text:
Jacob van Ruisdael

Jacob Isaackszoon van Ruisdael (c. 1629 – 10 March 1682) was a Dutch painter, draughtsman, and etcher. He is generally considered the pre-eminent landscape painter of the Dutch Golden Age, a period of great wealth and cultural achievement when Dutch painting became highly popular.

Prolific and versatile, Ruisdael depicted a wide variety of landscape subjects. From 1646 he painted Dutch countryside scenes of remarkable quality for a young man. After a trip to Germany in 1650, his landscapes took on a more heroic character. In his late work, conducted when he lived and worked in Amsterdam, he added city panoramas and seascapes to his regular repertoire. In these, the sky often took up two-thirds of the canvas. In total he produced more than 150 Scandinavian views featuring waterfalls.

Ruisdael's only registered pupil was Meindert Hobbema, one of several artists who painted figures in his landscapes. Hobbema's work has at times been confused with Ruisdael's. Ruisdael always spelt his name thus: Ruisdael, not Ruysdael.

Ruisdael's work was in demand in the Dutch Republic during his lifetime. Today it is spread across private and institutional collections around the world; the National Gallery in London, the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, and the Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg hold the largest collections. Ruisdael shaped landscape painting traditions worldwide, from the English Romantics to the Barbizon school in France, and the Hudson River School in the US, and influenced generations of Dutch landscape artists.

Life
Jacob Isaackszoon van Ruisdael was born in Haarlem in 1628 or 1629 into a family of painters, all landscapists. The number of painters in the family, and the multiple spellings of the Van Ruisdael name, have hampered attempts to document his life and attribute his works. The name Ruisdael is connected to a castle, now lost, in the village of Blaricum. The village was the home of Jacob's grandfather, the furniture maker Jacob de Goyer. When De Goyer moved away to Naarden, three of his sons changed their name to Van Ruysdael or Van Ruisdael, probably to indicate their origin. Two of De Goyer's sons became painters: Jacob's father Isaack van Ruisdael and his well-known uncle Salomon van Ruysdael. Jacob himself always spelled his name with an "i", while his cousin, Salomon's son Jacob Salomonszoon van Ruysdael, also a landscape artist, spelled his name with a "y". Jacob's earliest biographer, Arnold Houbraken, called him Jakob Ruisdaal.

It is not known whether Ruisdael's mother was Isaack van Ruisdael's first wife, whose name is unknown, or his second wife, Maycken Cornelisdochter. Isaack and Maycken married on 12 November 1628.

Ruisdael's teacher is also unknown. It is often assumed Ruisdael studied with his father and uncle, but there is no evidence for this. He appears to have been strongly influenced by other contemporary local Haarlem landscapists, most notably Cornelis Vroom and Allart van Everdingen.

The earliest date that appears on a Ruisdael painting and etching is 1646. Two years after this date he was admitted to membership of the Haarlem Guild of St. Luke. By this time landscape paintings were as popular as history paintings in Dutch households, though at the time of Ruisdael's birth, history paintings appeared far more frequently. This growth in popularity of landscapes continued throughout Ruisdael's career.

Around 1657, Ruisdael moved to Amsterdam, by then a prosperous city which was likely to have offered a bigger market for his work. His fellow Haarlem painter Allaert van Everdingen had already moved to Amsterdam and found a market there. On 17 June 1657 he was baptized in Ankeveen, near Naarden. Ruisdael lived and worked in Amsterdam for the rest of his life. In 1668, his name appears as a witness to the marriage of Meindert Hobbema, his only registered pupil, a painter whose works have, by some, been confused with Ruisdael's own.

For a landscape artist, it seems Ruisdael travelled relatively little: to Blaricum, Egmond aan Zee, and Rhenen in the 1640s, with Nicolaes Berchem to Bentheim and Steinfurt just across the border in Germany in 1650, and possibly with Hobbema across the German border again in 1661, via the Veluwe, Deventer and Ootmarsum. Despite Ruisdael's numerous Norwegian landscapes, there is no record of him having travelled to Scandinavia.

There is some speculation that Ruisdael was also a doctor. In 1718, his biographer Houbraken reports that he studied medicine and performed surgery in Amsterdam. Archival records of the 17th century show the name "Jacobus Ruijsdael" on a list of Amsterdam doctors, albeit crossed out, with the added remark that he earned his medical degree on 15 October 1676 in Caen, northern France. Various art historians have speculated that this was, in all probability, a case of mistaken identity. Pieter Scheltema suggests it was Ruisdael's cousin who appeared on the record. The Ruisdael expert Seymour Slive argues that the spelling "uij" is not consistent with Ruisdael's own spelling of his name, that his unusually high production suggests there was little time to study medicine, and that there is no indication in any of his art that he visited northern France. The evidence is inconclusive.

