text:
Coldrum Long Barrow

The Coldrum Long Barrow, also known as the Coldrum Stones and the Adscombe Stones, is a chambered long barrow located near the village of Trottiscliffe in the south-eastern English county of Kent. Probably constructed in the fourth millennium BCE, during Britain's Early Neolithic period, today it survives only in a state of ruin.

Archaeologists have established that the monument was built by pastoralist communities shortly after the introduction of agriculture to Britain from continental Europe. Part of an architectural tradition of long barrow building that was widespread across Neolithic Europe, the Coldrum Stones belong to a localised regional variant of barrows produced in the vicinity of the River Medway, now known as the Medway Megaliths. Of these, it is in the best surviving condition. It lies near to both Addington Long Barrow and Chestnuts Long Barrow on the western side of the river. Two further surviving long barrows, Kit's Coty House and Little Kit's Coty House, as well as possible survivals such as the Coffin Stone and White Horse Stone, are located on the Medway's eastern side.

Built out of earth and around fifty local sarsen-stone megaliths, the long barrow consisted of a sub-rectangular earthen tumulus enclosed by kerb-stones. Within the eastern end of the tumulus was a stone chamber, into which human remains were deposited on at least two separate occasions during the Early Neolithic. Osteoarchaeological analysis of these remains has shown them to be those of at least seventeen individuals, a mixture of men, women, and children. At least one of the bodies had been dismembered before burial, potentially reflecting a funerary tradition of excarnation and secondary burial. As with other barrows, Coldrum has been interpreted as a tomb to house the remains of the dead, perhaps as part of a belief system involving ancestor veneration, although archaeologists have suggested that it may also have had further religious, ritual, and cultural connotations and uses.

After the Early Neolithic, the long barrow fell into a state of ruined dilapidation, perhaps experiencing deliberate destruction in the Late Medieval period, either by Christian iconoclasts or treasure hunters. In local folklore, the site became associated with the burial of a prince and the countless stones motif. The ruin attracted the interest of antiquarians in the 19th century, while archaeological excavation took place in the early 20th. In 1926, ownership was transferred to heritage charity the National Trust. Open without charge to visitors all year around, the stones are the site of a rag tree, a May Day morris dance, and various modern Pagan rituals.

Name and location
The Coldrum Stones are named after a nearby farm, Coldrum Lodge, which has since been demolished. The monument lies in a "rather isolated site" north-east of the nearby village of Trottiscliffe, in the south-eastern English county of Kent. The site is also positioned about 500 metres from a prehistoric track known as the Pilgrims' Way. The tomb can be reached along a pathway known as Coldrum Lane, which is accessible only on foot. The nearest car park to Coldrum Lane can be found off Pinesfield Lane in Trottiscliffe. The village of Addington is located 1 mile away.

Context

The Early Neolithic was a revolutionary period of British history. Between 4500 and 3800 BCE, it saw a widespread change in lifestyle as the communities living in the British Isles adopted agriculture as their primary form of subsistence, abandoning the hunter-gatherer lifestyle that had characterised the preceding Mesolithic period. This came about through contact with continental European societies; it is unclear to what extent this can be attributed to an influx of migrants or to indigenous Mesolithic Britons adopting agricultural technologies from the continent. The region of modern Kent would have been key for the arrival of continental European settlers and visitors, because of its position on the estuary of the River Thames and its proximity to the continent.

Britain was then largely forested; widespread forest clearance did not occur in Kent until the Late Bronze Age (c.1000 to 700 BCE). Environmental data from the vicinity of the White Horse Stone, a putatively prehistoric monolith near the River Medway, supports the idea that the area was still largely forested in the Early Neolithic, covered by a woodland of oak, ash, hazel/alder and amygdaloideae. Throughout most of Britain, there is little evidence of cereal or permanent dwellings from this period, leading archaeologists to believe that the island's Early Neolithic economy was largely pastoral, relying on herding cattle, with people living a nomadic or semi-nomadic life.

Medway Megaliths

Across Western Europe, the Early Neolithic marked the first period in which humans built monumental structures in the landscape. These structures included chambered long barrows, rectangular or oval earthen tumuli which had a chamber built into one end. Some of these chambers were constructed out of timber, while others were built using large stones, now known as "megaliths". These long barrows often served as tombs, housing the physical remains of the dead within their chamber. Individuals were rarely buried alone in the Early Neolithic, instead being interred in collective burials with other members of their community. These chambered tombs were built all along the Western European seaboard during the Early Neolithic, from southeastern Spain up to southern Sweden, taking in most of the British Isles; the architectural tradition was introduced to Britain from continental Europe in the first half of the fourth millennium BCE. Although there are stone buildings—like Göbekli Tepe in modern Turkey—which predate them, the chambered long barrows constitute humanity's first widespread tradition of construction using stone.

Although now all in a ruinous state and not retaining their original appearance, at the time of construction the Medway Megaliths would have been some of the largest and most visually imposing Early Neolithic funerary monuments in Britain. Grouped along the River Medway as it cuts through the North Downs, they constitute the most southeasterly group of megalithic monuments in the British Isles, and the only megalithic group in eastern England. The archaeologists Brian Philp and Mike Dutto deemed the Medway Megaliths to be "some of the most interesting and well known" archaeological sites in Kent, while the archaeologist Paul Ashbee described them as "the most grandiose and impressive structures of their kind in southern England".

The Medway Megaliths can be divided into two separate clusters: one to the west of the River Medway and the other on Blue Bell Hill to the east, with the distance between the two clusters measuring at between 8 km and 10 km. The western group includes Coldrum Long Barrow, Addington Long Barrow, and the Chestnuts Long Barrow. The eastern group consists of Smythe's Megalith, Kit's Coty House, and Little Kit's Coty House, while various stones on the eastern side of the river, most notably the Coffin Stone and White Horse Stone, may also have been parts of such structures. It is not known if they were all built at the same time, or whether they were constructed in succession, while similarly it is not known if they each served the same function or whether there was a hierarchy in their usage.

The Medway long barrows all conformed to the same general design plan, and are all aligned on an east to west axis. Each had a stone chamber at the eastern end of the mound, and they each probably had a stone facade flanking the entrance. They had internal heights of up to 10 ft, making them taller than most other chambered long barrows in Britain. The chambers were constructed from sarsen, a dense, hard, and durable stone that occurs naturally throughout Kent, having formed out of sand from the Eocene epoch. Early Neolithic builders would have selected blocks from the local area, and then transported them to the site of the monument to be erected.

These common architectural features among the Medway Megaliths indicate a strong regional cohesion with no direct parallels elsewhere in the British Isles. Nevertheless, as with other regional groupings of Early Neolithic long barrows—such as the Cotswold-Severn group in south-western Britain—there are also various idiosyncrasies in the different monuments, such as Coldrum's rectilinear shape, the Chestnut Long Barrow's facade, and the long, thin mounds at Addington and Kit's Coty. These variations might have been caused by the tombs being altered and adapted over the course of their use; in this scenario, the monuments would be composite structures.

The people who built these monuments were probably influenced by pre-existing tomb-shrines that they were already aware of. Whether those people had grown up locally, or moved into the Medway area from elsewhere is not known. Based on a stylistic analysis of their architectural designs, the archaeologist Stuart Piggott thought that the plan behind the Medway Megaliths had originated in the area around the Low Countries, while fellow archaeologist Glyn Daniel instead believed that the same evidence showed an influence from Scandinavia. John H. Evans instead suggested an origin in Germany, and Ronald F. Jessup thought that their origins could be seen in the Cotswold-Severn megalithic group. Ashbee noted that their close clustering in the same area was reminiscent of the megalithic tomb-shrine traditions of continental Northern Europe, and emphasised that the Medway Megaliths were a regional manifestation of a tradition widespread across Early Neolithic Europe. He nevertheless stressed that a precise place of origin was "impossible to indicate" with the available evidence.

Design and construction

The Coldrum Long Barrow originally consisted of a sarsen stone chamber, covered by a low earthen mound, which was bounded by prostrate slabs. As such, Ashbee asserted that the monument could be divided into three particular features: the chamber, the barrow, and the sarsen stone surround. It had been built using about 50 stones. The barrow is sub-rectangular in plan, and about 20 metres in length. At its broader, eastern end, where the chamber is located, the monument measures 50 feet, while at the narrower, western end, it is 40 ft in breadth. As such, the barrow is a "truncated wedge-shape".

The megalithic builders responsible for the Coldrum Stones positioned it on the top of a small ridge adjacent to the North Downs, and constructed it facing eastward, towards the River Medway. It is located on the edge of a large lynchet scarp, although it is difficult to ascertain what views would have been possible from the monument at the time of construction, due to a lack of information on how densely forested the vicinity was. If the area was not highly wooded, then 360° views of the surrounding landscape would have been possible. The monument's axis points toward both the North Downs and the Medway Valley, which is similar to the other Medway Megaliths. The archaeologist Sian Killick suggested that the Coldrum Long Barrow might have been built within view of a nearby settlement, and that this "may have been a key factor in the experience of ceremonies and rituals taking place at the tombs and may also have defined a link between the tomb builders and the landscape."

