ephratah and a man named Bethlehem that were in the line of Judah: These were the sons of Caleb the son of Hur, the firstborn of Ephratah; Shobal the father of Kirjathjearim, 51 Salma the father of Bethlehem, Hareph the father of Bethgader. The World English Version spells Ephratah as Ephrathah. The Book of Ruth 1:1-2 reflects that Elimelech and Noami were Ephrathites from from Bethlehem. I have read this to mean that Ephrath is the same place as Bethlehem since most places in the bible are named after people. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.221.173.63 (talk) 00:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC) Also 1 Chronicles 4:4 reflects: These are the sons of Hur, the firstborn of Ephrathah, the father of Bethlehem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.221.173.63 (talk) 00:43, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Original research
The article is almost entirely original research based on primary sources. If not rectified, said content should be removed.--2.110.77.99 (talk) 04:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ephrath


text:
Talk:Bad Kreuznach (district)

Language
"Verbandsgemeinden" is not entirely english ;-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.133.103.141 (talk) 06:19, 27 February 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Bad Kreuznach (district)


text:
Hossein Derakhshan

Hossein Derakhshan (born January 7, 1975), also known as Hoder, is an Iranian-Canadian blogger, journalist, and researcher who was imprisoned in Tehran from November 2008 to November 2014. He is credited with starting the blogging revolution in Iran and is called the father of Persian blogging by many journalists. He also helped to promote podcasting in Iran. Derakhshan was arrested on November 1, 2008 and sentenced to 19½ years in prison on September 28, 2010. His sentence was reduced to 17 years in October 2013. He was pardoned by Iran's supreme leader and on November 19, 2014, was released from Evin prison.

Education
Derakhshan started his education in Nikan High School in Tehran. He has a bachelor's degree in sociology from Shahid Beheshti University in Tehran. He spent time studying sociology at the University of Toronto. He holds a master's degree (MA) in Film and Media Studies from SOAS, University of London, 2008.

Early journalism
Derakhshan started out as a journalist writing about Internet and digital culture for reformist newspaper, Asr-e Azadegan in 1999. Later, when this paper was closed down by the judiciary system, he moved to another newspaper, Hayat-e No. His column there was called Panjere-i roo be hayaat (A Window to the Life, a reference to Alfred Hitchcock's Rear Window), and later expanded to a weekly page on digital culture, Internet and computer games.

Blogging advocacy
In December 2000, Derakhshan moved to Toronto, Ontario, Canada. On September 25, 2001, he started his weblog in the Persian language. It was titled Sardabir: khodam, or "Editor: Myself".

He later moved his manually maintained weblog to Blogger.com, which was not supporting Unicode at the time. He also prepared a step-by-step guide in Persian on how other Persian writers can start their weblogs using Blogger.com and the Unicode standard.

Derakhshan spoke at the Wikimania 2005 conference in Frankfurt, Germany regarding the complementary use of wikis and blogs to aid political reform and the growth of democracy in Iran and other countries.

On leaving Iran, he was briefly detained and summoned to the Ministry of Intelligence. A few days later he was interrogated by an intelligence official over the content of his blog and was forced to sign an apology before being allowed to leave Iran. But after leaving Iran, he published a report on what happened on his website.

Anti-censorship
Derakhshan's weblog, like some other political Persian blogs and websites, has been blocked (or filtered) by the government in Iran, since 2004.

In December 2003, he founded Stop censoring us, a blog to watch the situation of internet censorship in Iran. He appeared a few times on a VOA Persian TV show to talk about Internet censorship and methods to get around filters.

Against Israel-Iran escalation
Derakhshan visited Israel as a Canadian citizen in early 2006 and early 2007. Before his first visit, he stated that he went to Israel as a personal attempt to start a dialogue between Iranian and Israeli people.

This might mean that I won't be able to go back to Iran for a long time, since Iran doesn't recognize Israel, has no diplomatic relations with it, and apparently considers traveling there illegal. Too bad, but I don't care. Fortunately, I'm a citizen of Canada and I have the right to visit any country I want.

I'm going to Israel as a citizen journalist and a peace activist. As a citizen journalist, I'm going to show my 20,000 daily Iranian readers what Israel really looks like and how people live there. The Islamic Republic has long portrayed Israel as an evil state, with a consensual political agenda of killing every single man and woman who prays to Allah, including Iranians. I'm going to challenge that image.

As a peace activist, I'm going to show the Israelis that the vast majority of Iranians do not identify with Ahmadinejad's rhetoric, despite what it looks like from the outside. I'm going to tell them how any kind of violent action against Iran would only harm the young people who are gradually reforming the system and how the radicals would benefit from such situation.

