text:
Rudolf Roessler

Rudolf Roessler (German: Rößler; 22 November 1897 – 11 December 1958) was a Protestant German and a dedicated anti-Nazi. During the interwar period, Roessler was a lively cultural journalist, with a focus on theatre. In 1934, Roessler became stateless by Germany and as a political refugee, moved to Lucerne in Switzerland. There he established a small anti-Nazi publishing firm in Lucerne known as Vita Nova that published Exilliteratur by fellow exiled writers. Late in the summer of 1942, Roessler ran the Lucy spy ring, an anti-Nazi Soviet espionage operation that was part of the Rote Drei while working for Rachel Dübendorfer through the cut-out Christian Schneider (editor). Roessler was able to provide a great quantity of high-quality intelligence, around 12,000 typed pages, sourced from the German High Command of planned operations on the Eastern Front, usually within a day of operational decisions being made. Later in the war, Roessler was able to provide the Soviet Union with intelligence on the V-1 and V-2 missiles. During the Cold War, Roessler reactivated his network and he spied on NATO countries in Western Europe under orders from the military intelligence services of the Czechoslovak Republic, until he was arrested by the Swiss authorities and convicted of espionage in 1953.

Early life
Roessler was born on 22 November 1897 in Kaufbeuren, Kingdom of Bavaria. His father was Lutheran Bavarian Forestry official Georg Roessler and his mother was Sophie née Kleemann. He was the youngest of five children. Roessler graduated from St Anna High School in Augsburg at the age of 17.

Military career
When he was eighteen, Roessler was drafted into the 120th (2nd Württemberg) Infantry "Emperor William, King of Prussia" regiment of the Imperial German Army in Ulm in 1916. On 28 April 1916, he was sentenced to 5 months and 15 days in prison for unauthorized removal from the troops; an appeal against this was unsuccessful. Roessler was pardoned to serve at the front on 15 July. First he was commanded to the Battle of the Somme, one of the most costly battles of World War I on the Western Front. After the failed British breakthrough attempts came to an end, Roessler took part in trench warfare on the slightly dented German front from 27 November to 21 December. After serving at the front, he developed a lengthy stomach and intestinal illness near Arras and was admitted to the Denain and Tegel hospitals for treatment.

From 25 May to 12 July 1917, Roessler's unit was deployed to an area south of Ypres, that was under continuous British bombardment from 21 May to 7 June. From 20 July to 10 August 1917 the unit was located in the Upper Alsace. Roessler then fought in the Third Battle of Ypres from 19 August to 10 September 1917. From 11 September to 12 November, Roessler took part in the fighting along the Hindenburg Line. On 13 November, his unit moved north. There he was removed from fighting near Hooglede on 6 December and taken to a hospital near Deinze. In January and February 1918, Roessler fought in the trenches in Flanders. His stomach and intestinal disease had not healed and he was admitted to a military hospital in Ghent on 28 February 1918, recuperating for more than a month. On 15 March 1919, he was discharged from the army.

Roessler was left with a lasting impression of how inhumanely the war was fought in 1916 and 1917 and the methods with which the masses were abused for the survival of a power-hungry class.

Civilian career
After the end of the war, he studied theology in Augsburg. Roessler, a liberal conservative, became a pacifist and eventually an opponent of Nazism. He started working as a trainee journalist at the Munich-Augsburger Abendzeitung, a German daily newspaper which was one of the most important Catholic newspapers in Germany until it was banned by the Nazis in 1935. In 1922, Roessler founded the Augsburger Literary Society along with Bertold Brecht and others and became its chairman. Many prominent writers joined the society including Thomas Mann, Hermann Hesse, Stefan Zweig, Hermann Graf Keyserling and Fedor Stepun. In the same year he was promoted to editor, a position he held for a year.

In 1924, Roessler moved to work at the Allgemeine Zeitung, a daily newspaper printed in Bavaria as a correspondant in Augsburg. From 1925, Roessler contributed copy to the Frankfurter Zeitung, the Kölnische Zeitung and the Vossische Zeitung newspapers. From 1925 to 1927, he was editor of Form und Sinn ("Form and Sense"), a journal for art and intellectual life. Hans Carossa and Hermann Hesse published articles in this short-lived journal. On 15 July 1926, in an essay entitled Das Glaubensbekenntnis der Dichter (The Poets' Creed), Roessler himself approvingly reviewed the recently published work Das Gute (The Good) by the then well-known Basel philosopher Paul Häberlin. In it, Häberlin asserted the unity of goodness, beauty and truth in God's creation. Roessler adopted this point of view.

Stage People's Association
In 1927, Roessler became associated with the Christian-conservative Bühnenvolksbund (Stage People's Association) in Berlin, that from 1919 to 1933, attempted to increase the number of people attending theatre, to ensure the advancement of German theatre stage people. The Bühnenvolksbund wanted to revive Christian plays such as Christmas, Passion and other mystery plays. The theatre's were to be encouraged to include such plays in their repertoires. However, these efforts were never successful as membership fees combined with state subsidies were insufficient to enable the organisation to maintain a stable financial position.

In 1928, he became executive director and a playwright for the association as well as head of the Bühnenvolksbund publishing house. For the next two years, Roessler edited the magazines Form und Sinn and from August 1932, the Deutsche Bühnenblätter, a theatre magazine and was co-editor of the Bühnenvolksbund Das Nationaltheater ("National theatre") magazine. In 1930, he co-wrote Thespis : das Theaterbuch (Thespis: the theatre book), which summarised theatre production in Germany from 1924 to 1929, with German art historian Oskar Fischel, German writer Walter Hollander and Austro-German writer, poet and art critic Theodor Däubler. Roessler was also chairman of the supervisory board of the stage companies, Südwestdeutsche Bühne GmbH Frankfurt, the Schlesische Bühne GmbH Breslau and the Ostpreußische Bühne GmbH Königsberg.

Impeachment and expulsion
In 1932, the Militant League for German Culture (Kampfbund für deutsche Kultur, KfdK) began to found its own theatre visitors' association and to persuade at least some of the middle-class members of the Stage People's Association to join the Nazi association. Roessler opposed the ethnic politicization of theatre and the attempt to subordinate art to mass taste. Rather, he believed that art should influence mass taste. From the KfdK's point of view, this was an arrogant liberal and conservative idea. After the Reichstag elections on 5 March 1933, the Nazis quickly began to dissolve the Stage People's Association and transfer the local groups and their members and the regional associations into the ethnic Reich Association of the German Stage (Reichsverband Deutsche Bühne). The Stage People's Association at the Reich level was to be dissolved.

On 5 May 1933, the chairman of the KfdK, Hans Hinkel, who later became the third managing director of the Reich Chamber of Culture, placed Roessler on leave and prohibited him from continuing to exercise his directorship, effectively expelling him. On 8 May, the KfdK took over Roessler's desk. Roessler and Brünker (Roesslers deputy) fought for an interim injunction against the removal before the Berlin district court. The Prussian Prime Minister Hermann Göring then told the press that he would no longer tolerate the KfdK's attacks but would punish them. The KfdK actually brought back the furniture that had been taken away. However, he later withdrew the financial assets of the Stage People's Association, which were essentially funded by members' contributions.

As a result, the Stage People's Association became insolvent and the ethnic Reichsverband Deutsche Bühne e.V filed an application with the Mitte district court on 29 May 1933 to open bankruptcy proceedings because of an outstanding invoice from a typewriter supplier in the amount of 1,170 RM. On 15 June 1933, bankruptcy proceedings were opened and from then on, Roessler was without income. In 1934, an investigation was initiated against Roessler and the Sturmabteilung appeared to search his office. In May 1934, Roessler left Germany as a political refugee and emigrated to Lucerne Switzerland with his wife Olga, with the help of his friend, the Swiss librarian and Marxist Xaver Schnieper, who Roessler had met during his studies in drama in Germany.

Vita Nova
In January 1934 and while still in Berlin, he co-founded the Vita Nova Verlag ("New Life Publisher") publishing house at 36 Fluhmattstrasse in Lucerne, Switzerland along with the Catholic bookseller Josef Stocker and the business women Henriette Racine. Stocker had been encouraged to help co-found the publishing firm by Jesuit priest and theological philosopher Otto Karrer, with the introductions arranged by Schnieper. Vita Nova was an anti-Nazi publishing house that primarily published German writers in exile. Vita Nova published some fifty brochures and books that attacked both Nazism and Stalinism, contrasting them with the Christian values of the older Germany and Russia. The small firm also published books that were critical of Francoist Spain. Indeed, the firm provided the only real publishing house for exiled Christian, Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox writer and playwrights to publish their work. Amongst others it published Russian religious philosopher Nikolai Berdyaev and the Catholic philosopher Emmanuel Mounier and the German philosopher Friedrich Wilhelm Foerster. Roessler used the pseudonym, "R. A. Hermes” to publish his own work at Vita Nova. From 1940-1941, Roessler wrote and published a 94-page memorandum using his Hermes pseudonym that was titled Die Kriegsschauplätze und die Bedingungen der Kriegführung (Memorandum on the war situation after the Battle of Britain) that discussed how partisans forces needed to be formed in countries that had been conquered, otherwise the country had to be dominated by forces in place. He described how Germany would fail to take this lesson into account, particularly in Poland and the Soviet Union, where the campaigns would be designed as a war of annihilation between two races and two world views.

Expatriation
On 20 May 1935, the German consulate in Basel refused to issue Roessler with new passport and he was informed privately that he was being deported, i.e. made stateless. The Nazi regime finally revoked his German citizenship in 1937. The expatriation of Roessler and his wife was officially announced in the German Reichsanzeiger newspaper, No. 96 of 28 April 1937. Roessler violated loyalty to the Reich and the people and damaged German interests. In 1940, Roessler obtained a Czechoslovakian passport for himself and his wife, which was issued to him by the consulate in Marseille of the no longer existing Czechoslovak Republic. In the event of a German occupation of Switzerland, he wanted to make it possible for him to leave the country.