Ruisdael was not Jewish. Slive reports that, because of Ruisdael's depiction of a Jewish cemetery and various biblical names in the Ruisdael family, he often heard speculation that Ruisdael must surely be Jewish. The evidence shows otherwise. Ruisdael was buried in the Saint Bavo's Church, Haarlem, a Protestant church at that time. His uncle Salomon van Ruysdael belonged to the Young Flemish subgroup of the Mennonite congregation, one of several types of Anabaptists in Haarlem, and it is probable that Ruisdael's father was also a member there. His cousin Jacob was a registered Mennonite in Amsterdam.

Ruisdael did not marry. According to Houbraken, whose short biography does contain a few errors, this was "to reserve time to serve his old father". No likeness of Ruisdael is known to exist

The art historian Hendrik Frederik Wijnman disproved the myth that Ruisdael died a poor man, supposedly in the old men's almshouse in Haarlem. Wijnman showed that the person who died there was in fact Ruisdael's cousin, Jacob Salomonszoon. Although there is no record of Ruisdael owning land or shares, he appears to have lived comfortably, even after the economic downturn of the disaster year 1672. His paintings were valued fairly highly. In a large sample of inventories between 1650 and 1679 the average price for a Ruisdael was 40 guilders, compared to an average of 19 guilders for all attributed paintings. In a ranking of contemporary Dutch painters based on price-weighted frequency in these inventories, Ruisdael ranks seventh; Rembrandt ranks first.

Ruisdael died in Amsterdam on 10 March 1682. He was buried 14 March 1682 in Saint Bavo's Church, Haarlem.

Early years
Ruisdael's work from c. 1646 to the early 1650s, when he was living in Haarlem, is characterised by simple motifs and careful and laborious study of nature: dunes, woods, and atmospheric effects. By applying heavier paint than his predecessors, Ruisdael gave his foliage a rich quality, conveying a sense of sap flowing through branches and leaves. His accurate rendering of trees was unprecedented at the time: the genera of his trees are the first to be unequivocally recognisable by modern-day botanists. His early sketches introduce motifs that would return in all his work: a sense of spaciousness and luminosity, and an airy atmosphere achieved through pointillist-like touches of chalk. Most of his thirty black chalk sketches that survive date from this period.

An exemplar of Ruisdael's early style is Dune Landscape, one of the earliest works, dated 1646. It breaks with the classic Dutch tradition of depicting broad views of dunes that include houses and trees flanked by distant vistas. Instead, Ruisdael places tree-covered dunes prominently at centre stage, with a cloudscape concentrating strong light on a sandy path. The resulting heroic effect is enhanced by the large size of the canvas, "so unexpected in the work of an inexperienced painter" according to Irina Sokolova, curator at the Hermitage Museum. The art historian Hofstede de Groot said of Dune Landscape: "It is hardly credible that it should be the work of a boy of seventeen".

Ruisdael's first panoramic landscape, View of Naarden with the Church at Muiderberg in the Distance, dates from 1647. The theme of an overwhelming sky and a distant town, in this case the birthplace of his father, is one he returned to in his later years.

For unknown reasons, Ruisdael almost entirely stopped dating his work from 1653. Only five works from the 1660s have a, partially obscured, year next to his signature; none from the 1670s and 1680s have a date. Dating subsequent work has therefore been largely based on detective work and speculation.

All thirteen known Ruisdael etchings come from his early period, with the first one dated 1646. It is unknown who taught him the art of etching. No etchings exist signed by his father, his uncle, or his fellow Haarlem landscapist Cornelis Vroom, who influenced his other work. His etchings show little influence from Rembrandt, either in style or technique. Few original impressions exist; five etchings survive in only a single impression. The rarity of prints suggests that Ruisdael considered them trial essays, which did not warrant large editions. The etching expert Georges Duplessis singled out Grainfield at the Edge of a Wood and The Travellers as unrivalled illustrations of Ruisdael's genius.

Middle period
Following Ruisdael's trip to Germany, his landscapes took on a more heroic character, with forms becoming larger and more prominent. A view of Bentheim Castle, dated 1653, is just one of a dozen of Ruisdael's depictions of a particular castle in Germany, almost all of which pronounce its position on a hilltop. Significantly, Ruisdael made numerous changes to the castle's setting (it is actually on an unimposing low hill) culminating in a 1653 version which shows it on a wooded mountain. These variations are rightly considered by art historians to be evidence of Ruisdael's compositional skills.

On his trip to Germany, Ruisdael encountered water mills which he turned into a principal subject for painting, the first artist to ever do so. Two Water Mills with an Open Sluice, dated 1653, is a prime example. The ruins of Egmont Castle near Alkmaar were another favourite subject of Ruisdael's and feature in The Jewish Cemetery, of which he painted two versions. With these, Ruisdael pits the natural world against the built environment, which has been overrun by the trees and shrubs surrounding the cemetery.