His second visit was to participate in a conference at The Chaim Herzog Center for Middle East Studies and Diplomacy at Ben-Gurion University in Beer Sheva. The annual international conference in 2007 was titled 'Reform, Resistance, and Conflicts in the Middle East." Hossein participated in panel titled 'Weblogging as a Space of Resistance', where he spoke about Iranian weblogs in a presentation titled as 'Internet in Iran: Are Weblogs and other forms of new media helping democracy in Iran?'.

His visits were widely covered by the local and international media, including Haaretz, Jerusalem Post, Ynet News, Ha'ir, Time Out Tel Aviv, Israeli Radio and its Persian service, Israel's English TV news, New York Times, BBC, etc.:
 * Loving Tehran in Tel Aviv (Video) (January 2007). Israel's Channel Two.
 * Iran-Israel Interface (January 2007). Jerusalem Post.
 * King of the Iranian bloggers (January 2007). Haaretz
 * חסיין דרחשאן, הבלוגר הכי חם בטהראן, בא לביקור בבאר שבע (January 2007). Haaretz
 * I'll blog your house down (January 2006). Haaretz
 * Web relations: Iranian blogs his way to Israel (January 2006). Jerusalem Post
 * ראיון עם בלוגר איראני. (January 2006) YNet News
 * Linking Tehran and Tel Aviv (May 2006). BBC News

Iran's nuclear program
In August 2006, he published an article in the Columns & Blogs section of The Washington Post in which he supported Iran pursuing nuclear weapons as a deterrent to possible invasion by global powers, after normalising relations with the U.S. and Israel: However, later after his prison sentence he supported Iran's nuclear deal with the six world powers.

Defending Iran against U.S. attack
Derakhshan wrote in his blog in December 2006: "If the US attacked Iran, despite all my problems with the Islamic Republic, I'd go back and fight these bastards. ... I can't let myself sit down for a moment and watch them make a Baghdad out of Tehran." He later published a commentary on The Guardian, titled "Stop Bullying Iran", in which he elaborated on his short blog post on why he defends Iran.

Khalaji vs. Derakhshan defamation lawsuit
In November 2007, Mehdi Khalaji, a fellow at a hawkish think-tank called Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP), filed a $2 million libel and defamation lawsuit against Derakhshan, over one of his blog posts in his Persian blog, in which he criticizes Khalaji for his service to the "enemies of his people and humanity", referring to the American hawkish policy makers on its board who were close to the George W. Bush administration and were closely involved in his interventionist middle east policy, including the occupation of Iraq, such as Richard Perle, Condoleezza Rice and James Woolsey. The case was dropped after Derakhshan's imprisonment in Iran.

Earlier in August 2007, Derakhshan's Florida-based hosting company, Hosting Matters, had terminated his hosting account as a result of alleged 'intimidation' by Khalaji.

Arrest and imprisonment (2008–2014)
On November 1, 2008, Derakhshan was arrested at his family home in Tehran. During November, he was allowed four calls to his family, each lasting about one minute.

On November 18, the anti-censorship group Global Voices Online published an article about Derakhshan's arrest. A few days later, the Times of London published a report saying Derakhshan had been arrested for spying on behalf of Israel. Amnesty International later suggested that he was likely to face accusations of "insulting religion."

On December 30, Alireza Jamshidi, the speaker of the Judicial system of Iran confirmed Derakhshan's arrest, but did not mention any Israel-related accusations. Jamshidi said that Derakhshan was in the custody of the Islamic Revolutionary Court and his case was in early discovery phase, and that among Derakhshan's accusations is what he had written about the "Pure Imams".

Nineteen Iranian bloggers published a letter "categorically condemn[ing] the circumstances surrounding Derakhshan's arrest and detention and demand[ing] his immediate release". A website "Free the blogfather" was created by supporters of Derakhshan in order to campaign for his freedom. Before an earlier return to Iran in 2005, Derakhshan had published recommendations of what to do if he or someone else were arrested in Iran, including requests to "spread the word", to "get the English-language media involved" and to "get the publicity translated [into Persian]" and "keep it up".

In April 2009, the New York Times reported that Derakhshan was still detained without charges.

In October 2009, approaching the one-year anniversary of his arrest, his family began speaking out to Persian and English-language media, and Derakhshan's father Hassan sent an open letter to the new head of the Iranian Judiciary, Ayatollah Sadeq Larijani asking for information about his son's detention.

On October 29, 2009, according to Derakhshan's brother Hamed, Derakhshan's parents met with the new district attorney, who allowed them to have dinner in Evin Prison with their son. The brother also said that at the dinner, Hossein confirmed human rights activists' reports claiming Derakhshan had been subject to physical and psychological pressures such as being forced to do squats in cold showers, receiving repeated beatings, being subject to solitary confinedment, beatings, threats to arrest family members, and false promises of his release, in an effort to secure a confession to espionage charges.