From 1936 to 1939, Roessler worked on the semi-monthly left-wing Catholic and radically democratic journal Die Entscheidung (The Decision) that was published by Xaver Schnieper. The editors were Xaver Schnieper, the Nidwalden architect and later intelligence officer Arnold Stöckli and the lawyers Hans de Segesser-Brunegg and Bernhard Mayr von Baldegg, with whom Roessler met regularly in private. After 1939, the editors were called up for active military service, so publication stopped. Here Roessler published his own work using the "Arbiter” pseudonym.

Büro Ha
In April 1939, Roessler's friend Schnieper met the photo dealer Hans Hausamann while on vacation in Lugano. Hausamann ran a press service and specialised in military intelligence from 1935 onwards. Schnieper shared his political views, so Hausamann asked him to find him an employee. Schnieper suggested his university friend Franz Wallner, who was able to fulfill the intelligence service tasks assigned to him. Hausamann therefore asked Schnieper to find another employee who was familiar with conditions in Germany and would be a reliable informant. Schnieper suggested his friend Roessler. Roessler anticipated that the Nazis would soon launch a military attack on Switzerland and therefore agreed to work with Hausamann. but only on the condition that the offer was official. At that time, Schnieper was working as a junior officer in the Swiss military intelligence agency Büro Ha, at the time located near Teufen, and he introduced Roessler to Major Hausamann. However, he avoided meeting with him personally, so Hausamann used Franz Wallner, who lived in Lucerne, as an intermediary. From the summer of 1939 to May 1944, he sent him 80-130 individual reports per month but Hausamann did not pass on any information to Roessler. Roessler became one of the most important sources of intelligence for Büro Ha.

Rote Drei
Another recipient of Roessler's messages and analyses was Soviet military intelligence-agent Alexander Radó, who ran a Soviet espionage network in Switzerland that was section of the so-called Red Orchestra. In Germany it was known as the Rote Drei.

Roessler was recruited into the espionage network by Soviet agents Paul Böttcher (politician) and Rachel Dübendorfer via Christian Schneider (editor). Schneider, an economist, became an editor at the Gladbecker Zeitung newspaper after completing his studies. In 1926, he was selected from 230 applicants as a translator at the International Labour Organization (ILO) in Geneva. He remained there until the end of his employment in 1939, when the ILO laid off staff because its importance had declined, resulting in Schneider becoming unemployed. At the same time, Roessler placed an advertisement in the Neue Zürcher Zeitung looking for a publisher who could also work in French-speaking Switzerland and on 17 July 1939 Schneider was hired. Schneider began to set up a branch of the publishing house in Geneva. Roessler and Schneider had similar political views and got on well, which resulted in Roessler telling Schneider of the reports he was receiving.

Schneider was friends with Dübendorfer (who also worked at the ILO), and her partner Paul Böttcher. Böttcher was a communist and former finance minister of Saxony and lived in Switzerland under the name Dübendorfer. Like Roessler, whom he did not know personally, Böttcher provided Radó with intelligence. At a dinner together around June 1941, Schneider showed Böttcher one of Roessler's reports.

About a year later, Böttcher told Schneider that a report by Roessler would be of great strategic interest to Soviet intelligence and asked Schneider if Roessler would be prepared to pass the intelligence to him on a regular basis. Roessler agreed and from the summer of 1942 to 1944 gave Schneider the typed sheets, who couriered them to Dübendorfer. Schneider received no payment from either of the recipients for his transmission services, only reimbursement for the costs of the railroad.

The role of Karel Sedláček
In June 1937, Karel Sedláček, a German speaking Czech intelligence officer, worked undercover as Karl Seltzinger in Zurich as correspondant for the Prague based newspaper Národní listy. By the autumn of 1938, Sedlacek was friends with Hans Hausamann and receiving intelligence reports from him. In the spring of 1939, Sedláček moved to Lucerne where he met Roessler and through their common journalistic background, cultivated him. In September 1939, Sedláček began transmitting intelligence to František Moravec of the Czechoslovak government-in-exile in London and continued over a period of three years.

Battle of Kursk and Operation Citadel
In early March 1943, Hitler planned a massive offensive against the Kursk salient known as Operation Citadel in the hope of regaining the initiative in the east. On 15 April 1943, Hitler signed Order Number 6 to begin the offensive. Within 24 hours Alexander Foote had informed Soviet intelligence. On the 3 April 1943, a message stated: The Wehrmacht's attack on Kursk is to be postponed until the beginning of May 1943 because increasingly stronger Soviet forces are being massed on the northern sector of the front, especially in Velikiye Luki. This report was true because Order No. 6 of the OKH ordered May 3rd as the earliest date of attack. On 20 April 1943 a message stated the attack on Kursk is postponed to 12 June 1943. This order was not signed until 29 April 1943. The attack was later postponed again and began on 5 July 1943.

In at least almost 70 cases, Sándor Radó forwarded significant messages from Roessler to Soviet intelligence.[48] Roessler's intelligence wasn't only strategic in nature; he also supplied the Soviets with detailed information on the new German Panther tank.

Renumeration
Roessler was particularly mercenary in his approach. At the beginning of 1942, Roessler complained to Bernhard Mayr von Baldegg, who by then was an officer in the Swiss general staff, staff officer to Max Waibel, in command of Noehrichtenstelle I of the 5th Signals in Lucerne, that he found the work for Hausamann boring. Waibel decided to keep him interested by paying him 250 Swiss francs per month, that later increased to 400 francs as the war progressed. Büro Ha also paid him, 1000 francs per month that was raised to 2000 francs per month as the war progressed. Roessler was also paid by Soviet intelligence, initially receiving 700 Swiss francs per month, that increased to 3000 franc's per month as the war progressed. The following are some examples of captured radio messages that details Roessler mercenary nature:

 * 12.3.1943 . . . Agree to buy Plan Ostwall for 5000 francs. Does Lucy know whether these documents are genuine and reliable?
 * 10. and ll.ll.1943 . . . Sissy states that Lucy group no longer works when the salary stops.
 * 14.11.1943 . . . Please tell Lucy in our name that ... his group will surely be paid according to his demands. We are ready to reward him richly for his information.
 * 9.12.1943 ... Inform Lucy not to worry about the money situation.

Roessler's Sources in World War II
The record of messages transmitted show that Roessler had four important sources. It was never discovered who they were. The four sources whose codenames were Werther, Teddy, Olga, and Anna were responsible for 42.5 percent of the intelligence sent from Switzerland to the Soviet Union.

The search for the identity of those sources has created a very large body of work of varying quality and offering various conclusions. Several theories can be dismissed immediately, including by Foote and several other writers, that the code names reflected the sources' access type rather than their identity- for example, that Werther stood for Wehrmacht, Olga for Oberkommando der Luftwaffe, Anna for Auswärtiges Amt (Foreign Office)- as the evidence does not support it. Alexander Radó made this claim in his memoirs, that were examined in a Der Spiegel article. Three and a half years before his death, Roessler described the identity of the four sources to a confidant. They were a German major who was in charge of the Abwehr before Wilhelm Canaris, Hans Bernd Gisevius, Carl Goerdeler and a General Boelitz, who was then deceased.

The most reliable study by the CIA Historical Review Program concluded that of the four sources, the most important source was Werther. The study stated he was likely Wehrmacht General Hans Oster, other Abwehr officers working with Swiss intelligence, or Swiss intelligence on its own. There was no evidence to link the other three codenames to known individuals. The CIA believed that the German sources gave their reports to Swiss General Staff, who in turn supplied Roessler with information that the Swiss wanted to pass to the Soviets.

Transmission channels
There are least two theories on how Roessler received his reports in Switzerland.

In the first earlier theory, Roessler received his reports via radio transmission that were encrypted with the Enigma rotor cipher machine. This theory is supported by Jörgensen, Accoce, Quet, along with Tarrant In Berlin, Roessler  was a member of the Herren Klub, a prestigious gentleman's club, where he met senior officers from the German military, many who would later become his contacts within Germany and assist with the disclosure of classified information. On 30 May 1938 in Lucerne, Roessler was visited by two of his contacts, the German generals Fritz Thiele and Rudolf Christoph Freiherr von Gersdorff, who would eventually become the officer in charge of the intelligence department of Army Group Centre in the Eastern Front. Roessler was provided with an Enigma machine and the latest shortwave transmitter and told to start listening for messages from Thiele who was stationed in the Bendlerblock. The messages were sent using the call-sign RAHS. A typical day for Roessler was to receive transmissions via the Broadcasting Center during his work day, and rebroadcast that information to the Russian military after leaving work for the evening. In this theory, Roessler was trained by Schneider on how to use the Enigma and the radio transmitter. This thesis was comprehensively contradicted by Der Spiegel magazine in 15 January 1967 article "Verräter im Führerhauptquartier".

The second newer and simpler theory is described by Kamber who believes that that the messages from Roessler's sources from the German Reich were sent via telephone and telex lines to the Milan reporting center. From there, they were forwarded to Switzerland by a courier. These were documents that arrived at Lucerne railroad station via the Chiasso border station by Swiss Post mail train at 11:30 in the evening. Roessler collected them there almost daily. Stöckli who was friends with Roessler from when he first moved to Lucerne, had told two authors, Lutz Mahlerwein and Adalbert Wiemer of a historical tv programme "Dora an Direktor: der Angriff steht bevor" on 18 July 1989, that the reports had come by postal train to Milan. The tv programme details had been recorded by the Stasi and archived.