Coldrum Long Barrow is comparatively isolated from the other Medway Megaliths; in this it is unique, given that the other surviving examples are clustered into two groups. It is possible that another chambered tomb was located nearby; a razed, elongated earthen mound with an east–west orientation is located in a hollow at the foot of the downs just under a quarter of a mile north of the Coldrum Stones. It may be that this represents the remnants of another such monument which has had its stones removed or buried. Several large sarsens south of the Coldrums might represent the remnants of a further such tomb, since destroyed.

The chamber

The inner chamber measures 13 ft in length, and 5 ft in width, although it was potentially much larger when originally constructed. The chamber's internal height would have been at least 6 ft. In its current state, the northern side of the chamber is made up of two slabs. One is 8 ft long, 7 ft deep, and 1 ft thick; the other is 5 ft long, nearly 6 ft deep, and 2 ft thick. Conversely, the chamber's southern side consists of a single slab, measuring 11 ft in length, 7 ft in depth, and 1 ft in thickness at its eastern end.

The western end of the chamber is closed off with a slab measuring about 4 ft wide, with a thickness of 1 ft and a depth of around 8 ft. A collapsed, broken slab lies at the chamber's opening, eastern end. It is also possible that a largely rectangular slab at the bottom of the slope had once been part of the chamber's eastern end. Excavation has revealed that flint masonry was used to pack around the chamber and support its sarsens; 20th-century renovation has seen this largely replaced with cement, allowing the stones to continue standing upright.

It is possible that there was a facade in front of the chamber, as is evident at other chambered tombs in Britain, such as West Kennet Long Barrow and Wayland's Smithy. It is also possible that there was a portal stone atop the chamber, as was apparent at Kit's Coty House and Lower Kit's Coty House. Many of the larger slabs of stone that have fallen down the slope on the eastern end of the monument may have been parts of this facade or portal.

The mound and kerb-stones

The earthen mound that once covered the tomb is now visible only as an undulation approximately 1 ft in height. In the 19th century, the mound was higher on the western end of the tomb, although during the 1920s this was removed by excavation to reveal the sarsens beneath. It is probable that in the Early Neolithic, the mound had a quarry ditch surrounding it, and it is inside this ditch that the kerb-stones now sit.

The kerb-stones around the tomb display some patterning; those on the northern side are mostly rectilinear, while those on the southern side are smaller and largely irregular in shape. It is probable that there was an ancillary dry-stone wall constructed using blocks of ironstone from the geological Folkestone beds, as is evident at Chestnuts Long Barrow. Given that such blocks of stone rarely occur naturally, it may have been quarried.

A concave line of abrasion and polishing can be found both on one of the central kerb-stones on the western end of the monument and on a kerb-stone on the south-east of the monument. These have been attributed to the sharpening of flint and other stone axe-blades on these sarsens. It is possible that these tools were sharpened for use in cutting and carving the timber levers and struts which would have been used in erecting the stones and constructing the tomb. Similar evidence for the sharpening of tools has been found at West Kennet Long Barrow, as well as later prehistoric monuments such as Stonehenge.

Meaning and purpose
Britain's Early Neolithic communities placed greater emphasis on the ritual burial of the dead than their Mesolithic forebears. Archaeologists have suggested that this is because Early Neolithic Britons adhered to an ancestor cult that venerated the spirits of the dead, believing that they could intercede with the forces of nature for the benefit of their living descendants. The archaeologist Robin Holgate stressed that rather than simply being tombs, the Medway Megaliths were "communal monuments fulfilling a social function for the communities who built and used them". Thus, it has been suggested that Early Neolithic people entered into the tombs—which doubled as temples or shrines—to perform rituals honouring the dead and requesting their assistance. For this reason, the historian Ronald Hutton termed these monuments "tomb-shrines" to reflect their dual purpose.

In Britain, these tombs were typically located on prominent hills and slopes overlooking the landscape, perhaps at the junction between different territories. The archaeologist Caroline Malone noted that the tombs would have served as one of various landscape markers that conveyed information on "territory, political allegiance, ownership, and ancestors". Many archaeologists have subscribed to the idea that these tomb-shrines were territorial markers between different tribes; others have argued that such markers would be of little use to a nomadic herding society. Instead it has been suggested that they represent markers along herding pathways. The archaeologist Richard Bradley suggested that the construction of these monuments reflects an attempt to mark control and ownership over the land, thus reflecting a change in mindset brought about by the transition from the hunter-gatherer Mesolithic to the pastoralist Early Neolithic. Others have suggested that these monuments were built on sites already deemed sacred by Mesolithic hunter-gatherers.

Human remains
Within the chamber were placed human remains, which have been discovered and removed at intervals during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Early twentieth century excavation found two separate deposits of bone, each buried atop a stone slab, one higher than the other. Also buried within the chamber were flint tools and small quantities of pottery.

Demographics
Ashbee suggested that—taking into account both its size and comparisons with other long barrows, such as Fussell's Lodge—the Coldrum tomb could have housed the remains of over a hundred individuals. Excavations conducted in the early 20th century have led to the methodical discovery and removal of what was believed to be the remains of twenty-two humans. These remains were examined by Sir Arthur Keith, the conservator of the museum at the Royal College of Surgeons. He published his results in 1913, in a paper largely concerned with discerning racial characteristics of the bodies. He ended his paper with the conclusion that "the people of pre-Christian Kent were physically not very different from the Kentish man of the Christian period".

In the early 21st century, these bones were re-analysed by a team led by the forensic taphonomist Michael Wysocki, the results of which were published in 2013. Wysocki's team conducted "osteological analysis, Bayesian modelling of radiocarbon dates, and carbon and nitrogen stable isotope analysis" in order to discover more about the "demography, burial practices, diet and subsistence, and chronology of the Coldrum population". Disputing earlier conclusions, their report stated that the minimum number of individuals was seventeen. These were identified as probably belonging to nine adults (probably five males and four females), two sub-adults (probably 16 to 20 years old), four older children, and two younger children (one around five years old, the other between 24 and 30 months old).

Keith believed that the crania he examined displayed similar features to one another, suggesting that this meant that they all belonged to "one family—or several families united by common descent." Similar observations have been made regarding the crania from other long barrows in Britain. The osteoarchaeologists Martin Smith and Megan Brickley cautioned that this did not necessarily mean that all of the individuals in any given barrow were members of a single family group, for such shared cranial traits would also be consistent with "a population that was still relatively small and scattered", in which most people were interrelated.

Wysocki's team noted that in all but one case, the fracture morphologies of the bones are consistent with dry-bone breakage. Three of the skulls displayed evidence that they had experienced violence; a probable adult female had an unhealed injury on the left frontal bone, an adult of indeterminate sex had an unhealed fracture on the left frontal, and a second adult female had a healed depressed fracture on the right frontal.

Isotope analysis of the remains revealed that while the bones had δ13C values that were typical of those found at many other southern British Neolithic sites, they had significantly higher values of δ15N, which grew over time. Although this data is difficult to interpret, the investigative team believed that it probably reflected that these individuals had had a terrestrial diet high in animal protein that over time was increasingly supplemented with freshwater river or estuarine foods. In the case of the older individuals whose remains were interred in the tomb, the tooth enamel was worn away and the dentine had become exposed on the chewing area of the crowns.

Radiocarbon dating of the human remains suggested that some were brought to the site between either 3980–3800 calibrated BCE (95% probability) or 3960–3880 cal BCE (68% probability). It further suggested that after an interval of either 60–350 years (95% probability) or 140–290 years (68% probability), additional depositions of human remains were made inside the tomb. This second phase probably began in 3730–3540 cal BCE (95% probability) or 3670–3560 cal BCE (68% probability). The radiocarbon dating of the human remains does not necessarily provide a date for the construction of Coldrum Long Barrow itself, because it is possible that the individuals died some time either before or after the monument's construction.

Post-mortem deposition

Cut-marks were identified on some of the bones (two femora, two innominates, and one cranium), with osteoarchaeological specialists suggesting that these had been created post-mortem as the bodies were dismembered and the bones removed from their attached ligaments. They further suggested that the absence of cut-marks on certain bones suggested that the body had already undergone partial decomposition or the removal of soft tissues prior to dismemberment. The precision of the cut-marks suggests that this dismemberment was done carefully; "they do not suggest frenzied hacking or mutilation." None of the criteria that osteoarchaeologists deem diagnostic of cannibalism were found on the bones.

This cut-marked human bone assemblage represented the largest yet identified from within a Neolithic long barrow in southern Britain, although similar evidence for dismemberment has been found from other Neolithic British sites, such as West Trump, Eyford, Aldestrop, and Haddenham. There are two possibilities for how this material developed. The first is that the bodies of the dead were excarnated or exposed to the elements, followed by a secondary burial within the tomb. The second is that they were placed in the tomb, where the flesh decomposed, before the bodies were then rearranged within the tomb itself. These practices may have been accompanied by other ritualistic or ceremonial practices, direct evidence for which does not survive.