Derakhshan's father, Hassan, also wrote a public letter to the head of the judiciary asking for Derakhshan's release.

Trial in 2010 and further developments
In March 2010, Derakhshan's mother, Ozra Kiarashpour, called on the head of Iran's judiciary to release her son, who had at that point been detained for 500 days without any official charge, for the Iranian New Year, or Norouz.

In June 2010, Tehran Revolutionary Court held Derakhshan's first trial. His sister Azadeh reported that the trial ended in late July, but no word on a verdict was available.

On September 28, Derakhshan was sentenced to 19½ years in prison. According to state-owned Mashregh News, which is close to Iran's presidential office, Derakhshan was convicted on charges of cooperation with hostile countries (a reference to the Israel visit), spreading propaganda against the ruling establishment, promotion of counterrevolutionary groups and insulting Islamic thought and religious figures.

On December 9, Derakhshan was released for two days on a bail of $1.5m (£950,000)

On May 6, 2011, Derakhshan updated his Facebook profile and photos, and added a one line status update of "On a very short leave from Evin".

In June 2011, Derakhshan's family said that the Iranian appeals court has upheld his conviction.

In October 2013, Derakhshan's sentence was reduced from 19.5 years to 17 years, as a result of the Supreme Leader's pardoning for Eid al-Fitr.

November 2014 release
Derakhshan was pardoned by the Supreme Leader of Iran Ali Khamenei in 2014 and freed from prison on November 19, 2014.

Post-prison activities
After his release, Derakhshan wrote an essay for Matter on how the internet had changed in his absence, titled "The Web We Have to Save" (2015). It was widely translated and published in various languages. The essay was the basis for a short video documentary he produced for Mozilla Foundation.

He has continued writing and speaking about socio-political implications of social media     and the future of journalism. He received a research fellowship at Harvard Kennedy School's Shorenstein Center in Spring 2018. The invitation caused a controversy and a number of prominent Iranian journalists including Roya Hakakian and Maziar Bahari accused Derakhashan of framing Iranian scholars Ramin Jahanbegloo and Hale Sfandiari.

He has co-authored a report on "fake news" and disinformation with Claire Wardle, titled "Information Disorder" (2017) which was commission by Council of Europe. He has also co-authored a few opinion pieces about information disorder with Wardle.

In 2018, Derakhshan restarted writing and commenting  on Iran.

In the 2021 Iranian presidential election, Derakhshan advocated participation in the election. The election broke records of the lowest turnout in Iranian electoral history and concluded with the victory of Ebrahim Raisi. Hemmati ended up in the third place (fourth considering invalid ballots).

Profiles

 * Blogfather: Times are hard for Iran's online free-speech pioneer] (November 2007). Ottawa Citizen
 * Blog Spring (Wired magazine)
 * Persian blogging round the globe (BBC News)
 * A Dissident's Diary. UofT Magazine
 * I'll blog your house down (January 2006). Haaretz
 * Web relations: Iranian blogs his way to Israel (January 2006). Jerusalem Post
 * In Weblogistan. Die Zeit
 * Jürgs, Alexander. (December 2005). Vater der Blogger Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung
 * Hoder visar ett annat Iran Svenska Dagbladet
 * Raadsels rond opsluiting omstreden Iraanse blogger (Oktober 2010). De Nieuwe Reporter - Dutch

Publications

 * Why Europe should build its own social platform for news (2019). The Guardian.
 * If news is dying, who will safeguard democracy? (2019). The Guardian.
 * Television’s Reinvention and the Era of Post-Enlightenment (2019). Medium.
 * Iran Lives on This App (2018). The New York Times.
 * Information Disorder: Toward an interdisciplinary framework for research and policymaking (2017). With Claire Wardle. Council of Europe
 * The Web We Have to Save (2015). Matter.
 * Democracy's Double Standard (January 2006). The New York Times
 * Democracy's Double Standard n Iran (January 2006). International Herald Tribune
 * Wiki-ocracy from openDemocracy
 * Iran Needs Nuclear Weapons, Washington Post.
 * Beware the bomber, not the bomb (February 2006) The Guardian
 * Linking Tehran and Tel Aviv (May 2006). BBC News
 * Why Iran loves Zidane (July 2006). The Guardian
 * No Iranian che (August 2005). The Guardian
 * Iran's young reformers. (July 2005). openDemocracy
 * Ein TV-Sieg. (June 2005). Die Zeit

title: Hossein Derakhshan


text:
Lelluri

Lelluri (also spelled Lilluri, Liluri) was a Hurrian goddess worshiped in southeastern Anatolia and northern Syria. She was associated with mountains, and in known sources appears in connection with the god Manuzi.