End of operations
On 12 December 1941, the Abwehr discovered Leopold Trepper's espionage network in Belgium and gave it the moniker "Rote Kapelle". On 9 November 1942, Anatoly Gurevich was arrested and during interogration he exposed the existence of the Swiss network to the Abwehr. Hans Peter, the lover of Margrit Bolli was actually a German agent, and according to one source stole an unencrypted message that had been left in Bolli's apartment when she moved apartment, as early as 16 March 1943 and passed it to German intelligence, who used it to decrypt Rote Drei radio communications.

In the summer of 1943, Heinz Pannwitz of the Sonderkommando Rote Kapelle despatched the German Jew Ewald Zweig with the cover name Yves Rameau to Switzerland with the intention of penetrating Radó's network. Zweig passed on details of what he learned about the network to the Swiss Federal Police.

Swiss defensive neutrality was important to the Swiss people, particularly in foreign policy that had passed from a political doctrine to tradition and had existed for centuries. There were also genuine fears that Switzerland would have been encircled after the Italian armistice. When the Swiss were informed of the existence of the network, they immediately began searching for it on 9 September 1943. On 11 September 1943, a Swiss Army radio counterintelligence company notified the Federal Police that radio signals from the Geneva area could be detected, which resulted in the arrest of radio operator Margrit Bolli along with Edmond and Olga Hamel on the night 13 October 1943.

Wartime arrest
After Hamel and Bolli were arrested, Roessler feared that he would also be investigated and that his informants in the German Reich would be endangered. He asked Mayr von Baldegg, the deputy head of Noehrichtenstelle I, to intervene on behalf of Hamel and Christian Schneider. Mayr von Baldegg presented the request to the head of the intelligence office, but left it at that. Until the arrest of Dübendorfer and Böttcher, the federal police were not aware of Roessler's reports. Radó suspected that Christian Schneider told the federal police that the reports came from Roessler. On 19 May 1944, the federal police arrested Roessler, his cutout with Schneider, the courier Tamara Vigier and Mayr von Baldegg. This ended Roessler's intelligence activities not only for Soviet intelligence, but also for the Büro Ha and the Swiss General Staff.

Roger Masson, head of the intelligence section of the Swiss army staff, was not interested in the intelligence activities of their informant Roessler becoming known to a wider group of people. He could have tried to have the investigation closed. However, he did not do this to send Roessler to prison for his safety. Masson feared that the German Sicherheitsdienst would kidnap Roessler.

On 6 September 1944, Roessler was released from prison. The main hearing against him and Schneider in the criminal case took place after the end of the war, in 22–23 October 1945, before a military court. Noehrichtenstelle I placed one of its officers as a defense attorney. The division court considered it criminal that Roessler and Schneider also passed on information in reports to Soviet intelligence that the Swiss authorities had determined through interrogations of deserters. The divisional court found Roessler and Schneider guilty, but nevertheless refrained from imposing a penalty because both had rendered great service to Switzerland. Roessler did not reveal the names of his German and Swiss informants either in the preliminary investigation or in the main proceedings On 22–23 October 1945, the Swiss military court sentenced each to two years.

Summary
During his spy career, Roessler provided intelligence to the Soviet Union, Czechoslovakia, Switzerland and the United Kingdom, at the minimum. He was often able to deliver accurate intelligence within one day of the orders being issued. For instance, a German army commander found a copy of his own orders in the Red Army headquarters building in the Polish town of Łomża when his unit occupied it after wresting it from the Russians. This was reported to the German high command, yet they were unable to find the leak.

Cold War

In 1945, shortly after the end of the war, Karel Sedláček, who had regular contact with Hans Hausamann and was now the Czechoslovak Military Attaché in Bern, visited Xaver Schnieper, whom he knew and who was a friend of Roessler. In 1947, Sedláček who then held the rank of lieutenant colonel, introduced his successor Kopačka and his secretary, Captain Volf to Schnieper to Roessler. Volf arranged with Schnieper to request Roessler to reactivate his wartime Rote Kapelle spy ring. Sedlacek knew Schnieper well and he also knew that both Schnieper and Roessler as freelance journalists would be struggling to make ends meet. Roessler, by virtue of his wartime reputation, was given a sweeping brief. He was told to report all military and air force matters in Western Europe, the U.K., and Spain under Franco, and in particular to concentrate on infiltrating the United States military and report on intelligence operations in Western Europe. Roessler agreed and provided the requested reports. Schnieper wrote the reports up on his typewriter and handed it to Volf. Roessler received 500 to 1,000 francs per bundle. On 25 February 1948, after the Czechoslovak coup d'état, contact between Volf and Roessler broke off.

There was no contact between Czech intelligence and Roessler until July 1950 when a contact "Konrad" approached Schnieper and asked him to reactivate the operation and send future reports on microfilm to two Prague addresses. He was paid a signing bonus of 3,000 francs. Roessler and Schnieper received almost 50,000 francs for the work. Roessler developed his reports largely from newspaper clippings and other previously published material. He collected, compared and checked the news for contradictions and placed them in a larger context.

Between 10-21 June and 7-27 September 1952, Roessler visited Germany and obtained information about the US Army stationed there. The renewed intelligence activity was noticed when a package sent to Germany on 3 January 1953 was returned. Customs opened it and found a honey jar with a capsule that contained microfilm. When the microfilm was examined, it was found to contain news about the airfields and the headquarters of the British Royal Air Force, about the rebuilding of the West German aviation industry, about U.S. bases, the German Air Force in Jutland and the operational strength of the French Army.

Arrest
On 9 March 1953, Roessler was arrested. During the investigation, Roessler testified that he had to secure his livelihood as his publishing company, Vita Nova Verlag was no longer profitable. Business remained satisfactory until 1948 because the publisher was able to sell existing books after the end of the war. However after 1948, sales declined. Roessler trial was held on 2 November 1953, where he was charged with spying on West Germany for Communist Czechoslovakia. He was sentenced to twenty-one months in prison, minus the time he spent in detention awaiting the trial. Roessler was imprisoned for 12 months and released in early 1954. Xaver Schnieper who was charged with Roessler, was imprisoned for nine months in prison.

Freelance journalist
After he was released from jail, Roessler spent his last years living quietly in Kriens. He continued to write. His articles, which were unsigned, appeared in the Lucerne daily newspaper, the Social Democratic Party of Switzerland, Freie Innerschweiz.

Roessler continued to argue against West German rearmament and for international solidarity. The articles can be split into two categories.The first category was short articles of one to two pages, that focused on a part of a larger topic. The second and more important were articles on specific areas of interest, that ran to four or five pages and covered subjects within economic, social, colonial and security policy. These bigger articles often contained a number of abbreviations that were subject to change, so it was not possible for the reader to determine who the author was. Roessler was disillusioned with the Cold War, particularly after his trial, particularly when he was accused of spying in favour of the Soviet Union. Therefore, his work at the newspaper was not formally recognised. Even his obituary failed to mention his work there.

Roessler was not a Social Democrat. So it was difficult to determine how his political analysis was affected by his articles being published in a social-democratic daily newspaper, as other sources on his life, politics and cultural outlook have so far been lacking. In a telephone call to the Freie Innerschweiz on 29 May 1991, his friend, Xaver Schnieper confirmed that Roessler would certainly not have written anything that contradicted his own opinion.

Roessler was committed to the socially disadvantaged, combined with a criticism of the idea that technology and armament were the only way to a better world. He had aversion to the hysteria of the Cold War and its associated militarism that made him appear more left-wing today than many social democrats at the time.

Missing honours
In 1967, the leadership of Soviet military intelligence proposed that Roessler, along with other Soviet military intelligence informants, be honoured posthumously with an award. But the GDR Minister for State Security Erich Mielke objected and the plan was abandoned. The possible motive is that Roessler rejected dialectical and historical materialism.

Analysis
There are a number of sources that claim that the Rote Drei was functioning before the war and that Roessler, as Lucy, sent information to the Soviets that provided advanced warning of Hitler's impending attack on Russia. However, on examination of the radio messages that were transmitted by the group, proves that Rachel Dübendorfer didn't form a clandestine relationship with Roessler until the late summer of 1942.

Roessler's value to the Rote Drei and the Soviets derived entirely from his sources in Germany. This context is probably misleading, as the CIA believed that the German sources gave their intelligence to Swiss General Staff, who in turn supplied Roessler with information that the Swiss wanted to pass to the Soviets.

title: Rudolf Roessler


text:
Crisis and Emergency Management Centre

The Crisis and Emergency Management Centre (CEMAC) is a Belgian center of excellence active in the domains of emergency planning, crisis management and crisis communications. Its activities include research and development, consulting, training and information management. CEMAC also covers the full cycle of crisis management: mitigation, planning, response, and recovery.

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

title: Crisis and Emergency Management Centre


text:
Talk:Simon Magus

Untitled
What does "the founder of witchcraft in old asia" mean? What is "old asia" and why isn't "asia" capitalized?

I was just about to make the same comment. That sentence doesn't make sense, let's strike it. "Founder" of witchcraft? Old asia? Seems like some sort of wiccan speculation.

The {} sign/s
One or more of the sign/s: placed on this page without any discussion, explanation or reasoning have been removed pending further discussion. (The category Category:Bible stories is now up for a vote for deletion at Categories for deletion) Thank you. IZAK 08:29, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Re: Simon Magus
The "Ancient Persian scholar Omid of Askar" is not mentioned in the Catholic Enclycopedia, or aywhere else! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.144.86.30 (talk) 14:12, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Simon Magus and St. Peter( the supposed first pope of catholic and first apostle), are two different people. Do the research, you won't have to imagine or read between the lines.

...right. Anyway the following needs a source:
 * The story of Simon Magus here may actually be a coded Ebionite attack on Paul of Tarsus, with Simon used to represent Paul.