The inclusion of occupational debris like ceramic sherds over the bones was not unique to the site but common in chambered tombs from southern England. On the basis of an example discovered at Kit's Coty House, Ashbee thought it apparent that the contents of the Coldrum's chamber would have been compartmentalised by medial slabs, which served the same purpose as the side chambers of West Kennet and Wayland's Smithy.

Damage and dilapidation
All the surviving megalithic tombs from the Early Neolithic period have suffered from neglect and the ravages of agriculture. Ashbee noted that the Coldrum Stones represent "Kent's least damaged megalithic long barrow", however it too has suffered considerable damage, having become dilapidated and fallen apart over the six millennia since its original construction. Most prominently, the eastern side has largely collapsed, with the stones that once helped to hold up the side of the barrow having fallen to the bottom of the slope. Conversely, it is possible that the sarsens at the bottom of the slope were not part of the original monument, but were stones found in nearby fields which were deposited there by farmers.

Excavation of Chestnuts Long Barrow revealed that it had been systematically destroyed in one event, and Ashbee suggested that the same may have happened to the Coldrum Stones. He believed that the kerb-stones around the barrow were toppled, laid prostrate in the surrounding ditch, and then buried during the late 13th or early 14th century, by Christians seeking to obliterate non-Christian monuments. Conversely, the archaeologist John Alexander—who excavated Chestnuts in 1957—suggested that the Medway tombs were destroyed by robbers looking for treasure within them. As evidence, he pointed to the Close Roll of 1237, which ordered the opening of tumuli on the Isle of Wight in search for treasure, a practice which may have spread to Kent around the same time. Alexander believed that the destruction in Kent may have been brought about by a special commissioner, highlighting that the "expertness and thoroughness of the robbery" at Chestnuts would have necessitated resources beyond that which a local community could probably muster. Ashbee further suggested that in subsequent centuries, locals raided the damaged Coldrum tomb for loamy chalk and stone, which was then re-used as building material.

Folklore, folk tradition, and modern Paganism
In a 1946 paper, the folklorist John H. Evans recorded the existence of a local folk belief that a battle was fought at the site of the Coldrum Stones, and that a "Black Prince" was buried within its chamber. He suggested that the tales of battles taking place at this site and at other Medway Megaliths had not developed independently among the local population but had "percolated down from the theories of antiquaries" who believed that the fifth-century Battle of Aylesford, which was recorded in the ninth-century Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, took place in the area.

Evans also recorded a local folk belief applied to all the Medway Megaliths and which had been widespread "up to the last generation"; this was that it was impossible for anyone to successfully count the number of stones in the monuments. This "countless stones" motif is not unique to the Medway region, and can be found at various other megalithic monuments in Britain. The earliest textual evidence for it is found in an early 16th-century document, where it applies to the stone circle of Stonehenge in Wiltshire, although in an early 17th-century document it was applied to The Hurlers, a set of three stone circles in Cornwall. Later records reveal that it had gained widespread distribution in England, as well as a single occurrence each in Wales and Ireland. The folklorist S. P. Menefee suggested that it could be attributed to an animistic understanding that these megaliths had lives of their own.

Several modern Pagan religions are practiced at the Medway Megaliths, with Pagan activity having taken place at the Coldrum Stones from at least the late 1980s. These Pagans commonly associated the sites both with a concept of ancestry and of their being a source of "earth energy". The scholar of religion Ethan Doyle White argued that these sites in particular were interpreted as having connections to the ancestors both because they were created by Neolithic peoples whom modern Pagans view as their "own spiritual ancestors" and because the sites were once chambered tombs, and thus held the remains of the dead, who themselves may have been perceived as ancestors. On this latter point, Pagan perspectives on these sites are shaped by older archaeological interpretations. The Pagans also cited the Megaliths as spots marking sources of "earth energy", often aligned on ley lines, an idea probably derived ultimately from the publications of Earth Mysteries proponents like John Michell.

Pagans sometimes visit the site alone or in pairs, there to meditate, pray, or perform rituals, and some have reported experiencing visions there. A modern Druidic group known as Roharn's Grove hold regular rites at the site, particularly during the eight festivals that make up the Pagan Wheel of the Year. The Coldrums have also witnessed Pagan rites of passage; circa 2000, a handfasting—or Wiccan marriage ceremony—was held there. One member of the Odinic Rite, a Heathen organisation, gave their "oath of profession" to the group at the Coldrum Stones because they felt a particularly positive energy exists there. Politically motivated rituals have also been held at the site. In the late 1990s, the South London branch of the Paganlink organisation held a ritual at the Coldrum Stones in an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the construction of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link through the Medway Valley landscape. Another politically motivated Pagan rite was carried out there in the early 2010s by The Warrior's Call, a group seeking to prevent fracking in the United Kingdom by invoking "the traditional spirits of Albion" against it.

In the early 21st century, a tradition developed in which the Hartley Morris Men, a morris dancing side, meet at the site at dawn every May Day in order to "sing up the sun". This consists of dances performed within the stones on top of the barrow, followed by a song performed at the base of the monument. The trees overhanging the Coldrum Stones on its northern side have become rag trees, with hundreds of ribbons in various colours having been tied to their branches. This is a folk custom that some Pagans engage in, although it is also carried out by many other individuals; one Pagan has been recorded as saying that she tied a ribbon to the tree with her young son, both to make a wish for an improved future and as an offering to the "spirit of place". As of early 2014, runic carvings written in the Elder Futhark alphabet were also evident on the trunks of these trees, spelling the names of the Norse gods Thor and Odin; these had probably been carved by Heathens, members of a religious movement that worships these deities.

Early antiquarian descriptions
The earliest antiquarian accounts of Coldrum Long Barrow were never published. There are claims that at the start of the 19th century, the Reverend Mark Noble, Rector of Barming, prepared a plan of the site for Gentleman's Magazine, although no copies have been produced to verify this. Between 1842 and 1844, the Reverend Beale Poste authored Druidical Remains at Coldrum, in which he described the monument. This remained unpublished at the time. Associating the site with the druids of Britain's Iron Age, Poste's suggestion was that the name "Coldrum" derived from the linguistically Celtic "Gael-Dun", and that Belgic chiefs were interred there. He further reported that in both 1804 and 1825, skulls had been found at the site. In 1844, an antiquarian named Thomas Wright published a note on the Coldrum Stones and other Medway Megaliths in The Archaeological Journal. Wright had been alerted to their existence by a local vicar, the Reverend Lambert B. Larking, and proceeded to visit them with him. Describing the Coldrums, Wright mentioned "a smaller circle of stones" to the others in the area, with "a subterranean cromlech in the middle". He further added that "it is a tradition of the peasantry that a continuous line of stones ran from Coldrum direct to the well-known monument called Kit's Cotty [sic] House", attributing this belief to various megaliths scattered throughout the landscape.

In 1857, the antiquarian J. M. Kemble excavated at the site with the help of the Reverend Larking, providing a report of their findings to the Central Committee of the British Archaeological Association. Describing the monument as a stone circle, they asserted that they discovered Anglo-Saxon pottery at the site, and noted that as well as being called the Coldrum Stones, the monument also had the name of the Adscombe Stones, which Kemble believed originated with the Old English word for funeral pile, ad. In August 1863, members of the Archaeological Institute—which was holding its week-long meeting in Rochester—visited the site, guided by the antiquary Charles Roach Smith. That year, the monument was described in a copy of Gentleman's Magazine by Yorkshire antiquary Charles Moore Jessop, who believed it to be a "Celtic" stone circle.

In 1869, the antiquarian A. L. Lewis first visited the site, and was informed by locals that several years previously a skull had been uncovered from inside or near to the chamber, but that they believed it to be that of a gypsy. A later account elaborated on this, stating that two individuals who excavated in the centre of the chamber without permission discovered a human skeleton, the skull of which was re-buried in the churchyard at Meopham. In an 1878 note published in The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, Lewis noted that while many tourists visited Kit's Coty House, "very few goes to or ever hears of a yet more curious collection of stones at Colderham or Coldrum Lodge". He believed that the monument consisted of both a "chamber" and an "oval" of stones, suggesting that they were "two distinct erections". In 1880, the archaeologist Flinders Petrie included the existence of the stones at "Coldreham" in his list of Kentish earthworks; although noting that a previous commentator had described the stones as being in the shape of an oval, he instead described them as forming "a rectilinear enclosure" around the chamber. He then included a small, basic plan of the monument.