Character
Lelluri most likely originated in the Nur Mountains, and her name ends with the Hurrian suffix -luri, known also from the theonyms Upelluri (a primordial giant from the Kumarbi Cycle), and Impaluri (sukkal of the sea god), as well as a number of Hurrian mountain and stone names. Assyriologist Beate Pongratz-Leisten regards her as a deity "associated with Hurrian identity." Volkert Haas describes Lelluri as "lady of the mountains" ("die Herrin der Gebirge").

She was closely linked with Manuzi, a god associated with both the weather and mountains. She was likely his partner, and that they shared a temple in Kummani.

A lexical text from Emar indicates that she was understood as analogous to the Mesopotamian goddess Ninmena.

Worship
According to Volkert Haas, Lelluri was worshiped chiefly in the proximity of Nur Mountains and Orontes River in the west and as far east as the middle of the Euphrates. In Kizzuwatna she was celebrated during the hišuwa festival, whose purpose was to guarantee the wellbeing of the king and his family. Among the other deities present in texts pertaining to it are "Teshub Manuzi" (weather god of [Mt.] Manuzi) Ishara, Allani, Maliya and two hyposthases of Nupatik. During the festival, the formula "Lelluri has achieved her heart's desire" had to be recited aloud after pouring an offering for her into a rhyton. A so-called ambašši offering to her consisted out of a lamb, a goose, a sheep and a loaf of bread.

Like the so-called "Syrian substrate" deities (Ishara, Kubaba, Aštabi, Adamma), Hebat and Šarruma Lelluri was also incorporated into Hittite religion. King Ḫattušili I mentions her (alongside Allatum, the storm god of Aleppo, and the mountain gods Adalur and Amaruk) among the deities whose statues he brought to Hatti as war booty. However, the exact location of the city of Haššuwa from which she was brought remains unknown.

title: Lelluri


text:
Province of North Carolina

The Province of North Carolina, originally known as Albemarle Province, was a proprietary colony and later royal colony of Great Britain that existed in North America from 1712 to 1776. (p. 80) It was one of the five Southern colonies and one of the thirteen American colonies. The monarch of Great Britain was represented by the Governor of North Carolina, until the colonies declared independence on July 4, 1776.

Etymology
"Carolina" is taken from the Latin word for "Charles" (Carolus), honoring King Charles II, and was first named in the 1663 Royal Charter granting to Edward, Earl of Clarendon; George, Duke of Albemarle; William, Lord Craven; John, Lord Berkeley; Anthony, Lord Ashley; Sir George Carteret, Sir William Berkeley, and Sir John Colleton the right to settle lands in the present-day U.S. states of North Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida.

History
King Charles II granted the Charter of Carolina in 1663 for land south of the British Colony of Virginia and north of Spanish Florida. He granted the land to eight lords proprietor, namely Edward, Earl of Clarendon; George, Duke of Albemarle; William, Lord Craven; John, Lord Berkeley; Anthony, Lord Ashley; Sir George Carteret; Sir William Berkeley; and Sir John Colleton. Charles granted the land in return for their financial and political assistance in restoring him to the throne in 1660. The granted lands included all or part of the present-day U.S. states of North Carolina, Tennessee, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida.

The northern half of the Province of Carolina differed significantly from the southern half, and transportation and communication were difficult between the two regions, so a separate deputy governor was appointed to administer the northern region in 1691.

The partition of Carolina into the Province of North Carolina and the Province of South Carolina was completed at a meeting of the lords proprietor held at Craven House in London on December 7, 1710, although the same proprietors continued to control both colonies. The first provincial governor of North Carolina was Edward Hyde. Unrest against the proprietors in South Carolina in 1719 led King George I to directly appoint a governor in that province, whereas the lords proprietor continued to appoint the governor of North Carolina. Both Carolinas became royal colonies in 1729, after the British government had tried for nearly 10 years to locate and buy out seven of the eight lords proprietor. The remaining one-eighth share of the province was retained by members of the Carteret family until 1776, part of the Province of North Carolina known as the Granville District.

In 1755 Benjamin Franklin, the Postmaster-General for the American colonies, appointed James Davis as the first postmaster of North Carolina colony at New Bern. In October of that year the North Carolina Assembly awarded Davis the contract to carry the mail between Wilmington, North Carolina and Suffolk, Virginia.

By the late eighteenth century, the tide of immigration to North Carolina from Virginia and the Province of Pennsylvania began to swell. The Scots-Irish (Ulster Protestants) from present-day Northern Ireland were the largest immigrant group from the British Isles to the colonies before the American Revolution. Indentured servants, who arrived mostly in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, comprised the majority of English settlers prior to the Revolution. On the eve of the Revolution, North Carolina was the fastest-growing British colony in North America.