It sounds like speculation to me.--Cuchullain 01:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

 * i Agree i think Peter (Simon) and Simon Magus were two seperate people, but st.peter the first Pope was Simon Magus

---

That is correct. After Simon Magus' encounter with the apostle Simon Peter, he is recorded by historian Justin Martyr (writing in 152 AD) as having made his way to Rome and the court of Claudius Caesar in 45 AD. He took on the title of Simon PATER (which means father, of course). He either deliberately masqueraded as Simon Peter to the church of Rome, or they mistook him for Peter. In any case, he spread his heresies within the church of Rome, which were backed up by his reputed magical abilities -- he was Simon Magus (THE MAGE), after all. Those of us who actually believe in God and also in the power of God's enemies the fallen angels know where Simon acquired his powers. Simon Magus, AKA Simon Pater, became that first bishop of Rome, and its first Pope, quite deliberately on his part. Simon Peter, the actual apostle of God, was never given the commission to go to Rome, but to stay within the Jewish lands and to concentrate only on the Jews. The Bible does not record Peter as having ever left The Levant. Indeed, much internal evidence exists in the Bible that indicates that Peter was never in Rome.

---

Does anyone know of historical evidence that Simon the magician became known as Simon Pater? user Tmo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.175.194.7 (talk) 06:19, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

tsalagicelt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Qodesh (talk • contribs) 18:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Simon Magus
Simon Magus and St. Peter are not the same. If you read the Clementine Recognitions, you will find that Simon Magus (and possibly his spouse Helen) came from the ranks of John the Baptist and he was his beloved disciple. After John's death, Simon was absent in Alexandria and he did not become the head of John's school. This function was given to Dositheus. However, it is clear that both Jesus and Simon were disciples from John te Baptist.

As you may know from the Gnostic Gospels, St. Peter was very anti-feminine. After the Council of Nicaea this became the Church's official doctrine. At this Council the Bible as we know is was established and many other scriptures were destroyed as musch as possible, some of which have been rediscovered as the Nag Hammadi Texts. Before this Council it was very common for females to take the ranks of priests and bishops. After the Council of Nicaea the St. Peter doctrines became the main doctrines.

Simon however preached a from of duality: male-female, which is also appearing in many Gnostic beliefs. Some believe he even undertook sexual rites. The Church is condemning him as evil and a sorceror (which literally means evil-doer). He is the complete opposite of St. Peter.

Delicate note however. In Jewish scriptures (Talmud), Jesus himself is also procalaimed to be a sorceror.

Brynnar, October 13, 2005

 * Sorceror does not literally mean "evil-doer", it more closely means means "one who influences (fate, fortune, etc)".

the forum?
Does anyone Know what exactly was the forum inwhich Magus died in the Article?

First heritic?
Interestingly, the German article points out that Simon was listed as the first heritic in the New Testament. I find no mention of that in this article. Is there a reason for this discrepancy? --Walter Görlitz 21:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

 * The Book of Acts criticises Simon for simony (which is named after him, as is magic). Clinkophonist 22:06, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Nope on the second detail; magos/magus and magikos/magicus were Greek/Latin terms well before anybody started telling stories about Simon Magus. True, though, re: simony (or at least simonia).  TheNuszAbides (talk) 02:54, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Can someone get rid of the huge gap between the 4th and 5th paragragh

Paul as Simon Magus
I've removed the paragraph on this subject, as it is completely unsourced. If anyone can provide a source, we can edit it accordingly and reinstate it. Here it is:

 * According to some academics, Simon Magus may in fact be a cypher for Paul of Tarsus, with Paul originally been detested by the church, and the name changed when Paul was rehabilitated by virtue of forged Epistles correcting the genuine ones. Though at first glance this suggestion appears completely radical, Simon Magus is sometimes described in apocryphal legends in terms that would fit Paul. Furthermore while the Christian Orthodoxy frequently portrayed the major gnostic leader Marcion as having been a follower of Simon Magus, Marcion nowhere mentions even the existence of Simon, and instead identifies himself as a follower of Paul. More significantly, the apocryphal Apocalypse of Stephen presents Paul in extremely negative tones, portraying him as arch villain and enemy of Christianity, only grudingly portraying him as having converted right at the end.

john k 17:08, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

F C Baur is one source for this. Also A. Hilgenfeld, and more recently Hermann Detering ("The Falsified Paul: Early Christianity in the Twilight" - 1995 (translated into English in 2003)). Oh, and J.R.Porter, The Lost Bible, pg 230 (which is cited in the edit summary immediately before your deletion). So I've put the paragraph back. Clinkophonist 18:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect account of death?
The account of Simon Magus' death appears to conflict with the stated source and should be verified and if necessary corrected or removed.

The article states that:
 * The apocryphal Acts of Peter gives a legendary tale of Simon Magus' death. Simon is performing magic for the Roman Emperor Claudius Caesar in the forum. In order to prove himself to be a god, he flies up into the air. The Apostles Peter and Paul pray to God to stop his flying, and he stops mid-air and falls to his death.

A version of the Acts of Peter can be read here. The death of Simon Magus is in chapter 32 and conflicts with the account above in many ways:
 * 1) Claudius Caeser is not mentioned. Simon Magus performs to a crowd.
 * 2) Paul is not mentioned.
 * 3) Simon Magus does not "fall to his death". He falls and breaks his legs in three places. He is then stoned by the crowd, but effectively dies (probably quite a while later) when two physicians attending to him cut him "sorely"

I'm not sure whether the version of the Acts of Peter on this website is authoritative or whether there are other versions. Agneau 23:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

That probably should be altered in the article. Clinkophonist 12:35, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Good Article
Add footnotes and renominate this article as a Good Article. --GoOdCoNtEnT 06:36, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Another account of his death
According to Snopes, one account of his death says that he buried himself alive, expecting a miracle that didn't come. Any basis to this? zafiroblue05 | Talk 04:03, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

 * yeah, that's in Hippolytus (conjectured author) Philosophumena, found in a 14th century manuscript. the section in question reads:
 * towards the end of his career going ... he settled under a plane tree and continued his teachings. And finally running the risk of exposure through the length of his stay, he said, that if he were buried alive, he would rise again on the third day. And he did actually order a grave to be dug by his disciples and told them to bury him. So they carried out his orders, but he has stopped away until the present day, for he was not the Christ.
 * you can find it in GRS Mead's comprehensive collection of Simoniana. Mead notes that it reads like a Patristic joke at Simon's expense. Whateley23 05:56, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Reference to Book of Acts being "Apocryphal"
The book of Acts is universally recognized to have been written by the disciple Luke, who work as a historian was shown to be meticulously accurate by the archaeologist William Ramsey Mitchell Ramsay, an avowed atheist at the beginning of his research into Luke’s work). I have to question the professional objectivity of  such a statement. (This comment was added by 69.115.162.235 at 01:52, 7 June 2007)

 * you should check on the things upon which you are commenting before making the comment. the Acts of Peter referenced in the article is, in fact, apocryphal. as you can plainly see by following the link to the wikipedia article about that book, it is the earliest of several apocryphal "Acts" books. also, please sign your comments. you can do so by typing a series of four tildes, like so: ~ . that will give you an automated signature and timestamp. Whateley23 02:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Luke wasn't a disciple, either. He was a physician. Jlricherson (talk) 17:53, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Pop culture section
What's wrong with having an "appearances in popular culture" or similar section? Keeps getting deleted without reasons given. James Haughton 02:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Clementine section
I added the Clementine section since it was not really discussed about. I thought it was crucial to speak briefly about it since it has more descriptive encounters between Simon Magus and Peter. Please feel free to help change some of the possible errors since I'm new to wikipedia. Also I was wondering what the correct citation format is when footnoting. --Vaflorc (talk) 00:28, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Simon and the Magi
Passing query - would Magus be connected to Magi? Jackiespeel (talk) 23:14, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Merely as Latin words which existed prior to the New Testament, yes - as with the Greek magos & magoi. TheNuszAbides (talk) 03:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

"Simon Magus" as a cypher for Paul or Marcion in the Pseudo-Clementines
''I have added the following, I propose the overweight material related to the PsClem be moved out to the PsClem article. Detering is a fringe source which requires a quick mention at most.'' Ferdinand Christian Baur (1792-1860), founder of the The Tübingen School, suggested that the representation of Simon Magus in later sections of the Pseudo-Clementines, is in some places intended as a polemic against Paul. The anti-Pauline context of the Pseudo-Clementines is recognised, but the association with Simon Magus is surprising since they have little in common. However the majority of scholars accept Baur's identification, though others, including [[Lightfoot, argued extensively that the "Simon Magus" of the Pseudo-Clementines was not meant to stand for Paul. A Berlin pastor, Hermann Detering (1995), has made the case that the veiled anti-Pauline stance of the Pseudo-Clementines has historical roots, that the Acts 8 encounter between Simon the magician and Peter is itself based on the conflict between Peter and Paul, though his view has not found support among scholars.