Ruisdael's first Scandinavian views contain big firs, rugged mountains, large boulders and rushing torrents. Though convincingly realistic, they are based on previous art works, rather than on direct experience. There is no record that Ruisdael made any trip to Scandinavia, although fellow Haarlem painter Allart van Everdingen had travelled there in 1644 and had popularised the subgenre. Ruisdael's work soon outstripped van Everdingen's finest efforts. In total Ruisdael produced more than 150 Scandinavian views featuring waterfalls, of which Waterfall in a Mountainous Landscape with a Ruined Castle, c. 1665–1670, is seen as his greatest by Slive.

In this period Ruisdael started painting coastal scenes and sea-pieces, influenced by Simon de Vlieger and Jan Porcellis. Among the most dramatic is Rough Sea at a Jetty, with a restricted palette of only black, white, blue and a few brown earth colours. However, forest scenes remain a subject of choice, such as the Hermitage's most famous Ruisdael, A Wooded Marsh, dated c. 1665, which depicts a primieval scene with broken birches and oaks, and branches reaching for the sky amidst an overgrown pond.

Later years
During Ruisdael's last period he began to depict mountain scenes, such as Mountainous and Wooded Landscape with a River, dateable to the late 1670s. This portrays a rugged range with the highest peak in the clouds. Ruisdael's subjects became unusually varied. The art historian Wolfgang Stechow identified thirteen themes within the Dutch Golden Age landscape genre, and Ruisdael's work encompasses all but two of them, excelling at most: forests, rivers, dunes and country roads, panoramas, imaginary landscapes, Scandinavian waterfalls, marines, beachscapes, winter scenes, town views, and nocturnes. Only the Italianate and foreign landscapes other than Scandinavian are absent from his oeuvre.

The imaginary landscapes of gardens that Ruisdael painted in the 1670s actually reflect an ongoing discourse on the Picturesque in circles of gardening aesthetes like Constantijn Huygens.

Slive finds it appropriate that a windmill is the subject of one of Ruisdael's most famous works. Windmill at Wijk bij Duurstede, dated 1670, shows Wijk bij Duurstede, a riverside town about 20 km from Utrecht, with a dominant cylindrical windmill. In this composition, Ruisdael united typical Dutch elements of low-lying land, water and expansive sky, so that they converge on the equally characteristic Dutch windmill. The painting's enduring popularity is evidenced by card sales in the Rijksmuseum, with the Windmill ranking third after Rembrandt's Night Watch and Vermeer's View of Delft. Windmills featured throughout Ruisdael's entire career.

Various panoramic views of the Haarlem skyline and its bleaching grounds appear during this stage, a specific genre called Haerlempjes, with the clouds creating various gradations of alternating bands of light and shadow towards the horizon. The paintings are often dominated by Saint Bavo's Church, in which Ruisdael would one day be buried.

While Amsterdam does feature in his work, it does so relatively rarely given that Ruisdael lived there for over 25 years. It does feature in his only known architectural subject, a drawing of the interior of the Old Church, as well as in views of the Dam, and the Panoramic view of the Amstel looking toward Amsterdam, one of Ruisdael's last paintings.

Figures are introduced sparingly into Ruisdael's compositions, and are by this period rarely from his own hand but executed by various artists, including his pupil Meindert Hobbema, Nicolaes Berchem, Adriaen van de Velde, Philips Wouwerman, Jan Vonck, Thomas de Keyser, Gerard van Battum and Jan Lingelbach.

Attributions
In his 2001 catalogue raisonné, Slive attributes 694 paintings to Ruisdael and lists another 163 paintings with dubious or, he believes, incorrect attribution. There are three main reasons why there is uncertainty over whose hand painted various Ruisdael-style landscapes. Firstly, four members of the Ruysdael family were landscapists with similar signatures, some of which were later fraudulently altered into Jacob's. This is further complicated by the fact that Ruisdael used variations of his signature. This typically reads "JvRuisdael" or the monogram "JVR", sometimes using a small italic 's' and sometimes a Gothic long 's', such as on Landscape with Waterfall. Secondly, many 17th-century landscape paintings are unsigned and could be from pupils or copyists. Finally, fraudsters imitated Ruisdaels for financial gain, with the earliest case reported by Houbraken in 1718: a certain Jan Griffier the Elder could imitate Ruisdael's style so well that he often passed them off as genuine Ruisdaels, especially with figurines added in the style of the artist Wouwerman. There is no large-scale systematic approach to ascertaining Ruisdael's attributions, unlike the forensic science used to find the correct attributions of Rembrandt's paintings through the Rembrandt Research Project.