Differences in the settlement patterns of eastern and western North Carolina, or the low country and uplands, affected the political, economic, and social life of the state from the eighteenth until the twentieth century. The small family farms of the Piedmont contrasted sharply with the plantation economy of the coastal region, where wealthy planters grew tobacco and rice with slave labor. The Tidewater in eastern North Carolina was settled chiefly by immigrants from rural England and the Scottish Highlands. The upcountry of western North Carolina was settled chiefly by Scots-Irish, English and German Protestants, and the so-called coheepoor, non-Anglican, independent farmers. During the Revolution, the English and Highland Scots of eastern North Carolina tended to remain loyal to the King because of longstanding business and personal connections with Great Britain. The English, Welsh, Scots-Irish, and German settlers of western North Carolina tended to favor American independence.

With no cities and very few towns or villages, the province was rural and thinly populated. Local taverns provided multiple services ranging from strong drink and beds for travelers to meeting rooms for politicians and businessmen. In a world sharply divided along lines of ethnicity, gender, race, and class, the tavern keepers' rum proved a solvent that mixed together all sorts of locals and travelers. The increasing variety of drinks on offer and the emergence of private clubs meeting in the taverns showed that genteel culture was spreading from London to the periphery of the English world. The courthouse was usually the most imposing building in a county. Jails were often an important part of the courthouse but were sometimes built separately. Some county governments built tobacco warehouses to provide a common service for their most important export crop.

Expansion westward began early in the eighteenth century from the provincial seats of power on the coast, particularly after the conclusion of the Tuscarora and Yamasee wars, in which the largest barrier was removed to provincial settlement farther inland. Settlement in large numbers became more feasible over the Appalachian Mountains after the French and Indian War and the accompanying Anglo-Cherokee War, in which the Cherokee and Catawba were effectively neutralized. King George III issued the Proclamation of 1763 in order to stifle potential conflict with Indians in that region, including the Overhill Cherokee. This barred any settlement near the headwaters of any rivers or streams that flowed westward towards the Mississippi River. It included several North Carolina rivers, such as the French Broad and Watauga. This proclamation was not strictly obeyed and was widely detested in North Carolina, but it somewhat delayed migration westward until after the Revolution.

Settlers continued to flow westwards in smaller numbers, despite the prohibition, and several trans-Appalachian settlements were formed. Most prominent was the Watauga Association, formed in 1772 as an independent territory within the bounds of North Carolina which adopted its own written constitution. Notable frontiersmen such as Daniel Boone traveled back and forth across the invisible proclamation line as market hunters, seeking valuable pelts to sell in eastern settlements, and many served as leaders and guides for groups who settled in the Tennessee River valley and the Kentucke County.

Geography
The oldest counties were Albemarle County (16641689) and Bath County (16961739). During the period of 1668 to 1774, 32 counties were created. As western counties, such as Anson and Rowan Counties were created, their western borders were not well defined and extended west as far as the Mississippi. Toward the end of this period, the boundaries were more well defined and extended to include the Cherokee lands in the west.

Two important maps of the province were produced: one by Edward Moseley in 1733, and another by John Collet in 1770. Moseley was surveyor general of North Carolina in 1710 and from 1723 to 1733. He was also the first provincial treasurer of North Carolina, starting in 1715. Moseley was responsible, with William Byrd, for surveying the boundary between North Carolina and Virginia in 1728. Other maps exist dating to the early period of the Age of Discovery that depict the coastline of the province along with that of South Carolina.

The ports for which there were Customs Agents in the Province of North Carolina included: Bath, Roanoke, Currituck Precinct, Brunswick (Cape Fear), and Beaufort (Topsail Inlet).

There were 52 new towns established in the Province of North Carolina between 1729 and 1775. Major towns during this period included: Bath (chartered in 1705), Brunswick (founded after 1726, destroyed during the Revolution), Campbellton (established in 1762), Edenton (chartered in 1712), Halifax (chartered in 1757), Hillsborough (1754), Newbern (settled in 1710, chartered in 1723), Salisbury (chartered in 1753), and Wilmington (founded in 1732, chartered in 1739 or 1740). Each of these nine major towns had a single representative in the North Carolina House of Burgesses in 1775. Campbellton and the town of Cross Creek (established in 1765) were combined in 1783 to form the town of Fayetteville.

Government
There were two primary branches of government, the governor and his council and the assembly, called the House of Burgesses. All provincial officials were appointed by either the lords proprietor prior to 1728 or The King afterwards. The King received advice for appointment of the governor from the Secretary of State for the Southern Department. The governor was accountable to the Secretary of State and the Board of Trade. The governor was also responsible for commissioning officers and provisioning the provincial militia. Besides the governor, other provincial officials included a secretary, attorney general, surveyor general, the receiver general, Chief Justice, five Customs Collectors for each of the five ports in North Carolina, and a council. The Council advised the governor and also served as the upper house of the legislature. Members of the lower house of the legislature, the House of Burgesses, were elected from precincts (counties after 1736) and from districts (also called boroughs or towns, which were large centers of population).