In August 1889, two amateur archaeologists, George Payne and A. A. Arnold, came across the monument, which they noted was known among locals as the "Coldrum Stones" and "Druid Temple"; according to Payne, "the huge stones were so overgrown with brambles and brushwood that they could not be discerned". He returned the next year, noting that the brushwood had since been cut away to reveal the megaliths. In his 1893 book Collectanea Cantiana, Payne noted that although it had first been described in print in 1844, "since that time no one seems to have taken the trouble to properly record them or make a plan", an unusual claim given that a copy of Petrie's published plan existed in his library. For this reason, after gaining permission from the landowner, he convinced Major A. O. Green, Instructor in Survey at Brompton, to conduct a survey of the monument in August 1892. He also wrote to the archaeologist Augustus Pitt-Rivers, encouraging him to schedule the Coldrum Stones as a legally protected site under the Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1882. Payne described the Coldrum Stones as "the finest monument of its class in the county, and one worthy of every care and attention." Comparing it to other monuments of its type in Britain, he stated that it was undoubtedly "of sepulchral origin, belonging to a period anterior to the Roman domination of Britain." Payne also noted a folk tradition that there were stone avenues connecting Coldrum to the Addington Long Barrow, but added that he was unable to discover any physical evidence of this feature.

In 1904, George Clinch published a note on the Medway Megaliths in the Royal Anthropological Institute's journal, Man, in which he referred to the Coldrum Stones as "at once the most remarkable and the least known of the whole series." Suggesting that its design indicates that it was built during "a late date in the neolithic age", he compared the workmanship in producing the megaliths to that at Stonehenge, although noted that they differed in that the Coldrum Stones clearly represented "a sepulchral pile". Ultimately, he ended his note by urging for the site to be protected under the Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1900. In that same issue, Lewis included an added note in which he rejected the idea that the monument had once been covered by an earthen tumulus because he could see "no evidence that anything of that kind ever existed", and instead he interpreted the site as a stone circle, comparing it to the examples at Avebury, Arbor Low, and Stanton Drew, suggesting that the central chamber was a shrine.

Archaeological excavation
The Coldrum Stones have been excavated on multiple occasions. On 16 April 1910, the amateur archaeologist F. J. Bennett began excavation at the site, having previously uncovered Neolithic stone tools from Addington Long Barrow. He soon discovered human bones "under only a few inches of chalky soil" at Coldrum. He returned to the site for further excavation in August 1910, this time with his niece and her husband, both of whom were dentists with an interest in craniology; on that day they discovered pieces of a human skull, which they were able to largely reconstruct. A few days later he returned to excavate on the north-west corner of the chamber with the architect E. W. Filkins; that day, they found a second skull, further bones, a flint tool, and pieces of pottery. This pottery was later identified as being Anglo-Saxon in date.

Later that month, George Payne and F. W. Reader met with Bennett to discuss his finds. With the aid of two other interested amateur archaeologists, Mr Boyd and Miss Harker, both from Malling, excavation resumed in early September. In 2009, the archaeologists Martin Smith and Megan Brickley noted that Bennett's excavations had taken heed of Pitt-Rivers's advice that excavations should be recorded in full. They noted that Bennett had provided "clear plan and section drawings, photographs of the monument and careful attempts to consider site formation processes." Suggesting that the monument was constructed on agricultural land, in his published report Bennett cited the ideas of anthropologist James Frazer in The Golden Bough in proposing that the Coldrum Stones "may at one time have been dedicated, though not necessarily initially so, to the worship of the corn god and of agriculture." He believed that the human remains found at the site were the victims of human sacrifice killed in fertility rites; conversely, Evans later stated that "we have no means of knowing" whether human sacrifice had taken place at the site.

In September 1922, Filkins again excavated at Coldrum, this time with the aid of Gravesend resident Charles Gilbert. Their project was financed through grants provided by the British Association and the Society of Antiquaries, with Filkins noting that at the time of its commencement, "a miniature jungle" had grown up around the site which had to be cleared. Excavation continued sporadically until at least 1926. Human remains were discovered, and placed into the possession of Sir Arthur Keith of the Royal College of Surgeons. It is also recorded that at some point between 1939 and 1945 human remains that had been found at the site were reburied in the churchyard at Trottiscliffe. This excavation revealed all the existing sarsens surrounding the monument, several which had previously been buried. The stones of the chamber were shored up with concrete foundations where Filkins deemed it necessary. Although Filkins' excavation was comprehensive, it ignored stone holes, packing stones, and their relationship to the mound. In 1998, Ashbee noted that while from "a present-day perspective, it is possible to see shortcomings [in Filkins' excavation...] in terms of the general standards of the early part of this century, there is much to commend."

Management by the National Trust

In his 1924 publication dealing with Kent, the archaeologist O. G. S. Crawford, then working as the archaeological officer for the Ordnance Survey, listed the Coldrum Stones alongside the other Medway Megaliths. In 1926, the Coldrum Stones were given to the National Trust, a charity which dedicated it as a memorial to the Kentish prehistorian Benjamin Harrison. A plaque was erected to mark this, which erroneously termed the monument a stone circle; in 1953, the archaeologist Leslie Grinsell expressed the view that "it is hoped that this error may be rectified in the near future". Still owned by the Trust, the site is open to visitors all year round, free of charge. On their website, the Trust advises visitors to look for "stunning views from the top of the barrow". John H. Evans characterised the site as "the most impressive" of the Medway Megaliths, while Grinsell described it as "the finest and most complete" of the group.

Among the Pagans who use the Coldrum Stones for their ritual activities, there is general satisfaction with the Trust's management of the site, although some frustration at the poor access for disabled visitors. A patch of scorched earth exists on the grass in the centre of the monument, perhaps used by Pagans as well as non-Pagans, and the Trust warden responsible for the site has decided to leave it there rather than seeding it over, in order to encourage any who do light fires to do so in the same spot rather than nearer to the stones themselves. The site also faces a problem from litter left by visitors, with Pagans who regularly visit the site cleaning this up.

title: Coldrum Long Barrow


text:
Gerhard Thiele

Gerhard Paul Julius Thiele (born September 2, 1953) is a German physicist and a former ESA astronaut. He is the father of Die Astronautin candidate Insa Thiele-Eich.

Early life and education
Born in Heidenheim an der Brenz, he attended the Friedrich-Schiller-Gymnasium in Ludwigsburg. After school he volunteered for the German Navy, serving as Operations/Weapons Officer aboard fast patrol boats. In 1976 he began to study physics at the University of Munich and the University of Heidelberg. He received his doctorate in Heidelberg in 1985 in environmental science.

Career
From 1986 to 1987 he was a postdoc at Princeton University. In 1988 he was selected for the German astronaut team and began basic training at the DLR. In 1990 he was selected as a backup crew member for the German spacelab mission D-2 (STS-55). During the mission, which took part in April 1993, he worked in the Payload Operations Control Center of DLR at Oberpfaffenhofen as the alternate payload specialist.

In 1996, he was selected by the German Space Agency to receive Space Shuttle Mission Specialist training at NASA. In August 1998, he joined the European Space Agency (ESA), into which the German national team was integrated. In 2000, he completed his only spaceflight, the STS-99 Shuttle Radar Topography Mission.

During 2003 and 2004, he trained in Russia as the backup for André Kuipers on the Soyuz TMA-4 mission.

He retired from the European Astronaut Corps in October 2005.

As from 1 April 2010 he became Resident Fellow with the European Space Policy Institute in Vienna, Austria.

Gerhard Thiele has been appointed as the head of ESA's Human Spaceflight and Operations Strategic Planning and Outreach office (HSO-K) effective 1 July 2013.

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

title: Gerhard Thiele


text:
Michel Tognini

Michel Ange-Charles Tognini (born 30 September 1949 in Vincennes, France) is a French test pilot, engineer, brigadier general in the French Air Force,  and a former CNES and ESA astronaut who served from 1 January 2005 to 1 November 2011 as head of the European Astronaut Centre of the European Space Agency. A veteran of two space flights, Tognini has logged a total of 19 days in space. Tognini has 4000 flight hours on 80 types of aircraft (mainly fighter aircraft, including the MiG-25, Tupolev 154, Lightning MK-3 and MK-5, Gloster Meteor, and F-104). He is fluent in English and Russian.

Early life
Tognini was born on 30 September 1949 in Vincennes, France. Following graduation from Cachan High School in Paris, He attended EPA Grenoble military school and then went on to study at the Ecole de l'Air, the French Air Force Academy, graduating in 1973.

Military career
Following graduation from the academy, Tognini was posted to advanced fighter pilot training at a squadron based at Normandie-Niemen where he served for one year before obtaining his advanced fighter pilot training. From 1974–1981, he served in the French Air Force as an operational fighter pilot (Cambrai Air Base), at the 12th Escadre de Chasse, flying SMB2 and Mirage F1 aircraft. During this tour of duty he served as flight leader in 1976, and flight commander in 1979.

In 1982, he was admitted to the Empire Test Pilots' School in Boscombe Down, United Kingdom, and later that year was awarded his test pilot diploma. He was awarded his military studies diploma in 1983. Tognini was then posted to the Cazaux Flight Test Center, France, initially as a test pilot and subsequently as chief test pilot. During his time there, he helped test a great deal of French flight hardware. He did the weapon systems testing for the Mirage 2000-C, Mirage 2000-N, Jaguar ATLIS, and FLIR aircraft, and was also responsible for flight safety for pilots, experimenters and flight engineers.