Legacy
Ruisdael has shaped landscape painting traditions from the English Romantics to the Barbizon school in France, and the Hudson River School in the US, as well as generations of Dutch landscape artists. Among the English artists influenced by Ruisdael are Thomas Gainsborough, J. M. W. Turner, and John Constable. Gainsborough drew, in black chalk and grey wash, a copy of a Ruisdael in the 1740s—now both paintings are housed in the Louvre in Paris. Turner made many copies of Ruisdaels and even painted fantasy views of a nonexistent port he called Port Ruysdael. Constable also copied various drawings, etchings and paintings by Ruisdael, and was a great admirer from a young age. "It haunts my mind and clings to my heart", he wrote after seeing a Ruisdael. However, he thought Jewish Cemetery was a failure, because he considered that it attempted to convey something outside the reach of art.

In the 19th century, Vincent van Gogh acknowledged Ruisdael as a major influence, calling him sublime, but at the same time saying it would be a mistake to try to copy him. Van Gogh had two Ruisdael prints, The Bush and a Haerlempje, on his wall, and thought the Ruisdaels in the Louvre were "magnificent, especially The Bush, The Breakwater and The Ray of Light". His experience of the French countryside was informed by his memory of Ruisdael's art. Van Gogh's contemporary Claude Monet is also said to be indebted to Ruisdael. Similarly, Piet Mondrian's early abstract compositions the eventually led to the founding of De Stijl have been traced back to Ruisdael's panoramas.

Among art historians and critics, Ruisdael's reputation has had its ups and downs over the centuries. The first account, in 1718, is from Houbraken, who waxed lyrical over the technical mastery which allowed Ruisdael to realistically depict falling water and the sea. In 1781, Sir Joshua Reynolds, founder of the Royal Academy, admired the freshness and force of Ruisdael's landscapes. A couple of decades later other English critics were less impressed. In 1801, Henry Fuseli, professor at the Royal Academy, expressed his contempt for the entire Dutch School of Landscape, dismissing it as no more than a "transcript of the spot", a mere "enumeration of hill and dale, clumps of trees". Of note is that one of Fuseli's students was Constable, whose admiration for Ruisdael remained unchanged. Around the same time in Germany, the writer, statesman and scientist Johann Wolfgang von Goethe lauded Ruisdael as a thinking artist, even a poet, saying "he demonstrates remarkable skill in locating the exact point at which the creative faculty comes into contact with a lucid mind". John Ruskin however, in 1860, raged against Ruisdael and other Dutch Golden Age landscapists, calling their landscapes places where "we lose not only all faith in religion but all remembrance of it". In 1915, the Dutch art historian Abraham Bredius called his compatriot not so much a painter as a poet.

More recent art historians have rated Ruisdael highly. Kenneth Clark described him as "the greatest master of the natural vision before Constable". Waldemar Januszczak finds him a marvellous storyteller. Januszczak does not consider Ruisdael the greatest landscape artist of all time, but is especially impressed by his works as a teenager: "a prodigy whom we should rank at number 8 or 9 on the Mozart scale". Slive states Ruisdael is acknowledged "by general consent, as the pre-eminent landscapist of the Golden Age of Dutch art".

Ruisdael is now seen as the leading artist of the "classical" phase in Dutch landscape art, which built upon the realism of the previous "tonal" phase. The tonal phase suggested atmosphere through the use of tonality, while the classical phase strived for a more grandiose effect, with paintings built up through a series of vigorous contrasts of solid form against the sky, and of light against shade, with a tree, animal, or windmill often singled out.

Although many of Ruisdael's works were on show in the Art Treasures Exhibition, Manchester 1857, and various other grand exhibitions across the world since, it was not until 1981 that an exhibition was solely dedicated to him. Over fifty paintings and thirty-five drawings and etchings were exhibited, first at the Mauritshuis in The Hague, then, in 1982, at the Fogg Museum in Cambridge, Massachusetts. In 2006, the Royal Academy in London hosted a Ruisdael Master of Landscape exhibition, displaying works from over fifty collections.

Interpretation
There are no 17th-century documents to indicate, either at first or second hand, what Ruisdael intended to convey through his art. While The Jewish Cemetery is universally accepted as an allegory for the fragility of life, how other works should be interpreted is much disputed. At one end of the spectrum is Henry Fuseli, who contends they have no meaning at all, and are simply a depiction of nature. At the other end is Franz Theodor Kugler who sees meaning in almost everything: "They all display the silent power of Nature, who opposes with her mighty hand the petty activity of man, and with a solemn warning as it were, repels his encroachments".

In the middle of the spectrum are scholars such as E. John Walford, who sees the works as "not so much bearers of narrative or emblematic meanings but rather as images reflecting the fact that the visible world was essentially perceived as manifesting inherent spiritual significance". Walford advocates abandoning the notion of "disguised symbolism". Perhaps Ruisdael's work can be interpreted according to the religious world view of his time: nature serves as the "first book" of God, both because of its inherent divine qualities and because of God's obvious concern for man and the world. The intention is spiritual, not moral.