In ictu oculi (talk) 03:04, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

 * The Simon=Paul theory did not originate with Detering and was a popular idea among certain radical critics in the 19th century, and every encyclopedia article of the time period mentions it, if only to refute it. (See the original DCB article, for instance.) Now, if it is overweight, I see no reason not to do some judicious trimming, as long as the essential information is presented. But the subject bears directly upon the character Simon Magus as portrayed in the Clementines, so I do not see why the issue should appear anywhere else. It's important to emphasize that the Clementines were used (and probably written) by a sect that did not care for Paul. Your paragraph is an excellent addition and helps clarify the issue greatly. Kramden (talk) 03:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kramden. Others are welcome to trim. I was a little surprised by Pate citing Lightfoot as having critiqued a theory 200 years before Baur originated it, but didn't have time other than simply insert on trust what Pate appears to say. Someone else might like to follow that up. I also believe that Detering taking the PsClem stance literally has precedent in a Dutch 19th Scholar, "Van Vanen"(sp?) or someone. But didn't think it was notable enough to go digging.In ictu oculi (talk) 03:44, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Josephus
Samarians were jews too, and still are to this day — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxthedog (talk • contribs) 08:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Are you directing your comment at Josephus? TheNuszAbides (talk) 03:04, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

~"Simon Magus" as a cipher~
This section is empty. Is the header a placeholder or something? Should it be there even if it is? TheNuszAbides (talk) 03:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Pseudo-Clementine literature
this section seems to be mostly block quotations. If not, it makes claims that cannot stand. It needs to be clearly marked as to what is what. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 21:57, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

Simon in Islam
Maybe it's wrong that someone says that Simon the viceregent of Jesus in Shia Islam is Peter but the same Simon in article because Peter and Paul were similar in Christian cycle to Abu Bakr and Umar in Islamic cycle and Ali according to this theory is similar to Simon, Ali did many miracles but his enemies at his time said that He was Magi and liar so in Judaism they reported about man who was viceregent of Jesus and He did the same miracles of Jesus like healing pepole and rise dead and they said that He has the greater name and they wrongly affilated him with Peter but He was Simon (the Magi) Himself but Church rejected him and his disciples claimed after his death that He was the Father like some of Ghulat Shia and became known as Simonians. 178.52.195.8 (talk) 10:39, 15 May 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Simon Magus


text:
Category talk:Saints

Inclusive
Are we including all religious figures in this category? To the best of my knowledge, Charles Wesley (a lifelong Protestant) has never been canonized or even beatified, so I'm not sure why he was included here. - jredmond 16:11, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * No, only people whom at least one Christian denomination reveres as a saint. The Church of England reveres Charles Wesley as a saint (at least, according to our List of saints - if this is inaccurate, he should be removed both from this category and that list).   Jonel 05:56, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * It looks complicated: the Church of England calendar puts John Wesley and Charles Wesley at 24 May, and not in italics so a "Lesser Festival" rather than a "Commemoration". --Henrygb 13:27, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Rename this category
Please rename this category to Christian Saints.

asnatu 16:48, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

PockBot (run by IP:207.160.66.129) - Category articles summary as of 21:43:9, Wed Feb 14, 2007
Suppressing old PocketBot generated content, because of talk misusing and by taking up much space. WikiProject Saints has currently better tools to deal with article status. --Kslotte (talk) 12:56, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Saints


text: User talk:216.99.241.197

title: User talk:216.99.241.197


text:
Python Software Foundation

The Python Software Foundation (PSF) is an American nonprofit organization devoted to the Python programming language, launched on March 6, 2001. The mission of the foundation is to foster development of the Python community and is responsible for various processes within the Python community, including developing the core Python distribution, managing intellectual rights, developer conferences including the Python Conference (PyCon), and raising funds.

In 2005, the Python Software Foundation received the Computerworld Horizon Award for "cutting-edge" technology.

Overview
The PSF focuses on empowering and supporting people within the Python community with grant programs that support sprints, conferences, meetups, user groups, and Python development. The PSF runs Python Conference (PyCon) US, the leading Python community conference. The PSF is the primary point of contact for organizations that wish to work with Python, to support Python, or sponsor Python development. The PSF provides a structure by which work, donations, and sponsorships are coordinated worldwide. The PSF also possesses and protects intellectual property associated with Python and the Python community, such as the word "Python," the two-snakes logo, and the terms "PyLadies" and "PyCon."

Membership
There are five tiers of membership within the PSF. These tiers include:
 * 1) Basic members – Basic members are individuals or entities who are part of the Python language community and who have decided to declare their support for Python and agree to the community Code of Conduct.
 * 2) Supporting members – Supporting members make an annual donation to the PSF to sustain the foundation and support the Python community. Supporting members are eligible to vote.
 * 3) Managing members – Managing members are people who commit to working at least five hours per month to support the Python ecosystem, by organizing Python events, managing or contributing to PSF projects, running infrastructure, participating in one of the PSF's working groups, etc. Managing members are eligible to vote.
 * 4) Contributing members – Contributing members are people who dedicate at least five hours per month working on projects that advance the mission of the PSF, where the work relates to the creation or maintenance of open source software available to the public at no charge. Contributing members are eligible to vote.
 * 5)  Fellows – Fellows are members who have been nominated by their extraordinary efforts and impact upon Python, the community, and the broader Python ecosystem. Fellows are nominated from the broader community and elevated by a vote of the members. Fellow members are eligible to vote.

Code of Conduct
Since late 2012, the Python Software Foundation started recommending that all Python conferences create and apply a code of conduct. This is mandatory to any event to be granted funds by the Python Software Foundation.

title: Python Software Foundation


text:
Antioch (disambiguation)

Antioch on the Orontes (Syrian Antioch) was a Hellenistic city in the Seleucid, Roman, and Byzantine Empires, located near present-day Antakya in Turkey.

Antioch may also refer to:

Asia

 * Principality of Antioch, a Crusader state with its capital at Antioch on the Orontes
 * Antioch, Pisidia, with a corresponding titular see.
 * Antioch on the Maeander
 * Antiochia ad Cragum, also known as Antiochetta, Antiochia Minor or Antiochoa Parva, in Isauria, later renamed Seleucia
 * Antioch on the Cydnus, Tarsus, now in Turkey
 * Antioch, Mygdonia, former name of Nisibis; in ancient Mesopotamia, now Nusaybin in Turkey
 * Antiochia ad Sarum, now Adana in Turkey

United States

 * Antioch, Clarke County, Alabama
 * Antioch, Covington County, Alabama
 * Antioch, California, the largest city with the name
 * Antioch, Florida
 * Antioch, Harris County, Georgia
 * Antioch, Polk County, Georgia
 * Antioch, Troup County, Georgia
 * Antioch, Illinois
 * Antioch, Clinton County, Indiana
 * Antioch, Greene County, Indiana
 * Antioch, Jay County, Indiana
 * Antioch, Harrison County, Kentucky
 * Antioch, Claiborne Parish, Louisiana
 * Antioch, Jackson Parish, Louisiana
 * Antioch, Lincoln Parish, Louisiana
 * Antioch Township, Michigan
 * Antioch, Missouri
 * Antioch, Nebraska
 * Antioch, Ohio
 * Antioch, Oklahoma
 * Antioch, South Carolina
 * Antioch, Tennessee
 * Antioch, Texas (disambiguation)
 * Antioch, Virginia
 * Antioch, West Virginia

Other places

 * Passage of Antioch, a strait on the western coast of France
 * Antioquia, a department (province) of Colombia

Education

 * Antioch College, an independent college in Yellow Springs, Ohio
 * Antioch University, a multi-campus university system, including
 * Antioch University Los Angeles, in Culver City, California
 * Antioch University McGregor, in Yellow Springs, Ohio

Culture

 * Antioch Peverell, a character in the Harry Potter series
 * "Antioch", the tune attributed to George Frederick Handel generally used for the Christmas carol "Joy to the World"
 * "Antioch (Interlude)", a song by Flobots from Noenemies
 * "Antioch", a character in The Rock-afire Explosion animatronic band
 * Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch, a holy weapon used to destroy the Rabbit of Caerbannog in the film the Monty Python and the Holy Grail

People

 * Ignatius of Antioch, a first-century bishop

Transportation

 * Antioch, California, United States
 * Antioch–Pittsburg station, Amtrak station
 * Antioch station (eBART), eBART station
 * Antioch station (Illinois), Metra station in Antioch, Illinois, United States

title: Antioch (disambiguation)


text:
Bill Gates (disambiguation)

Bill Gates (born 1955) is an American business magnate and co-founder of Microsoft Corporation.

Bill or William Gates or similar, may also refer to:

People

 * Bill Gates Sr. (1925–2020), American attorney and philanthropist, father of Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates
 * Willie Gates (born 1987), U.S. mixed martial artist
 * William "Pop" Gates (1917–1999), American basketball player
 * William Gates (basketball) (born 1971), American basketball player, subject of 1994 movie Hoop Dreams
 * William Thomas George Gates (1905–1990), British banker
 * William E. Gates (1863–1940), linguist and archaeologist
 * William Gates (soldier) (1788–1868), U.S. Army officer
 * Bill Gates (footballer), English footballer

Other

 * "Bill Gates", a song by American rapper Lil Wayne from the 2010 album I Am Not a Human Being

title: Bill Gates (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Polymorphism (computer science)

Do Haskell Type Classes count as bounded quantification?
The article describes Haskell type class constraints like (Eq a) => [a]->[a] as a form of bounded quantification... but in the intended dictionary-passing interpretation this is nothing more than an abbreviation for (forall a, (a->a)->[a]->[a]) where the first argument is the "eq" function (generally: the set of functions which instances of Eq must implement) on the type "a". I don't know if this is quite the same as something like F-sub. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Megacz (talk • contribs) 20:24, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

F-sub should be considered actually as a different matter if we refer to forms of bounded quantification as intended by common practice. I have a ten year experience in commercial software development and this is just clear when fererring to haskell types. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.182.132.93 (talk) 16 January 2009