Astronaut career
In 1985, France opened a recruitment program to expand its astronaut corps, and Tognini was one of seven candidates selected by CNES. In July 1986, he was one of four candidates to undergo medical examinations in Moscow. In August 1986, he was assigned as a back-up crew member for the Soyuz TM-7 mission. Although Tognini remained a French Air Force officer, he was placed on detachment to CNES for his space flight activities from September 1986 onwards. In November 1986 he reported to the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center, Star City, Russia, for alternate cosmonaut training, including EVA, for the Soviet-French ARAGATZ mission.

During 1989–1990 he supported the Hermes program in Toulouse, France.

Antares
In 1991 he returned to Star City, Russia, to start prime crew training for the third Soviet-French ANTARES mission. During his stay in Russia, Tognini also gained piloting experience of BURAN simulators (MiG-25, Tupolev 154).

Tognini made his first spaceflight on 27 July 1992 aboard Soyuz TM-15 (returning on Soyuz TM-14 on 10 August). Together with Anatoly Solovyev and Sergei Avdeyev he linked up with Mir (ANTARES mission) and joined the crew of Alexander Viktorenko and Alexander Kaleri already on board. They spent 14 days carrying out a program of joint Soviet-French experiments before returning to Earth. He returned to France following the mission. During 1993–94, he attended a training cycle of the French Institute for High Studies of National Defense (IHEDN).

Tognini attended ASCAN Training at the Johnson Space Center during 1995. He was initially assigned to the Operations Planning Branch of the Astronaut Office working technical issues on the International Space Station, and was subsequently assigned to the Robotics Branch. Tognini was then assigned as ISS CAPCOM in Mission Control.

STS-93
Following training at the JSC, Tognini was made available for assignment as a space shuttle mission specialist.

Tognini flew aboard Space Shuttle Columbia on STS-93 (22–27 July 1999) (STS: Space transportation System). During the five-day mission his primary task was to assist in the deployment of the Chandra X-Ray Observatory, and to conduct a spacewalk if needed.

He retired from active astronaut status in May 2003.

After having been Head of the European Astronaut Division, he has been the Head of EAC ( European Astronaut Centre) in Cologne, Germany. Now he is in France working for Human Space Exploration with University and performing speeches for general public. He is also the President of GAMA (Groupe Aéronautique du Ministere de l'Air) and President of Space Conseil.

Awards and honors

 * Chevalier de l'Ordre National du Mérite
 * Commander de l'Ordre de la Légion d'Honneur
 * Soviet Order of Friendship between the People
 * Russian Order of Friendship between the People

title: Michel Tognini


text:
Coaster

Coaster or Coasters may refer to:

Arts and entertainment

 * The Coasters, an American doo-wop band
 * Coaster (album), by punk rock band NOFX
 * Coaster, a 2000 album by The Bobs
 * Coaster (video game), a 1993 roller coaster simulator
 * Coaster Step, a dance step
 * Roller coaster, a form of fun ride, often shortened to coaster
 * Coaster, the dragon mascot of the Playland (New York) theme park

Transport

 * Coaster (rail service), a commuter rail service in San Diego County, California, U.S.
 * Toyota Coaster, a minibus model
 * Coaster brake, a type of bicycle brake
 * Coastal trading vessel, also known as a coaster, a ship used for trade along a coastline

Other uses

 * Drink coaster, on which to rest a cup
 * The Coaster, a weekly newspaper in Asbury Park, New Jersey, U.S.
 * Coaster trout (Salvelinus fontinalis), a fish native to Northern America's Lake Superior
 * Demonym for people from New Zealand's West Coast

title: Coaster


text:
Valeri Tokarev

Valeri Ivanovich Tokarev (Валерий Иванович Токарев; born 29 October 1952) is a Russian Air Force colonel and test cosmonaut at the Yuri A. Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center. Tokarev traveled to space twice, and has performed two career spacewalks, before retiring in June 2008.

In 26 March 2009, Tokarev joined the United Russia party. On 8 September 2013, he was elected head of Zvyozdny Gorodok for five years, receiving 67.9% of the vote.

Personal
Tokarev was born on 29 October 1952 in Kapustin Yar, Astrakhan Oblast, Soviet Union. He is married to Irina Tokareva (née Nikolayevna), with whom they have two children: a daughter, Olya, and a son, Ivan, and reside at Star City, Moscow Oblast. His mother, Lidiya, lives in the city of Rostov, Yaroslavl Region and his father, Ivan Pavlovich, died in an auto accident in 1972. Tokarev's interests include nature, automobiles, airplanes, and sports.

Education
In 1973, Tokarev graduated from Stavropol Higher Military Aviation School for Pilots and Navigators. In 1982, he completed with honours his studies at the Test Pilot Training Center (TPTC) in Akhtubinsk. From 1989 to 1993 he studied by correspondence at the Yu. A. Gagarin Military Air Academy in Monino, and from 1996 to 1997 Tokarev studied at the National Economy Academy under the Russian Federal Government, full-time/correspondence tuition and received a master's degree in state administration.

Experience
Tokarev is a 1st Class Air Force Pilot and a 1st Class Test Pilot. Tokarev has gained proficiency and flight experience with 44 types of airplanes and helicopters and has logged more than 3000 hours. He has participated in tests of fourth-generation carrier-based aircraft and vertical/short takeoff and landing jets (Su-27K, MiG-29K, Yak-38M, Su-25UTG), as well as bomber and missile navy fleet jets (Su-24M).

Cosmonaut career
In 1987, Valeri Tokarev was selected to join the cosmonaut corps to test and fly the Buran spacecraft. Since 1994, he has served as commander of a group of cosmonauts of aerospace systems. Since termination of the Buran program in 1997, Tokarev has been assigned as a test cosmonaut at the Yuri A. Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center.

STS-96
Tokarev flew on STS-96, on 27 May 1999. STS-96 was a mission flown by to the International Space Station (ISS). It was first shuttle flight to dock with the ISS. Tokarev served as a mission specialist. During the 10-day mission, the crew of Discovery delivered four tons of logistics and supplies to the ISS in preparation for the arrival of the first crew to live on the station. On flight day 2, Tokarev temporarily stowed some logistics transfer items stored on the shuttle's middeck, in the Spacehab module to provide more room for the spacesuit checkout activities. On 29 May Tokarev and NASA astronaut Ellen Ochoa temporarily stowed docking targets and lights and checked hatch seals in the narrow passageway inside the Pressurized Mating Adapter (PMA 2). The next day, he and Canadian astronaut Julie Payette traveled to the Zarya module and began maintenance activities on the storage batteries located under the floorboard. He and Payette replaced battery recharge controllers. To reduce noise levels in the Zarya module, Tokarev also installed acoustic insulation around some fans. He was also involved with the transfer of logistics items by documenting and stowing items aboard the ISS. On 1 June Tokarev took time out to answer questions regarding the progress of the mission from Russian reporters.

At the end of the mission on 6 June, Discovery landed at the Kennedy Space Center runway 15 at 2:02:43 a.m. EDT. The mission was accomplished in 153 Earth orbits, traveling 4 million miles in 235 hours and 13 minutes.

Expedition 12
Tokarev was the flight engineer for the Expedition 12 crew on the ISS, arriving at the station aboard the Soyuz TMA-7 spacecraft on 3 October 2005. The Soyuz TMA-7 carrying Tokarev, NASA astronaut William McArthur and U.S spaceflight participant Gregory Olsen lifted off from the Baikonour cosmodrome at 03:55 UTC on 1 October. After two days of autonomous flight Soyuz TMA-7 docked with the Pirs Docking Compartment Module on the ISS at 05:27 UTC.

Torakev performed the Russian part of science experiments that included more than 30 experiments on board. He was involved with biological, microbiological, genetic and physics experiments. One of the experiments named Plants allowed to obtain peas grown on the station and also grow greens. Medical experiments he performed aimed at finding the effects of extreme space conditions on humans and blood cells. His physics research included investigating the upper layers of the atmosphere. The objective of the research was to improve the understanding of how the space vehicles affect the upper levels of the atmosphere. During Expedition 12, one cargo flight, Progress M-55 docked with the ISS on 23 December 2005. The resupply ship transported scientific equipment and supplies to the station.

Torakev departed the ISS on 6 April 2006. Tokarev, McArthur and Brazilian spaceflight participant Marcos Pontes returned to Earth inside the Soyuz TMA-7 capsule on 8 April 2006 at 23:48 UTC. The spacecraft landed at the assigned site near the town of Arkalyk in Kazakhstan. Torakev spent 189 days, 19 hours and 53 minutes in space on board the Soyuz spacecraft and the ISS.

Spacewalks
Tokarev has performed two spacewalks during the course of his cosmonaut career totaling 11 hours and 5 minutes.