Andrew Graham-Dixon fancifully asserts all Dutch Golden Age landscapists could not help but search everywhere for meaning. He says of the windmill in The Windmill at Wijk bij Duurstede that it symbolises "the sheer hard work needed to keep Holland above water and to safeguard the future of the nation's children". The symmetries in the landscapes are "reminders to fellow citizens always to remain on the straight and narrow". Slive, sensible scholar that he is, is more reluctant to read too much into the work, but does put The Windmill in its contemporary religious context of man's dependence on the "spirit of the Lord for life". With regards to interpreting Ruisdael's Scandinavian paintings, he says "My own view is that it strains credulity to the breaking point to propose that he himself conceived of all his depictions of waterfalls, torrents and rushing streams and dead trees as visual sermons on the themes of transcience and vanitas".

Collections
Ruisdaels are scattered across collections globally, both private and institutional. The most notable collections are at the National Gallery in London, which holds twenty paintings; the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam, which holds sixteen paintings; the Hermitage Museum in Saint Petersburg, which holds nine, and the Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum in Madrid, Spain has four (and two additional paintings attributed to Jacob Isaacksz. van Ruisdael). In the US, the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York has five Ruisdaels in its collection, and the J. Paul Getty Museum in California has three.

On occasion a Ruisdael changes hands. In 2014, Dunes by the Sea was auctioned at Christie's in New York, and realised a price of $1,805,000. Of his surviving drawings, 140 in total, the Rijksmuseum, the Teylers Museum in Haarlem, Dresden's Kupferstich-Kabinett, and the Hermitage each hold significant collections. Ruisdael's rare etchings are spread across institutions. No collection holds a print of each of the thirteen etchings. Of the five unique prints, the British Museum holds two, two are in the Albertina in Vienna, and one is in Amsterdam.

Context
According to some, Ruisdael and his art should not be considered apart from the context of the incredible wealth and significant changes to the land that occurred during the Dutch Golden Age. In his study on 17th-century Dutch art and culture, Simon Schama remarks that "it can never be overemphasized that the period between 1550 and 1650, when the political identity of an independent Netherlands nation was being established, was also a time of dramatic physical alteration of its landscape". Ruisdael's depiction of nature and emergent Dutch technology are wrapped up in this. Christopher Joby places Ruisdael in the religious context of the Calvinism of the Dutch Republic. He states that landscape painting does conform to Calvin's requirement that only what is visible may be depicted in art, and that landscape paintings such as those of Ruisdael have an epistemological value which provides further support for their use within Reformed Churches.

The art historian Yuri Kuznetsov places Ruisdael's art in the context of the war of independence against Spain. Dutch landscape painters "were called upon to make a portrait of their homeland, twice rewon by the Dutch people – first from the sea and later from foreign invaders". Jonathan Israel, in his study of the Dutch Republic, calls the period between 1647 and 1672 the third phase of Dutch Golden Age art, in which wealthy merchants wanted large, opulent and refined paintings, and civic leaders filled their town halls with grand displays containing republican messages.

As well, ordinary middle class Dutch people began buying art for the first time, creating a high demand for paintings of all kinds. This demand was met by enormous painter guilds. Master painters set up studios to produce large numbers of paintings quickly. Under the master's direction, studio members would specialise in parts of a painting, such as figures in landscapes, or costumes in portraits and history paintings. Masters would sometimes add a few touches to authenticate a work mostly done by pupils, to maximise both speed and price. Numerous art dealers organised commissions on behalf of patrons, as well as buying uncommissioned stock to sell on. Landscape artists did not depend on commissions in the way most painters had to do, and could therefore paint for stock. In Ruisdael's case, it is not known whether he kept stock to sell directly to customers, or sold his work through dealers, or both. Art historians only know of one commission, a work for the wealthy Amsterdam burgomaster Cornelis de Graeff, jointly painted with Thomas de Keyser.

title: Jacob van Ruisdael


text:
Charlotte Casiraghi

Charlotte Marie Pomeline Casiraghi (born 3 August 1986) is a Monégasque model, socialite, equestrian, and humanitarian. She is the second child of Caroline, Princess of Hanover, and Stefano Casiraghi, an Italian industrialist. She is eleventh in line to the throne of Monaco. Her maternal grandparents were Rainier III, Prince of Monaco, and American actress Grace Kelly. She is named after her maternal great-grandmother, Princess Charlotte, Duchess of Valentinois.

Early life
Charlotte Casiraghi was born in Princess Grace Hospital Centre in La Colle, Monaco on 3 August 1986 to Princess Caroline of Monaco and Stefano Casiraghi. She was christened on 20 September 1986. Her godparents are Albina du Boisrouvray and Stefano Casiraghi's brother-in-law, Massimo Bianchi. She has two brothers: Andrea (b. 1984) and Pierre (b. 1987). When she was four years old, her father was killed in a boating accident. After his death, Princess Caroline moved the family to the Midi village of Saint-Rémy-de-Provence in France, with the intention of minimising their exposure to the press.