The eight provincial governors appointed by the King were:
 * 1) Edward Hyde (1712)
 * 2) Charles Eden (17141722)
 * 3) George Burrington (17241725), (17311734)
 * 4) Sir Richard Everard (17251731)
 * 5) Gabriel Johnston (17341752)
 * 6) Arthur Dobbs (17541764)
 * 7) William Tryon (17641771)
 * 8) Josiah Martin (17711776)

The last provincial council included the following members:

 * Samuel Cornell
 * William Dry
 * George Mercer (Lieutenant Governor)
 * James Hasell (Chief Baron of the Exchequer, Acting Governor in 1771)
 * Martin Howard (Chief Justice)
 * Alexander McCulloch
 * Robert Palmer
 * John Rutherfurd (Receiver General)
 * Lewis Henry De Rosset
 * John Sampson
 * Samuel Strudwick (Clerk)
 * Thomas McGuire (Attorney General)

Governor Martin issued a proclamation on April 8, 1775, dissolving the General Assembly after they presented a resolve endorsing the Continental Congress that was to be held in Philadelphia. The provincial council met for the last time onboard HMS Cruizer in the Cape Fear River on July 18, 1775, they believed that the "deluded people of this Province" would see their error and return to their allegiance to the King.

The Court Act of 1746 established a supreme court, initially known as the General Court, which sat twice a year at Newbern, consisting of a Chief Justice and three Associate Justices. The 14 chief justices of the Supreme Court appointed by the King included the following:

title: Province of North Carolina


text:
Asr-e Azadegan

Asr-e Azadegan was a Persian-language daily newspaper in Iran published briefly between 1999 and 2000.

History and profile
Asr-e Azadegan was established on 7 October 1999. The founder and publisher of the daily was Hamid Reza Jalaipour who also launched Jameah, Toos and Neshat; all of which had been closed down before the launching of Asr-e Azadegan. However, the existence of Asr-e Azadegan lasted very brief and it was banned in April 2000 for publishing articles which "disparaged Islam and the religious elements of the Islamic revolution."

The paper was edited by Mashallah Shamsolvaezin. The manager editor was Ghafour Garshasbi who was acquitted of publishing articles that violated the Iranian press law in October 2000.

The newspaper's editors included:
 * Akbar Ganji, who wrote about Iranian secret services.
 * Ebrahim Nabavi, who wrote a daily political satire.
 * Hossein Derakhshan, who wrote a regular technology column.
 * Massoud Behnoud, who wrote a regular opinion column.

title: Asr-e Azadegan


text:
Talk:Vasili IV of Russia

Russian Homage
Why is it not mentioned in the article?

Also, the article mentions that "in 1610, he was deposed by his former adherents Princes Vorotynsky and Mstislavsky, and made a monk". If so, how could he pay homage to Sigismund III Vasa as a Russian Czar on 29 October 1611? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danvolodar (talk • contribs) 16:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Untitled
hmm..how one can die when he is already dead? ;_) (pls rephrase the last sentence..)

User:Ghirlandajo should justify his changes not me.--Emax 08:00, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * And why is that? Are you special in some way? You made the dubious changes, please justify them. --Gene s 08:19, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

User:Space Cadet wrote in the summary: ''I already discussed on your own Talk page. And without your ridiculing and patronizing.'' Just for the record what he wrote in my talk page:
 * I engage in reverts of incorrect information, because and only when I truly believe it is incorrect. Sometimes I have a difficulty using Talk pages (when I run out of coins in an internet cafe) and sometimes I forget the edit summaries. Mea Culpa. Space Cadet 08:42, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

That is not a meaningful reply. --Gene s 10:24, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Gordian knot
Gentlemen, I untied the Gordian knot for you by placing both of the rulers in the succession box and adding a tag. I believe it should stay there until the matter is resolved here. Please, don't make me ask for protection of this page. Halibutt 10:42, Jan 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, he should be listed there. At least with a note, explaining this as a historical curiosity. I'd do the same for Wladyslaw as a tzar or Russian tzars as rulers of Poland, add them to a list with 1 note below explaining that the title is controversial because... Btw, the same thing is with Wladyslaw being King of Sweden, Goths and Vandals - IIRC he never step one foot there, but I hear nobody complaining. The fact is that he had a reason to call himself that. Should we censore it out or explain why he insisted on doing that, even if he wasn't really a Tsar? Are we builing an NPOV Encyclopedia or not? Btw, I like the idea of putting two names in the template. We can have the real tsar and the 'wannabe' Wladislaw with a note, nicely fixing everything, don't you think so? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 10:46, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Let's avoid repeating everything. I suggest we use Talk:Michael I of Russia as the primary talk page. --Gene s
 * Support. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 13:12, 12 Jan 2005 (UTC)