On 7 November 2005 Torakev performed his first career spacewalk. The beginning of the spacewalk was delayed about an hour to repressurize the Quest airlock's crew compartment. During the 5 hours, 22 minutes spacewalk, He and NASA astronaut William McArthur installed a new camera assembly and jettisoned the Floating Potential Probe. They also completed two get-ahead tasks. Tokarev wore an all-white suit for the spacewalk. Their first primary task was the camera assembly installation on the Port 1 Truss. The two spacewalkers spent about 2 hours, 10 minutes on the installation. In order to have daylight for the Floating Potential Probe (FPP) jettison, they moved on to the retrieval of a failed remote joint motor controller. Once it was completed, the pair with MacArthur in the lead then moved up the P6 truss to the FPP. The dysfunctional FPP had been designed to measure the space station's electrical potential and compare it to the surrounding plasma. Tokarev and McArthur released and stowed a grounding wire, then released the FPP housing from its stanchion. They checked its condition and McArthur carefully jettisoned the FPP. The FFP removal and jettisoning took an hour to complete. The two spacewalkers next removed and replaced a remote power controller module on the mobile transporter. After completing all the tasks the pair returned to the Quest airlock at 3:54 EST. On 3 February 2006 Torakev performed his second career spacewalk. He and McArthur donned in red-striped Orlan suits, ventured outside the ISS at 5:44 p.m. EST from the Pirs docking compartment airlock to begin the spacewalk. During the spacewalk, Tokarev and McArthur relocated a boom adapter for the Strela, a Russian hand-operated crane, from the Zarya module to Pressurized Mating Adapter 3. They also retrieved experiments and inspected and photographed parts of the station's exterior. The two spacewalkers also jettisoned an old Russian Orlan spacesuit equipped with a radio for broadcasts to students around the world. The suit, dubbed SuitSat-1 had reached the end of its operational life for spacewalks in August 2004. It was outfitted by the crew with three batteries, internal sensors and a radio transmitter for this experiment. The SuitSat-1 had recorded greetings in six languages to ham radio operators for about two orbits of the Earth before it stopped transmitting The suit was expected to enter the atmosphere and burn up in a few weeks after the spacewalk. The spacewalk ended when the two re-entered the Pirs airlock and closed its hatch at 11:27 p.m. EST. The spacewalk lasted 5 hours and 43 minutes.

Awards
Tokarev was awarded the "Hero of the Russian Federation" medal in 2000, Pilot Cosmonaut of the Russian Federation title in 1999, the Gold Star Medal of the Hero of the Russian Federation, Order for Service to Motherland in the USSR Air Forces Third Class in 1978, RF Medals and the NASA Space Flight Medal in 1999. He is an Honorary Citizen of Rostov, Yaroslavl Oblast.

title: Valeri Tokarev


text:
User:Oberiko/JSP.jsp

Hello! The time is now <%= new java.util.Date %>

title: User:Oberiko/JSP.jsp


text:
Vladimir Titov (cosmonaut)

Vladimir Georgiyevich Titov (Владимир Георгиевич Титов; born 1 January 1947 in Sretensk, Zabaykalsky Krai, Russia) is a retired Russian Air Force Colonel and former cosmonaut. He has participated in four spaceflight missions. The catastrophic explosion of a Soyuz rocket in 1983 led to him being one of only four people to use a launch escape system. He is married to Alexandra Kozlova, they have two children.

Education
Graduated from secondary school in 1965, from the Higher Air Force College in Chernihiv in Ukraine in 1970, and the Gagarin Air Force Academy in 1987.

Career
In 1966, Titov enrolled at the Higher Air Force College in Chernihiv in Ukraine, graduating in 1970. Until 1974, he served at the College as a pilot-instructor and was responsible for the graduation of twelve student pilots. He later served as a flight commander with the air regiment where the cosmonauts carry out flying practice. He has flown 10 different types of aircraft, has logged more than 1,400 hours flying time, and holds the qualifications of Military Pilot, 1st Class, and Test Pilot, 3rd Class.

Titov was selected as a cosmonaut in 1976, and in September 1981 was paired with Gennady Strekalov. The two men served as the back-up crew for Soyuz T-5 in 1982 and Soyuz T-9 in 1983. A veteran of five missions, Titov served as commander on Soyuz T-8 and Soyuz T-10-1 in 1983 and Soyuz TM-4 in 1987, and flew on the crew of STS-63 in 1995 and STS-86 in 1997. He has logged a total of 18 hours, 48 minutes of EVA, and has spent a total of 387 days, 52 minutes, 18 seconds in space (including the Soyuz T-10-1 launch abort).

Titov made his first space flight on April 20, 1983, as commander of Soyuz T-8. He and Strekalov had been specifically trained to repair the faulty Salyut 7 solar array. He was supposed to dock with Salyut 7, but once in orbit the Soyuz rendezvous radar antenna failed to deploy properly. Several attitude control maneuvers at high rates were made but failed to swing the boom out. (The postflight inquiry later discovered that the antenna had been torn off when the Soyuz payload shroud separated.) With FCC permission, the crew attempted a rendezvous using only an optical sight and ground radar inputs for guidance. During the final approach, which was made in darkness, Titov believed that the closing speed was too great. He therefore attempted a braking maneuver, but felt that the two spacecraft were still closing too fast. He aborted the rendezvous to avoid a crash, and no further attempts were made before the three men returned to Earth after a flight lasting just 2 days, 17 minutes, 48 seconds

Titov and Strekalov were then scheduled for launch on board what should have been Soyuz T-10 on September 27, 1983. However, a valve in the propellant line failed to close at T−90 seconds, causing a large fire to start at the base of the launch vehicle only one minute before launch. The fire quickly engulfed the rocket, and the automatic abort sequence failed as the wires involved burned through. Two launch controllers manually aborted the mission by sending radio commands from the launch blockhouse. This was accomplished 12 seconds after the fire began. The Soyuz descent module was pulled clear by the launch escape system, and after being subjected to 15–17 G's, the crew landed safely some 2.5 miles (4 km) from the launch vehicle, which apparently exploded seconds after the Soyuz separated. The two men were given a medical check-up, but had sustained no injuries during their brief flight which lasted 5 minutes, 30 seconds.

Titov was next assigned to command Soyuz TM-2. He and his flight engineer, Alexander Serebrov, were scheduled for a long-duration flight on board Mir 1. Six days prior to launch, due to doubts about Serebrov's health, they were replaced by the back-up crew. Titov continued training for a long-duration mission, and in April 1987 was paired with Musa Manarov. Later that year, he graduated from the Yuri Gagarin Air Force Academy while continuing his work at the Yuri Gagarin Cosmonaut Training Center.

His next assignment came as the commander of Soyuz TM-4, which launched on December 21, 1987. Together with Musa Manarov and Anatoli Levchenko, he linked up with the orbiting Mir 1 space station and her crew. After a short period of joint work, Romanenko, Alexandrov, and Levchenko returned to Earth handing over the space station to Titov and Manarov. The two men settled down to a long program of scientific experiments and observations, and played host to the visiting Soyuz TM-5 and TM-6 missions. At the end of the Soyuz TM-6 visit, one of its crew, Dr. Valeri Polyakov, remained on board with Titov and Manarov.

On February 26, 1988, the two cosmonauts carried out an EVA lasting 4 hours and 25 minutes, during which they removed one of the sections of the solar panel and installed a new one. They also installed some new scientific experiments and removed samples of material that had been left exposed to open space, and inspected the Progress 34 spacecraft.

On June 30, 1988, they attempted a repair on the Roentgen X-ray telescope. The telescope had not been designed for repair or replacement so the EVA was a difficult one. As they sliced through the 20-layer thick thermal blanket to expose the telescope's faulty X-ray detector unit, the two men had to stop and rest several times, as they had nowhere to anchor themselves, and had to take turns holding each other steady. Their bulky gloves made removing the small bolts very difficult, and it took 90 minutes instead of the 20 allocated. When a special wrench they were using suddenly snapped, the EVA had to be aborted, and the two men returned inside the Mir, having spent 5 hours, 10 minutes in open space.

On October 20, 1988, repairs were successfully completed, and the X-ray telescope recommenced operations. The cosmonauts also installed some anchor points for the EVA scheduled for the joint Soviet-French mission, installed a new shortwave aerial, and took samples of a film which had formed over one of the portholes, before returning inside the Mir after 4 hours and 12 minutes. They then settled down to their program of experiments and observations. In November 1988, they played host to the joint Soviet-French mission. After three weeks of joint work, Titov and Manarov returned to Earth together, along with the French cosmonaut Jean-Loup Chrétien aboard Soyuz TM-6. Titov and Manarov returned to Earth after a mission lasting 365 days, 22 hours, 39 minutes, setting a new record, and exceeding one year in space for the first time.

On October 28, 1992, NASA announced that an experienced cosmonaut would fly aboard the STS-60 Space Shuttle mission. Titov was one of two candidates named by the Russian Space Agency for mission specialist training at the Johnson Space Center. In April 1993, he was assigned as back-up mission specialist for Sergei Krikalev, who flew on STS-60, the first joint U.S./Russian Space Shuttle Mission (February 3 to 11, 1994). In September 1993, Titov was selected to fly on STS-63 with Krikalev training as his back-up.