In January 1999, Charlotte gained a stepfather and two stepbrothers, (Prince Ernst of Hanover and Prince Christian of Hanover), when her mother married Ernst August, Prince of Hanover. Six months later, Casiraghi's half-sister, Princess Alexandra of Hanover, was born at a clinic in Vöcklabruck, Austria. Casiraghi is one of the godmothers to her sister. The family then moved to the Parisian suburb of Fontainebleau.

From 2001 through 2004, as a member of Marcel Rozier's Team Marionnaud, Casiraghi participated in a number of Junior and Amateur class show jumping competitions. She was trained by his son Thierry Rozier.

Education
From the ages of two to six, Casiraghi attended Les Dames de Saint Maur, which is part of the Catholic schools of François d'Assise Nicolas Barré in Monaco. At the age of six, she moved on to the École de la République (state school system) in Saint-Rémy-de-Provence. From 2000 to 2004 she attended the Lycée François-Couperin, Fontainebleau.

She obtained an "excellent" (in French: très bien, the highest possible) mark on her baccalaureate exam in July 2004. After passing her bac, she enrolled in the hypokhâgne and khâgne course at the Lycée Fénelon, in St-Germain-des-Près, Paris, in the hope of entering the École normale supérieure (Paris). She took the written entrance exam for ENS in June 2006, but failed to make the list of candidates eligible to proceed to the oral exam.

In 2007, Casiraghi earned a License of Philosophy (B.A.) from the University of Paris IV: Paris-Sorbonne; Casiraghi completed two internships, firstly with the publishing house of Robert Laffont in Paris, and then later from October 2007 with the Sunday magazine supplement of The Independent newspaper of London. In 2018, Casiraghi told Clara Le Fort of Billionaire magazine: "I continued studying philosophy while at the Sciences Po Doctoral School." Casiraghi furthered her studies at the Catholic University of Paris.

Fashion and modelling
In 2010, Casiraghi became the official ambassador for the equestrian collections of Gucci. In 2014, she became the face of Gucci Cosmetics. Casiraghi modelled for Yves Saint Laurent's campaign for its Fall 2018 collection, giving it the hashtag #YSL15. Casiraghi was photographed by David Sims to be the face of the campaign.

Casiraghi modeled for the lens of Collier Schorr in the eighth issue of System magazine. In a gender fluid framework, Casiraghi modeled clothing from the Gucci menswear line. On 22 December 2020, Casiraghi became the brand ambassador of Chanel. She was the global face for Chanel's Spring/Summer 2021 campaign.

In 2018, Casiraghi collaborated with Montblanc on a line of jewellery called Les Aimants and inspired by Nancy Cunard.

Philosophy
In 2015, Casiraghi founded Les Rencontres Philosophiques de Monaco (literally, "Philosophical Encounters"). Her co-founders include her former teacher in Fontainebleau, the philosopher Robert Maggiori. The others founders are Joseph Cohen and Raphael Zagury-Orly. Her mother is among the many honorary members of the group, which is really a think tank on philosophy. They discuss contemporary issues and new publications in the field of philosophy. The writings and the life of Anne Dufourmantelle made a strong impact on Casiraghi, who wrote in particular about Dufourmantelle's book Défense du Secret in an article for Libération. Casiraghi and Dufourmantelle, who died in 2017, were friends, sharing, by the admission of Casiraghi herself, a passion for not only philosophy but for horses.

Casiraghi wrote the preface for a book published in 2017 by the psychoanalyst Julia Kristeva. The two women also published their letters to each other, reflecting on philosophy.

In March 2018, Casiraghi and Maggiori published their Kindle book, through Éditions du Seuil. The title is Archipel des Passions (Archipelago of the Passions). It is a series of dialogues between the professor and the student about the various passions (i.e. arrogance, joy, cruelty, love) and their affects. It is also "an essay on the passion of thought." The book is dedicated to her father and the passions explored amount to about forty. It "reads like a treatise of the passions."

Equestrianism
In June 2009, Casiraghi, accompanied by her uncle Albert II, Prince of Monaco, appeared on the French television programme Stade 2 to speak about her recent enrollment in the Global Champions Tour.

Since returning to the show jumping sport in April 2009 (after a four-year hiatus), she continues to train with Thierry Rozier. Casiraghi and the bay gelding named GI Joe (owner: Jan Tops), participated in the 2009 Global Champions Tour in Valencia, Spain, Monte Carlo, Cannes, Estoril, Rio de Janeiro, and Valkenswaard.

Casiraghi continued participation in the Global Champions Tour throughout 2010. For the most part, she rode horses Troy (a chestnut stallion) and Tintero (a grey gelding). The GCT "Pro-Am Cup" (Professional-Amateur) relay was her original concept. It is a staple of the GCT Monaco event to this day.