External link
Godunov to Nicholas II by Saul Zaklad

Conflict
Okay, was Vasya IV the last Rurikid Tsar, or was it Feodor I? THe pages on the two Tsars and the Rurik dyanasty all conflict.--ChadThomson 07:33, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
 * Feodor was the last Rurikid tsar from the legitimate House of Moscow. Vasily IV was also a Rurikid, but he was not chosen by people and his legitimacy was not backed up by tradition. --Ghirlandajo 07:38, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Vasili?
Normally it's romanised as Vasily (my preference) or Vasiliy. Vasili is wrong. This needs admin intervention. --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   22:51, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Further to the above, how could he have been born Vasily Ivanovich Shuisky, but become Tsar Vasili? This utter inconsistency in romanisation is very telling.  --   Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   18:49, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Exiled by Boris Godunov?
According to the article False Dmitry I

"...many of the noble families exiled by Godunov - such as the Shuiskys, Golitsins and Romanovs - were granted his [False Dmitry] grace and allowed to return back to Moscow"

However this article mentions no such thing. Instead we have

"...[Shuisky] went to Uglich to inquire into the cause of the death of the Tsarevich Dmitry Ivanovich... Shuisky reported that it was a case of suicide... On the death of Boris... Shuisky went back upon his own words in order to gain favour with the pretender False Dmitriy I"

Suggesting that Shuisky remained loyal to Godunov until the later's death.

What is correct?

Top.Squark (talk) 19:49, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Family
Can someone add something about his wives and two daughters in the article?--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 05:55, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vasili IV of Russia


text:
Talk:List of battleships of Japan

Article
Should be good enough for now. I'm not sure whether all the ships should have 'IJN' designation infront.

Revth 06:46, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

 * No IJN - it's been discussed before, and it seems nobody has turned up any evidence that it was an official ship prefix. See WikiProject Ships for what we have in the way of common standards. Stan 13:36, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Merge proposal
List of Japanese steam battleships and List of battleships of Japan are almost exact forks of one another. The former is more complete and the latter has a shorter title, so I suggest merging to here. Essentially the The Land (talk) 21:17, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I concur. LordAmeth (talk) 01:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I also agree. 65.94.253.16 (talk) 08:07, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Kii-class names
Where did the names for BB11 and BB12 come from (Suraga and Omi)? I have never seen any names listed for those ships. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 14:19, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

German ships
I've removed the German ships, as including them here gives the average reader the false impression that they were put into service with the Japanese fleet, which is not the case. I also don't know why SMS Weissenburg was included at all, since she was never transferred to the Japanese Navy; the Turks retained her until they broke up her for scrap in the 1950s. So not only was she never under Japanese control, the article had her disposal wrong by a couple of decades. Parsecboy (talk) 03:02, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Might need to split
This article is going to rather large - we're over 40kb and only 3 of 19 sections are completed. We might have to split the list between pre-dreadnoughts and dreadnoughts. Parsecboy (talk) 10:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Maybe, but I'd prefer not to. I'm gonna need a couple more introductory paragraphs to cover the later dreadnoughts and then can resume work on the individual classes at a paragraph or two apiece. Let's see how it goes.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:40, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Notice of editing; Operation Majestic Titan resumes
Buenas dias. I'm leaving this notice here to alert attentive editors of edits I have begun and will continue to actively make until Friday, June 29 to get this article to Featured Article status. – Vami _IV✠  17:14, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Have at it, but be advised that the lead is in pretty good shape, IMIO, so think through any edits that you make there. (Putting on my pedant hat, I do believe that you mean FL, not FA) --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:05, 23 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Do not use sfn format for cites here; match the existing style. See WP:CITE--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:19, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I question this. I'm going to wind up throwing a lot of Lengerers and Hacketts at readers, and they should be able to easily trace which Lengerer, Chesneau, Hackett, etcetera that I'm using for a given citation. I have my working version at this sandbox. – Vami _IV✠  01:22, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I think we should Ignore all rules here and change the citation format. I've done it to an article before because of the exact problem Vami brought up. It also helps readers to link the citations to the reference as sfn does. I know it's a pain to redo all the citations but I've done it with past articles and I have no problems doing it again with this one if need be.-- White Shadows New and improved!