From February 2 to 11, 1995, Titov was a mission specialist aboard Space Shuttle Discovery, on STS-63, the first flight of the new joint Russian-American Space Program. Mission highlights included the rendezvous with the Russian Space Station Mir, operation of Spacehab, and the deployment and retrieval of Spartan 204. In completing this mission, he logged an additional 8 days, 6 hours, 29 minutes in space.

Titov served on the crew of STS-86 Atlantis (September 25 to October 6, 1997) NASA's seventh mission to rendezvous and dock with the Russian Space Station Mir. Highlights included the exchange of U.S. crew members Mike Foale and David Wolf, the transfer to Mir of 10,400 pounds of science and logistics, and the return of experiment hardware and results to Earth. Vladimir Titov and Scott Parazynski performed a 5-hour, 1-minute spacewalk during which they retrieved four experiments first deployed on Mir during the STS-86 docking mission, tethered the Solar Array Cap for use in a future Mir spacewalk to seal any hole found in the hull of the damaged Spektr module, and evaluated common EVA tools which may be used by astronauts wearing either Russian or American-made spacesuits. Mission accomplished in 169 orbits in 10 days, 19 hours, 21 minutes.

Titov retired from the Air Force and the Russian Space Agency in 1998. In 1998 he became Director of Space and Communications for the Boeing Company in Moscow, Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States. He is currently serving as General Director, Russian Operations of Excalibur Almaz.

Awards and honors
Foreign awards:
 * Hero of the Soviet Union;
 * Pilot-Cosmonaut of the USSR;
 * Two Orders of Lenin (1983, 1988);
 * Order of the Red Star;
 * Medal "For Merit in Space Exploration" (Russian Federation).
 * Commander of the Legion of Honour (France);
 * Order of Georgi Dimitrov (People's Republic of Bulgaria);
 * Order of Stara Planina (People's Republic of Bulgaria);
 * Order "The Sun of Liberty" (Afghanistan);
 * Two NASA Space Flight Medals (USA).

In 1990, Titov and Musa Manarov were awarded the U.S. Harmon Prize — the first Soviet citizens to win the award — in recognition of their world endurance record.

title: Vladimir Titov (cosmonaut)


text:
Racial equality

Racial equality is when people of all races and ethnicities are treated in an egalitarian/equal manner. Racial equality occurs when institutions give individuals legal, moral, and political rights. In present-day Western society, equality among races continues to become normative. Prior to the early 1960s, attaining equality was difficult for African, Asian, and Indigenous people. However, in more recent years, legislation is being passed ensuring that all individuals receive equal opportunities in treatment, education, employment, and other areas of life. Racial equality can refer to equal opportunities or formal equality based on race or refer to equal representation or equality of outcomes for races, also called substantive equality.

American Civil War
In 1860, a third of all people in the Southern United States were slaves. Among other things, the American Civil War fought to end this, and in September 1862, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation which abolished the practice of slavery in the United States and granted protection and legal rights to recently freed Blacks.

Post–Civil War equality
Three million slaves were freed as a result of the American Civil War. Despite their having been freed, blacks still faced much discrimination and were forced into dependence on white landowners. Segregation was common in everyday life, such as in segregation of schools, healthcare and housing, especially so in the South. In addition, Black Americans were a common target of racial violence, and they would not receive equal treatment by the justice system. This effectively made them second-class citizens.

Health
Where one lived often determined their access to basic healthcare. The poor inner-city areas lacked the necessary health care that was available in other areas. Inner cities' isolation from other parts of society was a large contributor to the poor health of the residents. Also, the overcrowded living conditions added to the poor health of the residents through the spread of infectious diseases.

Martin Luther King Jr.
Martin Luther King Jr. is known as a civil rights leader in the United States concerning racial equality. Martin Luther King Jr. became one of the greatest leaders due to his stance concerning various mistreated black men and women in the South. Moreover, he played many roles in society and won an award for the movement he conducted. Martin Luther King Jr. not only took part in the Montgomery bus boycott, became a key speaker at the March on Washington, and was one of the youngest individuals to win the Nobel Peace Prize, but he also peacefully handled his opinion. King kept his anger toward the idea of segregation of race to himself; however, he did show his passion for equality in his speeches and peaceful protest.

King displayed his very first civil rights movement by voluntarily taking a stance in the Montgomery bus boycott. The bus boycott had started by Rosa Parks refusing to give up her seat for a white male after a long and tiring day at work. Thus, after Park's arrest, King gathered the blacks in hopes of boycotting the bus, by cutting the use of transportation. This boycott continued for 382 days. Although King had to overcome many attacks against him such as arrest and violent harassment, the result was their first victory: black men and women were allowed to ride the buses in Montgomery equally as the whites.

Rosa Parks
Rosa Parks was born on February 4, 1913, in Montgomery, Alabama. She attended the all-black Alabama State College, and soon worked at the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) as a secretary. Rosa Parks had become an activist for an event that triggered other events to occur. On December 1, 1955 Parks had taken the bus home from work when all of a sudden she was forced to give up her seat for a white male. Rosa Parks had been frustrated with the way black individuals were treated; thus, she refused and was arrested and fined $14.

Parks' refusal and arrest had caused a dilemma for white individuals, especially for the ones that owned the bus business. A boycott of the Montgomery bus system was started, with the goal of desegregating public transportation. Moreover, Martin Luther King Jr. had gotten involved to not only motivate the mistreated black population but to share his passion for equality. This boycott lasted 382 days and ended on December 21, 1956. At the end of the bus boycott, both Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King Jr. had become national heroes. Furthermore, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional to segregate seats in Montgomery buses.

Religious institutions
The Church of God held that "interracial worship was a sign of the true Church", with both whites and blacks ministering regularly in Church of God congregations, which invited people of all races to worship there. Those who were entirely sanctified testified that they were "saved, sanctified, and prejudice removed." Though outsiders would sometimes attack Church of God services and camp meetings for their stand for racial equality, Church of God members were "undeterred even by violence" and "maintained their strong interracial position as the core of their message of the unity of all believers".

Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC)
Martin Luther King Jr. was the founder of SCLC, having summoned various numbers of black leaders in 1957. He became the President of this activist group and decided to improve communities by managing peaceful protests and boycotts regarding the social ethics of discrimination and segregation between races.

National Association of the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP)
First created on February 12, 1909, in Springfield, Illinois. This group was against the violence that was directed toward blacks. Their objective was to eliminate racial inequality, and guarantee political, educational, social, and economic equality for citizens. Their office was located in New York. Moorfield Storey was named president, while, Du Bois, was the only black Director of Publications.

Congress of Racial Equality
There was a civil rights group called the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE) that came together to fight corruption and segregation in a nonviolent manner. CORE grew profoundly after the 1950s, beginning with James Farmer who later became the leader of the group and a civil rights activist in 1941. He went back to his "Native South" and visited a local movie theater, where he came upon the "crow's nest", an area that was reserved for blacks. He opposed the Jim Crow laws. He realized that he and his friends supported those laws by what they did in their daily actions. He soon wrote a memo and summoned the formation of a group of individuals that were powerful in mind and body to be able to take personal nonviolent actions to end discrimination.

CORE was established in 1942 in Chicago. It was a branch of a "Peace-Lover" organization, which was called the Fellowship of Reconciliation (FOR). CORE used nonviolent actions that involved sit-ins, which were done on lunch counters in Chicago. By 1947, CORE contributed with an interracial bus ride across the upper part of the South. They were testing state buses that the U.S. Supreme Court ordered to be desegregated, which was the Morgan v. Virginia decision in 1946. This led to some success for the facilities that were testing out the orders they were given, but it didn't grab much attention, especially at the national level, which was their main goal. By 1960, there was a new wave of nonviolent direct action protests initiated through the student sit-in movement. CORE's national director James Farmer repeated the Journey of Reconciliation. Another Supreme Court ruling, Boynton v. Virginia (1960), ordered a stop to segregation in the interstate bus terminals. That came to be the Freedom Rides. The Freedom Riders traveled deep into the south and were attacked by segregationists along with Alabama.

CORE began in the North and was mainly concentrated in public areas. About two decades ago, the North had segregated spots where blacks were not allowed. Those places, for example, were restaurants, bowling alleys, skating rinks, and barber shops. More successful efforts were the work settings where there were some experiments with interracial workers and in housing co-operatives. CORE's main focus was to increase public recognition in the north. In the late 1940s and early 1950s, CORE moved to the border states of Missouri, Maryland, and Oklahoma.

Accomplishments of CORE and NAACP
In the first few weeks of April, the two groups CORE and NAACP combined forces to make a change in racial equality. Both groups of protesters constructed a plan to shut down construction of the city's Municipal Services Building, by marching in front of Mayor James Tate's North Philadelphia row house. Furthermore, many protesters had engaged in various fights involving police and white unionists. Moreover, the two groups had caused many debates to open up regarding racial politics, discrimination, and employment.