In 2010, she assumed the role of honorary president of the Global Champions Tour (now the Longines Global Champions Tour) in Monaco; her mother had been honorary president of the event as it existed prior to its inclusion in the Global Champions Tour. Since 2015, Casiraghi never participated in multiple phases of the Longines Global Champions Tour. After that year, she reduced her participation to the Monaco phase only.

Journalism
Casiraghi is a published writer and magazine editor. Her credits include work for AnOther Magazine (its issue for January 2008) and the Sunday supplement to the British The Independent newspaper in the late months of 2007. She was the editor-at-large for Above magazine in 2009. With two friends, she left that role in order to focus on the founding of the ecological/fashion-related Ever Manifesto.

Through her work as the editor-at-large for Above magazine, Casiraghi befriended Stella McCartney, whom she interviewed for the magazine's first issue. McCartney enlightened Casiraghi and readers as to the many ways the fashion industry can harm the ecosystem. Also for Above, Casiraghi was reported in Women's Wear Daily as being "instrumental in securing an interview with Gomorrah author Roberto Saviano (which took place in hiding thanks to Saviano's dissection of the Mafia)."

On 21 September 2009, Casiraghi announced plans to publish 3,000 copies of Ever Manifesto, a free publication on what she considers the fashion industry's harmful impact on the global environment and to promote sustainability in fashion. Casiraghi revealed that her collaborators with the Loro Piana-funded project are the socialite Alexia Niedzielski and advertising executive Elizabeth von Guttman. She also revealed that the environmentally conscious designer Stella McCartney, as well as her own uncle Prince Albert II, greatly enlightened and influenced her. Specifically, she said: "It's only recently that I've questioned the way that I've been consuming. I haven't been as conscious as I should have been."

The debut issue of Ever Manifesto was distributed free at the 10 Corso Como boutique during Milan Fashion Week and again at Colette in Paris during Paris Fashion Week. Casiraghi explained that the magazine will not have a predetermined publication schedule. "We want to publish when we have something to say or people to support," she said. "It will be short and meaningful so that people will read it."

The day after the publication of her La Stampa interview, 22 September, Casiraghi joined her partners, Niedzielski and Guttman, at the gallery of Michelangelo Pistoletto, in the town of Biella, in the Italian region of Piedmont. Along with the artist and the Vogue Italia editor-in-chief Franca Sozzani, Casiraghi unveiled plans for Ever Manifesto and the Città dell'arte Fashion: Bio Ethical Sustainable Trend.

In October 2009, Casiraghi was a guest at the Stella McCartney show in Paris. Sitting in the front row with Dasha Zhukova, Paul McCartney and Gwyneth Paltrow, she told Women's Wear Daily about Ever Manifesto. Copies of the magazine's first issue were left on the seats before the show. "We will announce [succeeding issues] on the website soon," she said.

Casiraghi contributed to the October 2009 issue of 20, the free newspaper of Alex Dellal's gallery, 20 Hoxton Square Projects.

Film
Casiraghi founded Swoon Productions in 2012 that focused on equestrian films. In 2014, Casiraghi bought the rights to the book Our Lady of the Nile, which was released as a feature film in 2020, in which she was one of the producers.

Philanthropy
Casiraghi is a private citizen, but occasionally attends official functions in Monaco, such as a fundraising gala for AMADE Mondiale and Nelson Mandela's foundation in September 2007. In 2006, she made her debut appearance at Monaco's Rose Ball (in French: Bal de la Rose), which also raises money for the Princess Grace Foundation. In 2015, she joined the board of directors of FXB France, an organization founded by her godmother Albina du Boisrouvray in 1989 to combat AIDS and poverty.

As a child, she was Monegasque delegate to the Club des Habits Rouges. At the same time, her grandfather Rainier III, Prince of Monaco designated her patron of the Public Safety Division in Monaco.

Personal life
At the age of 16, Casiraghi was named number ten on a list of the world's most eligible young women. Vanity Fair selected Casiraghi as one of the International Best Dressed List of 2006.

Casiraghi is often photographed at fashion shows, art exhibits, and equestrian events.

In December 2011, Casiraghi started dating stand-up comedian and actor Gad Elmaleh. Their son, Raphaël, was born on Tuesday, 17 December 2013. As Raphaël's parents were not married, he is not included in the line of succession to the Monegasque throne. The couple split in June 2015.

In March 2018, several credible media sources reported her engagement to Dimitri Rassam, the son of French actress Carole Bouquet, and it was widely noted that she wore a diamond ring at Monaco's Rose Ball on 24 March. Casiraghi was visibly pregnant by the summer and the couple chose to postpone a wedding until after the birth of their child. On 23 October 2018, Casiraghi gave birth to a second child, a son named Balthazar. The couple married civilly at the Prince's Palace of Monaco on 1 June 2019. They celebrated in a reception at the nearby Villa La Vigie in Roquebrune.

On 29 June 2019, they married religiously at the Abbey of Sainte-Marie de Pierredon, outside Saint-Rémy-de-Provence. The couple's separation was announced on February 2, 2024. Speculations on their split were around a little before media's announcement.