 * I commend your efforts, and I hesitated in making this post when I checked your userpage (hot damn that top bar), but I want to ask you to approach this more cautiously. I have an establish method for this, and a sandbox I'm hosting my work at (not that you could have known that until this post, though). I had hoped to hog the glory of building this article for myself, but I'd be willing to work with you for this. Por la Enciclopedia. – Vami _IV✠  01:29, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry. I didn't check the talk page before plowing straight into this! I wasn't aware you were working on this page.-- White Shadows New and improved!
 * What a chance! What plan should we work out for working on this, so as to avoid edit conflicts? – Vami _IV✠  01:40, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * We could do all of the work over at your sandbox and then get an admin to move it. Again, I don't want to take any credit from you if you'd like to bring this to FL (though I suggest this list goes up for an ACR first and then an FL). I definitely want to help you with the citations issue, and the handful of battleships I'm interested in working on (mostly the post Russo-Japanese War ships that were scrapped in the 1920s after doing practically nothing). Again, I have no issues with you taking the lead on this one since you seem to be quite committed to it. Just happy to help!-- White Shadows New and improved!
 * The line about glory was a jest. I shall sleep and resume my work in the morning (CST). In the meanwhile, feel free to work on what you want to work, and then we can deliberate and tack on more or less material later. – Vami _IV✠  02:44, 24 June 2018 (UTC)

Following a dispute over citation method, I am discontinuing my work on this list for perpetuity. – Vami _IV✠  21:02, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I will carefully reconsider freaking out like this again. – Vami _IV✠  11:41, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Got time to work out a strategy? You have probably caught on to my method of writing for these Lists from the first three entries on this list. I find doing the technical (first) paragraphs easy and the service history (second) paragraphs varying shades of pain in the neck. – Vami _IV✠  11:52, 21 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I can do the service history sections. Just let me know which ones you need help on...or if we want things to be consistent we can always rewrite the service history of every class.— White Shadows Let’s Talk 16:37, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Citation Format
Everyone,

I'm creating this section to discuss the citations of the list and the format being applied. I changed all of them over to sfn-style and then forgot that WP:CITE exists. In order to avoid a fait accompli, I'd like to open up discussion to the rest of the community to see if we can come up with a consensus regarding what citation style we will use in the list. I have no problem reverting all of my edits back to the previous citation style if that is what the consensus is, and likewise if that is the conclusion we have then I apologize in advance for any inconvenience my editing may have had on others. If we do choose to keep the style I implemented, the good news is that all of the citation work for the article is complete (for now).

-- White Shadows New and improved!
 * So I had said that I would make no more edits here, but then I blanked the page because I mistook it for a nearly-identical sandbox I had of it. So I'll leave my two cents here. SFN / Harvard citation format is superior in every way to standard ref-tags. A disclaimer I feel I need to make is that I made the argument that the switch to sfn was necessary because the reader might be confused and would have an easier time tracing a source with the same author and date as another. What I didn't account for, in my own pigheaded fashion, is that you could do what I did in ref-tag to undo this. But I still think that doesn't matter. We're still throwing ten billion references at the reader from at least a dozen books alone. Ref-tags are well and good for articles with a dozen or fewer books and other references, but they don't link and I don't like that. And when it comes to working with lots of references/sources, as was the case for me at Ludwigsburg Palace because of the method that I conducted my research with (google), I am biased to a fault in favor of sfnrefs. – Vami _IV✠  00:15, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

 * My general perspective is, if someone is willing to do the work to change the refs over, and they're going to be the ones writing the article (or list, in this case), then it shouldn't be an issue. I'm not planning on coming back to work on this list at any point in the near term, and I doubt Sturm is, so if Vami and WS want to switch them over and finish the list, go ahead and do it. A completed list with SFN is better than an unfinished list with "unadulterated" refs. Parsecboy (talk) 12:26, 4 July 2018 (UTC)
 * If y'all can take it all the way to FL, I'm not going to fuss any further about this as I don't know how much time I'm going to have in the near future to finish this and better completed than not for OMT. But I will say this, WP:CITE is written to avoid these sorts of things, so, in the future, do not change existing, consistently formatted cites in articles to your preferred format, no matter how superior you believe your preferred format is. I've used harv, sfn, and other formats myself when editing existing articles that used those formats throughout, no matter how much it pained me to do so, so y'all need to learn to do the same lest y'all have this little contretemps over and over, with the consequent wasting of time as hard work gets reverted. Honestly, it probably only matters for articles going for GA and above, but it can happen at any time and y'all wouldn't have a leg to stand on when reverted. I'm not trying to be a dick, but people can get surprisingly invested in their format, especially if they figure on maintaining the article long-term, just as much as Vami IV prefers sfn over any others. So don't change formats!--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:00, 11 July 2018 (UTC)]]

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:26, 17 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Colorized Shikishima 1900.jpg
 * Kawachi 1913.jpg
 * Kongo 1936.jpg
 * Yamato & Musashi.jpg

title: Talk:List of battleships of Japan