Technique
CORE's technique was always nonviolence as the method of fighting racial injustice. CORE was the first organization to use nonviolent actions to stop many issues that affected the black community. The student sit-ins started in February 1960. Within the year, 130 eating locations opened up in the southern communities. They were interested in how CORE approached the issue of segregation.

Expansion
CORE grew in the early 1940s, but continued to be composed of small groups. They persisted in being small because of the students who were part of the organization. The students would graduate and move away. Also, others were fighting for a specific cause and once the issue has been dealt with, they disappeared. CORE was only a voluntary organization; there was no paid staff.

Main goals
In the South:
 * Desegregation
 * Voter registration

In the North:
 * Better jobs
 * Better housing
 * School integration

Many outsiders started to notice the efforts of the group. They supported them and started the Freedom Rides. CORE was more involved in the black power movement around the mid-1960s. Then things shifted to integration and nonviolent actions toward the organization of communities, the separation of the people, and black power. Also, as whites and blacks started to work together to fight over the dilemmas of segregation, white liberals weren't fond of the idea that they were working together. CORE's issues changed over time, so they worked on different actions that would come up.

Sit-ins
Sit-ins, the oldest technique, have been used by CORE the most. CORE divided people into three different groups: one with all black individuals, one with all whites, and one that was interracial. These three different groups would go to a segregated eating area before the busiest hour and wait to be attended quietly. This was used to open up restaurants, and was later used for other locations.

Standing in line
This was used at cafeterias, ticket booths, and other places where one stands in a line to be served. If someone is refused, the CORE members who might be in line before him/her will also refuse to step out of line and interrupt service. CORE did this at movie theaters in Kentucky, and a swimming pool at Palisades Amusement Park in New Jersey. This technique was also important for stopping segregation.

Attitudes
Since 1942, two particular issues have evolved in racial equality. One is the handling of blacks to ensure equality, which was favored by the White American community, and the other is the differences between Southerners and non-Southerners. These two issues were observed by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC). They made questions that plotted five main topics that targeted blacks at the time. The five points that affected racial equality and tracked during the years 1965–1980 were year, region, cohort, and education. Many educational systems in the south and non-southern areas were in favor of segregated educational institutions among blacks. They also didn't want blacks near their neighborhood or interracial marriages to happen.

Demographic changes in the United States have led to more distrust and fear of non-white racial minorities. Discussing the decreasing White American population and the proportional increase in negative racial attitudes, Maureen Craig, Julian Rucker, and Jennifer Richeson explain, "For example, Whites who reside in areas with larger racial minority populations tend to express greater perceived threat, more racial bias, and less support for racial integration than Whites living in areas with smaller minority populations." In other words, increasing racial diversity can lead to increased racial bias and discrimination. Evidence suggests, however, that positive contact between two racial groups can promote racial equality. Interacting with minority groups can reduce feelings of threat and increase trust between racial groups. In general, racial diversity within a neighborhood creates a more inclusive feeling and promotes trust. However, racial diversity on large, city-wide scales has been shown to produce greater levels of prejudice.

One potential source of negative racial attitudes towards blacks specifically is biological racism, or the idea that perceived differences between races can be attributed to biological differences. A 2019 analysis of responses to a 2016 voter study found that 57% of respondents believe that black people are inherently lazier than white people. The same study found that throughout Obama's presidency, there was a continually increasing negative relationship between racial prejudice and support for racial equality policies such as equal opportunity employment, school desegregation, etc. Therefore, although the true percentage of American's who believe in a biological basis for race is unknown and difficult to determine accurately, prejudice predicated on biological differences between races continues to shape American politics. White supremacist groups notably cite racial differences between whites and nonwhites to justify white superiority. In fact, some researchers argue that the increased media attention granted to white supremacy groups could positively correlate with biologically racist beliefs.

State of racial equality
Although the adoption of the UDHR has led to increased racial equality, racism and racial inequality persist in nearly all countries. Discrimination on the basis of race leads racial minorities to receive less job opportunities than their white peers, decreased access to educational and healthcare resources, and higher rates of incarceration. While writing on the failures of Brown v. Board of Education, Jody Heymann, Aleta Sprague, and Amy Raub noted that "From 1988 to 2014, the percentage of 'hyper-segregated schools,' in which 90% or more of the students are minorities, grew from 5.7% to 18.4%." This shows that despite the efforts of the Supreme Court, segregation continues to exist in some American schools. The gap in resources and opportunities available between white communities and racial minorities is large; on average, white communities receive three times more than the least-privileged minority communities. Indirect forms of discrimination continue to exist many ways. One noteworthy form of indirect racial discrimination is pretrial risk assessment tests. Risk assessment tests are algorithmic attempts to measure the likelihood of recidivism in previously incarcerated persons. Despite being created to remove the threat of racial bias from risk assessment tests, these algorithms have been found to overestimate the recidivism rate in blacks and underestimate the recidivism rate in White Americans. These tests, similar to Jim Crow era literacy tests, are not outwardly discriminatory towards blacks, they appear to be race-neutral, however the danger lies in the fact that the designers of said risk assessment tools conflate risk with a distrust of authority, and the oppressive social and political conditions that can lead one to committing crimes. This methodology is inherently flawed because oppressed racial minorities are more likely to be critical of the institutions that oppress them.

Many countries, however, have found success in promoting racial equality through their constitution and legislature. Countries such as Brazil, Colombia, and South Africa ensured racial equality in their constitutions by writing them in cooperation with marginalized minority communities. Other countries' (including Canada, Mexico, the UK, India, etc.) constitutions include provisions that allow affirmative action to be taken in the name of promoting racial equality in the future, and mending the racial inequality of the past. For example, in response to the inequality of the caste system, India's constitution was written specifically to provide proportional legislative representation to members of previously oppressed castes. The original clause in the Indian constitution only provided this representation for a period of 10 years but it has been continually renewed every 10 years since its inception.

Thirteenth Amendment
The Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution was passed on January 31, 1865, with the intention to abolished slavery and involuntary servitude in all states, except as punishment for a crime. As a result, many people, particularly in the South, abused the poorly written amendment. To further explain, an article from the Gettysburg College, states, "Many in Congress believed that slavery was detrimental to white laborers in the South because slaves were seen as a long term investment, and white laborers were unable to make advancements because slavery was less expensive in the long run." In elaboration, the thirteenth amendment was only set to abolish slavery legally, however, with further knowledge of what happened, it was seen that many people took advantage of the second statement of this amendment and set into place convict lease programs, which allowed for a subtle form of slavery, and was not legally abolished until the late 1900s.

Fourteenth Amendment
The Fourteenth Amendment was passed in 1868 and allowed citizenship for anyone born on U.S. soil regardless of race. Just like the other reconstruction amendments, the fourteenth amendment was not popular amongst the southern states and faced a lot of backlash, since it gave previously enslaved people individual rights.

Fifteenth Amendment
The Fifteenth Amendment (1870) made it illegal for any state to deny people the right to vote regardless of their race, ethnicity, or any previous servitude. This amendment was surprisingly supported by both the North and the South of the United States. This was mainly because the Northern states had a great amount of black Male suffrage movements, and the Southern States figured the black population can add more votes for Southern view points.

Supreme Court cases
Plessy v. Ferguson (1896) was a landmark decision issued by the supreme court that ruled the act of segregation to be constitutional as long as it was separate but equal. To further explain, "The decision also recognized and justified the power of individual states to enforce their state segregation laws. As a result, the decision has had implications for such issues as the definition of blackness, the acknowledgment of gradients of whiteness, the significance of citizenship, and the interpretation of the state’s regulatory role in the separation of races in public space."

Brown v. Board of Education (1952) was a Supreme Court decision following Plessy V. Ferguson that decided that separation cannot be equal in schools, therefore, segregation was unconstitutional. Many people believe that this supreme court case was responsible for desegregation in schools, however, the court decision had no direct impact, and schools remained largely segregated. Schools were allowed to take as much time needed to desegregate, delaying any reconstruction towards racial equality amongst blacks and White Americans.

Loving v. Virginia (1967) was a Supreme Court decision that allowed for interracial marriage in the United States. It made any laws banning this right unconstitutional.

Civil Rights Act of 1964
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was set in place as consequence to the civil rights movement and protests, primarily led by people such as Martin Luther King Jr., and many others. "In 1964 the federal government issued the Civil Rights Act, which barred racial discrimination based on race, sex, religion, or national identity. This act snatched crucial power from many southern states because in effect it reversed the 1896 Plessy v. Ferguson ruling by declaring racial segregation unacceptable and unconstitutional."

Jim Crow laws
Jim Crow laws, which were placed in the late 19th century, were enforced in the South in order to separate blacks and White Americans. These laws primarily focused on the separation in the workplace and mindset. During these times, it was difficult for blacks to find jobs and sustain a family, which resulted in poverty. It was also easier for blacks to be punished for any harmless activity, and lead to racial injustice, despite the amendments and supreme court cases. The Jim Crow laws were abolished in the 1960s.

title: Racial equality