 * I think that is true. Bounded quantification is a tricky topic though. Pierce, 2002, ch. 31 discusses $$F^\omega_{<:}$$, (F-omega-sub) which is more formally called Higher-Order bounded quantification; this is not covered in here or anywhere else on this wiki as of today. F-omega-sub is probably closer to Haskell since you can have types, kinds and parametric polymorphism combined with subtyping. The caveat is that the Haskell subtyping isn't "real" in the sense that a type class does not define a type... Pcap ping  10:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

conflicting definitions of ad-hoc polymorphism
In the second paragraph: "If the range of actual types that can be used is finite and the combinations must be specified individually prior to use, it is called Ad-hoc polymorphism." In section 3, "Ad-hoc polymorphism": "Strachey chose the term ad-hoc polymorphism to refer to polymorphic functions which can be applied to arguments of different types, but which behave differently depending on the type of the argument to which they are applied" How is a reader supposed to learn what ad-hoc polymorphism means when the writers can't even do it? Herorev (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I think the meanings of these terms have drifted over time, and the are used differently between the typed-FP and the OO communities. In the typed FP world we'd say that a polymorphic function is one that universally quantifies over some class of types, and doesn't know anything about the specific type given to any instantiation.  A function that actually inspects the type of its argument and does different things depending on the type is called "generic".  The article generic programming is in pretty bad shape right now, but it has some useful links that explain this. 67.122.210.149 (talk) 12:10, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It's not conflicting, both do not exclude each other, and there is no 'if and only if'. Rajakhr (talk) 08:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
 * in the first paragragh .mcclarah ia the owner of the system which undergone the implementation process long time ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 197.221.253.21 (talk) 16:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Way too complex article!!
I am a java programmer with 8 years of experience. When I end up sitting pretty much baffled by what I read here, there is something fundamentally flawed with the article. Many of these computer science articles are way to tied into the theoretical underpinnings, which is very sad for people actually trying to use Wikipedia as a tool to learn and/or understand things, and to do a "quick look-up" of some aspect. Such theory is obviously important for a complete discussion of the aspect, but should OBVIOUSLY come as a distinct chapter later. The intro should be in a "layman terms" language, importantly exemplified with an example written in some NORMAL generic pseudo-language (not any lisp-like silliness - what stupid idea is that?!), as in "This exemplifies the aspect under discussion". I must say that it is obvious that the hardcode theory geeks are WAY too much in control for the comp.sci. articles, making them read like scientific articles seemingly written for journals - and as I've understand the theory of WP, this is not its intention. Stolsvik (talk) 14:45, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree. I can code in a whole bunch of languages, including Java and Haskell, and this article is hard for me to understand.—greenrd (talk) 17:06, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Having 100 years of programming experience in Java does not unfortunately give you the ability to understand an article that uses quite a vast array of notions from type theory, and mathematical logic in general. This article is indeed written in a way that caters to graduate students in CS, and likely to those specializing in programming languages. I added a big "about" template at the top to redirect readers like you to the gentler introductory article Polymorphism in object-oriented programming. Pcap ping  09:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I have just read three books each with a mutaully exclusive meaning for ad hoc polymorohism. I can say the same for many terms in the literature. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.207.123.2 (talk) 20:37, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I have read this article many times over the last few years. I must admit that the first few readings (a few years ago), this article was pretty confusing. Gradually, and over time, I begin to understand more and more of the article (specifically the different type of polymorphism), to the point where as of May of 2011, I believe I can understand most if not all it. I believe the key is to be patient, and come back later if you have trouble understand it. Don't be discourage if you cannot understand everything at first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.197.233.126 (talk) 01:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

This is a communication style conflict, which is not resolvable because all people believe their style is correct. A more top-down approach, moving from the simple to the more complex, would benefit all communication styles, not just the analytical. More balance means more understanding, which is the goal, and would make the article accessible to more people. Dprust (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Genetic polymorphism
The article needs to mention or redirect to genetic polymorphism (which is what I was looking for) which is a medical realm. I know little about it - other than it is not cited here as existing. Spanglej (talk) 00:05, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

 * This article is "Polymorphism_(computer_science)", making it clear that it's a CS article, while "Polymorphism" is a disambiguation page, which is where you ought to look. No changes are needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skulldyvan (talk • contribs) 11:06, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I changed the OOP bit at the start...
I'm pretty sure it was wrong, inheritance and subtyping are different things. Inheritance allows reusing code, whereas subtyping allows one type to be substituted for another. Surely polymorphism is achieved through the latter not the former, as the article originally suggested. The textbook Programming Language Concepts by Mitchell mentions this distinction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.60.95.68 (talk) 13:32, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

This talk page needs (auto-)archiving
Really old threads and newer threads are randomly intermingled. Pcap ping  09:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

 * I have manually created an archive page for the older entries. — Tobias Bergemann (talk) 07:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Pcap ping  10:27, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

External Links - Commercial Sites...?
The following external links should be considered for removal:

 * C++ examples of polymorphism WP:NOTADVERTISING WP:CONFLICT WP:ELNO
 * Objects and Polymorphism (Visual Prolog) WP:NOTADVERTISING WP:ELNO

Broken example
The example assumes that the language differentiates between integers and floating point numbers. Not all do. Not only can a language treat integers as floating point numbers that happen not to have any significant digits after the decimal point, but some languages handle all numbers using a "big number" format, in which the digits are stored as characters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.80.104.2 (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Horrible mish-mash
Sorry, but this is a really horrible article! It is full of half truths, for example "most OO languages allow constraints on type parameters" is wrong: neither Java nor C++ allow constraints, and that's 99% of all (statically typed) OO language usage in the real world.

Then there's the incorrect assertion polymorphism applies to data types. No, it doesn't, even though that's common lay language. If you take the example of a list of some "arbitrary type", for example, it is not a polymorphic data type at all, it is in fact a data functor that maps each type T to a type list of T.

What makes this a functor is that it is structure preserving: for every function f: U -> V, there is a function list(f): list(U) -> list(V) written in Ocaml as List.map f, such that list(f). list(g) = list (f . g), which is commonly known as the deforestation isomorphism: in expanded form, ML notation: List.map f (List.map g lst) = List.map (fun x -> f (g (x))) lst.

Now, if we consider a polymorphic function such as list reversal, what is it? The signature tells the story: List.rev: T -> (list(T) -> list(T)), this entity maps each type T to a function on lists of T. Note carefully the result is a single arrow (for any given T, in most FPLs this is also a value). This operation preserves structure because for any function f: U -> V, map f (rev lst) = rev (map f list), in other words it is independent of T.

This is what a polymorphic function is. A categorical explanation in lay-ish terms is the only proper way to describe it. Even mentioning "type variables" is a seriously bad idea: term calculi are often used in calculations but they're woeful way to describe anything. For example, when we talk about "instantiating a type variable with a type" and allow or not that the type may itself be "polymorphic" we're just getting confused. A type variable is not a type. It's a "hole" in a type term, which makes for a messy way to write a data functor. Instantiation (substitution) of a type variable is then nothing more than composition of functors. The so-called predicative typing is nothing more than a requirement the composition be with a null-ary functor such as 1 |-> int so we get 1 |-> list(int), rather than the impredicative kind such as the bifunctor T,U |-> T * U which leaves the specialisation T,U |-> list (T * U). In other words, the distinction just isn't important: they're both just compositions.

I hope it is clear the abstract (categorical) view is much easier to understand than the archaic term based type theories. All modern type theory uses the language of categories.

So called "object oriented" polymorphism via "subtyping" isn't polymorphism at all. This is another myth. Subtyping is subtyping. It isn't polymorphism. A function with signature f: A -> B will clearly accept a value of any subset of A. There's no polymorphism here.

There is also too much focus on higher rank polymorphism. Although interesting, it is primarily a problem with Hindley-Milner type inference: it isn't fundamental to the notion of polymorphism, inference is just a syntactic convenience.

What is important is something else: functorial polymorphism, sometimes called polyadic programming. A function with this kind of polymorphism is properly higher order (not just higher rank): it operates on data structures independently of the structure. The canonical example would be a generic fold or a type specific version thereof such as a summation of integers, which operates just as well on a list, array, tree, or any other container.

No production languages provide statically type checked polyadic programming, although there do exist some research languages that do in some limited form (such as Jay's FISh over arrays, or Bondi, which is fully general). Most languages emulate it with some help, such as Haskell (cheating with type classes), or Charity (fully automatic but doesn't support recursion). Even C++ has some polyadic programming (via polymorphic methods together with overloading hackery: the STL is based on obtaining polyadicity by using iterators).

Polyadicity is the only true kind of polymorphism, because polymorphic means "over many forms" which means "independent of structure": the point is that parametric data polymorphism is very weak. Polyadicity is the holy grail. The existing article focuses on too much junk that has little to do with what polymorphism is really about: being able to write routines with a very high level of reusability, and therefore vastly improving the chance a program will be correct by reducing the amount of code that requires examination.

Yttrill (talk) 16:13, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree that's the most coherent definition currently used, but to some extent we also need to document terms as they're used in different communities, not *solely* in specific parts of academic PLs research, especially since terminology has shifted over the years. I agree that what the OO community means by "polymorphism" isn't what most current-day PLs researchers define as polymorphism, but nonetheless it's common terminology there, so should be mentioned somehow, even if the actual discussion is in a different article. It's not as if it's only laypeople who don't know better making the "error", either; there are some pretty well-known academics who call OO subtyping "polymorphism", and it's present under that name in many textbooks. --Delirium (talk) 15:55, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Polymorphism in object-oriented programming
I've redirected Polymorphism in object-oriented programming to this article as there didn't seem to be anything in that article that isn't already discussed either here or in Subtyping. —Ruud 16:48, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Useful reference
This might be a useful reference (I have only skimmed): —Ruud 16:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Connor, R.C.H. “Types and Polymorphism in Persistent Programming Systems”. Ph.D. Thesis, University of St Andrews (1990)

Needs full rewrite
Still a horrible mish-mash after 5 years! I've been programming in Java since 1996, and I've used polymorphism via subclassing and overloading. Everyone says that for a language to be "object-oriented", it must support polymorphism, but I didn't see much about OOP in this article.

I think it began its life as a grad-school level article for math geeks. Can we write something practical for budding software engineers? --Uncle Ed (talk) 11:39, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

 * I think this article is in a much better shape than it was 5 years ago, thanks to the editing of User:Crosbiesmith. What you might know as polymorphism is a very specific form of polymorphism also called subtyping. I think the article adequately describes this distinction, although the subsection on subtyping could still be improved significantly. —Ruud 12:52, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

I think this article should present a clear distinction of polymorphism under Object Oriented, Functional Languages, and Type Theory. They are fundamentally different, even when OO languages implement concepts from functional languages. It would be much easier to split into 3 or more wikipedia entries, each maintained for specialists of the correct areas. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 179.219.172.183 (talk) 23:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

 * We already have more in-depth articles on ad-hoc polymorphism, parametric polymorphism and subtyping. It doesn't make sense to split this into specific articles for OO and FP as, unlike in 1996, most contemporary OO and FP languages support all three forms of polymorphism to a lesser or greater degree. —Ruud 16:47, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

 * There used to be a separate article, Polymorphism in object-oriented programming, but imo it wasn't in great shape, and it was merged into this article a few months ago. An older version of the article was written from a more traditional OO perspective (analogous to the way polymorphism is introduced in many introductory Java or C++ textbooks). Whether a separate article makes sense I'm ambivalent about. I do think the current article comes across as somewhat "foreign" to people who come from the OOP world rather than the PLs world. Not hugely so, but somewhat. --Delirium (talk) 17:58, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Pure and reverse polymorphism
The redirects for Pure polymorphism and Reverse polymorphism go to the disambiguation page Polymorphism. Should they actually go to this article's section Types of polymorphism? If so, could someone put a short reference to these concepts here in order that the redirect makes sense. Thanks.--NHSavage (talk) 18:15, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Polymorphism
The Polymorphism template adds nothing to the article. The important links are right there in the lead. The links to various types of dynamic dispatch are excessive. This *is* the article on polymorphism. If the concepts in the nav-box aren't in the lead of this article, they aren't worth having in the nav-box. Either the links are redundant, or the whole nav-box is redundant. There is no requirement for us to add a nav-box for consistency with other articles on polymorphism. There is a requirement for us to remove unhelpful clutter from the lead. - Crosbie 18:41, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree eliminating clutter is good. However, the Polymorphism Sidebar template wouldn't be clutter.  If indeed the lead of the article did contain all the links found in the side-bar, there would be concern.  Except it wouldn't be concern for duplicate links, it would be the risk of having a confusing introductory paragraph, failing to give a concise overview of the topic.  Fortunately, that's not what we have.  I encourage you to become familiar with the purpose and current numerous examples of Sidebars throughout Wikipedia (see Category:Sidebar templates).  Being a Sidebar, it has no intent of providing information to the reader (as would an Infobox) other than to say, these are related topics to the current article (since, in fact and fortunately, again all of them are not linked in the lead paragraph).  You mentioned it doesn't add any information to the article, and this is good because it's not an infobox.  As with other articles with Sidebars, the Polymorphism Sidebar template is particularly relevant to the top of this article..digamma (talk) 19:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with Crosbie, that template is horrible. The links in there either duplicate links already in the lead, or are too specific and belong in one of the sections further down. —Ruud 13:08, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Ad hoc polymorphism result
In the section on ad hoc polymorphism, the result of the writeln calls is never explicitly stated. The section of the article appears to be attempting to illustrate how the two Add functions are different, but doesn't actually demonstrate this. Shouldn't it be explicitly stated that the first will write out '3', and the second will write 'Hello, World!'? Or am I missing something?

Without stating the result explicitly, it doesn't appear demonstrate anything unless you had prior knowledge of what ad hoc polymorphism was, defeating the purpose of that part of this section. The main article calls this out, I imagine this section probably should too.

Slurgi (talk) 19:47, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

 * Fixed. —Ruud 22:34, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Monomorphism redirects here but isn't mentioned in the page
I came looking for an explanation of "monomorphization" and couldn't even find an (explicit) explanation of "monomorphism". The sort of answer I was looking for appears here: http://stackoverflow.com/a/14198060. Perhaps some kind wikipedian with a strong CS background could incorporate that into this or a linked page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 135.23.107.176 (talk) 15:20, 8 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That article on SO looks to me to be something different, I've not heard the term monomorphism used but in this case it would be the opposite of some sort of polymorphism, e.g. a class that doesn't implement any of its parent's interface differently from the parent class. 82.71.38.251 (talk) 17:23, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Cleaning up the Ad-Hoc subsection
The Ad-Hoc section is vague and inaccurate in many places, over-specific in others.

 * There's no need to be repeating history details which are already covered in the History section and in the main page for Ad-Hoc Polymorphism
 * "functions that can be applied to arguments of different types, but that behave differently depending on the type of the argument to which they are applied" this is equally true of subtyping and not informative.
 * Function overloading and operator overloading are treated interchangeably, when they are significantly different. In fact, defining function overloading as a type of ad-hoc polymorphism - or polymorphism at all - is contentious.
 * The single line about dynamic types should be saved for the main page on this topic.
 * The single line about coercive polymorphism shouldn't even be in this subsection.

So I'm doing a little pruning Itsbruce (talk) 15:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Reference 5 is a dead link
Syrak (talk) 17:31, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Polymorphism (computer science)


text:
Talk:Margaret the Virgin

Needs to be merged into article.
Saint Margarita, virgin and martyr, is celebrated by the Church of Rome on July 20, but her feast formerly fell on the 13th, and her story is almost identical, even in the proper names, with that of the Greek St. Marina (July 17). She was of Antioch (in the Greek story, Antioch of Pisidia), daughter of a priest Aedesius. She lived in the country with a foster mother, scorned by her father for her Christian faith, and keeping sheep. Olybrius the "praeses Orientis" sees her, and offers her his hand as the price of renunciation of Christianity. Her refusal leads to her being cruelly tortured, and after various miraculous incidents, in which a heavenly dove plays a prominent part, she is put to death.

Women prayed to St. Margarita for easy deliverance. It has been shown by H. Usener (Legenden der heiligen Pelagia, Bonn, 1879) that this legend belongs to a group of various narratives which all have their root in a transition of the Semitic Aphrodite into a Christian penitent or saint. Of these legends that of St. Pelagi is perhaps the most important. Marina is a translation of Pelagia, and both are epithets of Aphrodite as she was worshipped on the coasts of the Levant. Pelagia in the legend has Margarita as her second name. The association of the marine goddess with the pearl is obvious, and the images of Aphrodite were decked with these jewels.

From the 9th edition (1883) of an unnamed encyclopedia.

See also: Saint Margaret the Virgin

Olybrius
The article links to Olybrius, who was Emperor for 3 months before dying in 472. Whereas, it also says, Margaret died in 304. Both can't be "right"; we should get the legend straight. Johnbod 16:11, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

The python stuff
I recommend deleting it. Pythons make sure their prey is dead before they start swallowing. That's what all the strangling is for. David Marjanović (talk) 00:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you're right. I enjoyed it as a splendid rearguard action, but ... Johnbod (talk) 01:06, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Preserved for posterity: "If Margaret has been a historical person, an explanation for the dragon could be a rock python (Python sebae), which can grow to length of up to 6 m (20 ft). It was known to Romans, and often seen in circuses. Rock pythons are known to have attacked and even swallowed humans, and if Margaret had been of smallish stature, the snake could well have devoured her and later vomited."

It's the "could well" I like! Johnbod (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The Word Cult
I do believe using the word cult to describe groups that took to Saint Margaret of Antioch is unnecessary. The word cult carries negative connotations that this article does not need. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jewellertman (talk • contribs) 08:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

The word cult has a specific meaning in religious studies that is different than it's contemporary meaning. Its usage is correct here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leprendun (talk • contribs) 13:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I agree, in fact, none of the Saints were apart of any cult. Cult people are cultists and Saints are saints. Some people hate the saints so much that they will purposely call them everything else but a Saint. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by DanaelC (talk • contribs) 14:37, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Leprendun is quite correct, as you will see from the article Cult (religious practice). Ian Spackman (talk) 19:36, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Which Saint in the Zurbarán painting?
A picture of a painting by Francisco de Zurbarán is used both in this page about Saint Margaret, who in the Orthodox church is called Saint Marina, and on the page of Marina of Aguas Santas. One of them needs to be wrong. The same mistake is to be found in the correlating pages in Spanish. On the website of the Museo CarmenThyssen in Malaga Trinidad de Antonio writes that the Zurbarán painting is about the Spanish saint who has "often been mistaken for St Margaret of Antioch". Arjendn (talk) 07:49, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

Joan of Arc
Joan said she talked to Margaret. But an earlier Pope had declared Margaret apocryphal. Did the Pope make a mistake, or did Joan, or what is going on? This needs clarifying. 2A00:23C7:E284:CF00:F027:C74B:9A3:AB8F (talk) 16:19, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Margaret the Virgin


text:
Alexander Foote

Alexander Allan Foote (13 April 1905 – 1 August 1956 ) was a radio operator for a Soviet espionage ring in Switzerland during World War II. Foote was born in Liverpool and raised mostly in Yorkshire by his Scottish-born father and English mother.

Life
Foote completed his education at sixteen and after working in different professions, joined the Royal Air Force in 1935. However, he deserted while serving at Gosport Barracks on 23 December 1936.

Following his desertion he sailed for Spain and served with the British Battalion of the International Brigades during the Spanish Civil War for two years.

Serving with the rank of Sergeant, Foote was appointed transport officer and batman to Fred Copeman.

He decided to continue his efforts against Fascism (and, perhaps, for Communism) and volunteered for clandestine work with Red Orchestra. He was put into contact with Ursula Kuczynski in Switzerland. He became a radio operator for the Soviet espionage operation run by Alexander Radó and was one of those who passed information to Moscow from the Lucy spy ring run by Rudolf Roessler. Foote was one of those arrested when the Swiss police shut down most of the operation and was detained for a time.

After the War, he spent some time in the Eastern Bloc and then returned to the West and published his book, A Handbook for Spies. He died in 1956.

Espionage
Because of the implausible veracity of the intelligence (fast, plentiful, and accurate) and never explained source of the Lucy Ring's information, suspicion attaches to all those associated with it. Since Foote, as the Lucy Ring's radio operator, was a central cog in the chain of supply and therefore in a position to know much, his subsequent account has been thought to be rather dubious in places. This, and the fact that he seemingly managed to return to the West rather easily, has led some to suggest Foote was a British Secret Service double agent and one conduit (perhaps even the main one) of intelligence from Britain to Roessler and thence to Moscow.

According to various sources, Foote was indeed a MI6 (SIS) double agent unbeknownst to Radó. After the destruction of Radó's network and his escape from Switzerland, Radó met Foote in Paris and both were ordered to return to Moscow immediately. They took off aboard a Russian military aeroplane on 6 January 1945, taking a circuitous route (the war being still in progress) via Egypt. Their plane landed to refuel in Cairo, whereupon Radó defected. Continuing alone to Moscow, Foote was subjected to intensive interrogation in an attempt to determine his loyalty and the possibility of his being a penetration agent. Foote was confronted with an instance of disinformation sent from his transmitter in May 1942 and told "That message cost us 100 000 men at Kharkov and resulted in the Germans reaching Stalingrad". Foote said that he merely passed on what he received from Radó. Satisfied with Foote's explanation, the Soviets gave Foote a false identity under the alias of Major Granatov. Posing as a German, Albert Müller, he inserted himself into postwar Berlin to establish this alias with the aim of being sent by the Moscow Centre to Argentina, to attempt to identify and infiltrate groups of escaped high-ranking Nazis.

Journalist, broadcaster and author Malcolm Muggeridge, himself a wartime MI6 officer, "got to know Foote after the war" (pp 207–08) when Foote paid Muggeridge "regular visits" at his flat near Regent's Park, London. Foote at this time was working as a clerk in the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries, work he found, according to Muggeridge, "very tedious". Muggeridge is firmly of the opinion that the information Foote sent "could only, in fact, have come from Bletchley".

In March 1947, following the defection of a Soviet agent who had been involved with British Intelligence, Foote's allegiance to the British may have been confirmed. Foote himself defected from his Russian control in Berlin, escaping to the British sector.

title: Alexander Foote


text:
AAG

AAG may refer to:

 * Ambrak language, a Torricelli language of Papua New Guinea
 * Assistant adjutant general, a military title
 * United States Assistant Attorney General, a ranking within the Department of Justice

Business

 * American Advisors Group
 * American Airlines Group

Film and television

 * Aag (1948 film), a 1948 Bollywood film
 * Aag (1994 film), a 1994 Bollywood film
 * Aag (2007 film), a 2007 Bollywood film
 * AAG TV, a Pakistani TV channel

Medicine

 * Acute angle closure glaucoma
 * alpha-1-acid glycoprotein, also referred to as Orosomucoid (ORM)
 * alkyladenine glycosylase; see Deamination
 * Autoimmune autonomic ganglionopathy
 * AAG, a codon for the amino acid lysine

Organizations

 * American Association of Geographers
 * Association of Applied Geochemists
 * Athletics Association of Guyana

Technology

 * AAG (cable system), an undersea cable system linking South East Asia with the United States of America
 * Advanced Arresting Gear, an aircraft arresting system

Transportation

 * AAG (1900 automobile), a German automotive company
 * AAG (1906 automobile), a German automotive company
 * Arapoti Airport, Paraná, Brazil, IATA airport code
 * Air Atlantique, ICAO airline designator

title: AAG


text:
Richard Campagna

Richard Vincent Campagna (born May 5, 1952) of Iowa City, Iowa is an American political figure who was the vice-presidential running mate of Michael Badnarik of the Libertarian Party in the 2004 U.S. presidential election.

Early life, education, and career
Richard Campagna is from New York City, and grew up in the Midwood section of Brooklyn.

Campagna has degrees from Brown University (B.A.), New York University (M.A.), St. John's University (J.D.), and Columbia University (M.A.), and a PhD. After completing his undergraduate degree from Brown University, where he majored in political science, he enrolled at both St. John's University School of Law and New York University for a master's in Latin American Studies.

In the mid-1970s, he practiced in Caracas, Venezuela and Paris, France with companies like Ford and Schlumberger, Ltd. In the roles of Latin American counsel and international counsel for the latter. He oversaw legal operations in approximately 190 countries. After returning to the United States in the early 1980s, he worked as lead counsel for the Motion Picture Association under movie mogul Jack Valenti. Richard then served as general counsel for Fairchild Camera and Instruments in Mountain View, California before they headed back east to New York City in the mid 1980's. He and his wife, also an attorney, started their own international legal consulting firm in the early-1990s, and Richard also wrote and published travel books during this time.

After moving to Iowa City, Iowa in the early 1990s, he completed doctoral coursework at the University of Iowa. He is a consultant in a range of fields, including psychological counseling, legal advisement, teaching, interpretation, and stress management consulting. Richard also participated on the Columbia University's Alumni Council.

Politics
In 2002, Campagna ran on the Libertarian Party ticket for lieutenant governor of Iowa with gubernatorial candidate Clyde Cleveland. Together they placed fourth, receiving 13,098 votes, 1.3% of the total votes cast.

In mid-2003, Campagna became the first candidate to enter the race for the Libertarian Party's vice-presidential nomination (the Libertarian party chooses its presidential and vice-presidential nominees in the convention on separate ballots). He defeated his closest competitor, Missouri libertarian Tamara Millay, on the first ballot at the May 2004 Libertarian National Convention, which selected Michael Badnarik as the Libertarian Party presidential nominee. The ticket of Badnarik and Campagna placed fourth in the 2004 presidential election, receiving just under 400,000 votes nationwide and no electoral votes.

Personal
Campagna lives in Iowa with his wife, Odalys. He is an active proponent of existentialism.

title: Richard Campagna


text:
Backbone Mountain

Backbone Mountain is a ridge of the Allegheny Mountains of the central Appalachian Mountain Range. It is situated in the U.S. states of West Virginia and Maryland and forms a portion of the Eastern Continental Divide. Within the state of Maryland, Backbone Mountain reaches an elevation of 3,360 ft, making it Maryland's highest point.

Description and geography
Backbone Mountain stretches approximately 39 mi southwest to northeast, from the Black Fork near Hambleton in Tucker County, West Virginia to the Savage River Reservoir in Garrett County, Maryland.

The Eastern Continental Divide follows part of the mountain in Maryland. The headwaters of Youghiogheny River, in the watershed of the Mississippi River, lie just northwest of the mountain, whereas the headwaters of the North Branch of the Potomac River lie just south of the mountain, along the West Virginia-Maryland border. In West Virginia, the Eastern Continental Divide diverts to the east, with both sides of the mountain draining into the Black Fork.

The ridge is crossed twice by U.S. Route 219, once north of Parsons and again near Silver Lake. It is also crossed by U.S. Route 50 east of Red House, Maryland, which is marked by a Maryland State Highway Administration sign.

Hoye-Crest
Located just inside of Maryland along Backbone Mountain is Hoye-Crest. At an elevation of 3360 ft, it is the highest point in the state of Maryland. The location, named for Captain Charles Hoye, founder of the Garrett County Historical Society, has a marker and offers a view of the North Branch Potomac River valley to the east. The location is accessible via a path leading from U.S. Route 219 to the west.

Olson Observation Tower
The southern end of Backbone Mountain was the location of West Virginia's first fire tower. The first tower was built in 1922 by the state and subsequently transferred to Monongahela National Forest. In 1963, the original tower was replaced with the one currently on-site and named after Ernest B. Olson in recognition of 28 years of service in MNF fire control and conservation programs.

While the cab of the tower is not open to the public, the 133 steps leading to it are. From the tower it is possible to view the surrounding area, including Cheat River watershed, Parsons, Blackwater Canyon, Canaan Mountain and the Otter Creek Wilderness.

Crabtree Woods
Crabtree Woods, on the northwest slopes of Backbone Mountain, is in the Potomac-Garrett State Forest. It constitutes Maryland's largest surviving remnant of old-growth forest: over 500 acre of mixed Appalachian hardwoods (sugar maple, red oak, basswood and cucumber tree).

title: Backbone Mountain


text:
Talk:Cecilia Gallerani

Poor quality
This article is of rather poor quality. I know little about Cecilia Gallerani, but I know enough to see that this could be written much better. - 27 Semptember 2005

 * There are two sources - and I can cite a third (Julia Cartwright's biography of Beatrice D'Este summarizes some primary source material about Cecilia. Removing that tag.  Article needs work but it's not an issue of sources - even the primary sources are meager for that period and that status of woman.  Both of the sources cited are using the same sources Cartwright used.--LeValley 23:44, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

More info needed
So, was she an aristocrat or what? If so, presumably the fact that she spoke Latin is no more than one would expect? This article needs looking at by someone with knowledge of Italian mediaeval history. Woblosch 19:41, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, article nejeanne (talk) 13:37, 17 April 2008 (UTC)eds more details as to her exact birthdate,parents names, etc.

So in the end she married Count Bergamino? making her Celilia Bergamino, how strange my great Aunt Cecilia Bergamino died about two years ago, it must be a common name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.240.155.95 (talk) 11:07, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there more info on this topic? It seems like this article has needed more info for half a decade.P0PP4B34R732 (talk) 02:35, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Birthplace
Some sources indicate that she was born in Milan in the early months of 1473 to parents from Siena Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 10:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cecilia Gallerani