Publications

 * Archipel des Passions (H.C. ESSAIS). By Charlotte Casiraghi and Robert Maggiori. Published by Éditions du Seuil, 1 March 2018. ISBN 978-2-0213-3575-3
 * Everlution. Ever Manifesto. First Issue. October 2009.
 * Ever Bamboo. Ever Manifesto. Second Issue. June 2011.

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

title: Charlotte Casiraghi


text:
Minority religion

A minority religion is a religion held by a minority of the population of state or which is otherwise politically marginalized. Minority religions may be subject to stigma or discrimination. An example of a stigma is using the term cult with its extremely negative connotations for certain new religious movements. People who belong to a minority religion may be subject to discrimination and prejudice, especially when the religious differences correlate with ethnic differences.

Laws are made in some countries to protect the rights of religious minorities, such as protecting the minorities' culture and to promote harmony with the majority.

title: Minority religion


text:
Talk:Charlotte Casiraghi

Untitled
Charlotte Marie Pomeline Casiraghi of Monaco, umm she is not a Royal or Princess and is therefore not Charlotte of Monaco. Mac Domhnaill 04:29, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
 * True. I think there is a better way to word it.... "commonly/inaccurately referred to in press as...."? Though it might be best just take that out completely. A long time ago, it might have been necessary, when hardly anyone seemed to know who was Charlotte Casiraghi. But now more and more people seem to recognize the Casiraghi name. Yet very recently, her brother Pierre was referred to as Prince Pierre of Monaco on a news blog, I forgot which. And in 2008, in the Philippines, there was reference in the serious newspapers there to "Prince Andrea of Monaco." And that was an official trip! --Ashley Rovira (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

-

Is the right of male primogeniture still valid in Monaco, even with the new constitution amendments? I believe it is, but I would like a confirmation.
 * The primogeniture law still applies in Monaco's succession law, even after the 2002 amendment. Other things were altered, but not that. --Ashley Rovira (talk) 21:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

School Advertising?
What have the schools she attended to do with an encyclopedia? Sure, you should cite them but not link their website. If you did this with EVERY vip in wikipedia, we would have millions of external links. Why is her biography different than others? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.208.106.73 (talk) 20:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree. I removed the school links except her secondary school, because that was the one school not with a wiki link in article. Who knows? someone might want to read about her high school, and then they will have that resource in the external links. But I agree that listing all the schools was repetitive. It was probably something I did a long time ago when this page was just beginning, and it was a bad idea. --Ashley Rovira (talk) 21:23, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

First Flirtation
Where does this come from? Hubertus Herring was born in 1979 - therefore at the Monaco Grand Prix 2001 he was 22 and she 14!! He is just the owner of the neighbouring hunt of Ernst August in Austria and therefore has a lot to do with the family! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Austin19 (talk • contribs) 10:54, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This was changed. Since her friendship was exaggerated in the tabloids, I changed the reference here to reflect that, though there is more likelihood of this pair merely being friends, the tabloids exaggerated the relationship as to suggest there was a romance between them. I didn't want to fully remove the reference because there is a history of press coverage about the relationship, whatever its nature. --Ashley Rovira (talk) 05:45, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

education vouchers
I vouch for there being some translation of of her educational accomplishments set in parentheses. With, for example, hypokhâgne and khâgne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.144.86 (talk) 23:39, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Charlotte Casiraghi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090928021933/http://www.lastampa.it:80/_web/cmstp/tmplRubriche/moda/grubrica.asp?ID_blog=59&ID_articolo=1027&ID_sezione=107&sezione= to http://www.lastampa.it/_web/cmstp/tmplRubriche/moda/grubrica.asp?ID_blog=59&ID_articolo=1027&ID_sezione=107&sezione=
 * Added tag to http://www.amade-mondiale.org/en/evenements-2007/united-for-a-better-world.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Charlotte Casiraghi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110428000420/http://www.20hoxtonsquare.com/usr/documents/newspapers/newspaper_url/2/20hox_np_web.pdf to http://www.20hoxtonsquare.com/usr/documents/newspapers/newspaper_url/2/20hox_np_web.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:47, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Charlotte Casiraghi. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110720123957/http://www.hunterjumpernews.com/?p=8461 to http://www.hunterjumpernews.com/?p=8461
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.globalchampionstour.com/profiles/riders/153/charlotte-casiraghi/horses/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:19, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Interpol-internship
She should by Japan and aquitting Bachelor gain an internship at Interpol in Madrid for being legal with Sciences Po by citizenship and Throne upon Promotion in List of ambassadors of the United States to Colombia absentia with Madrid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.40.240.91 (talk) 00:47, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Charlotte Casiraghi


text:
Nicolaes Pieterszoon Berchem

Nicolaes Pieterszoon Berchem (1 October 1620 – 18 February 1683) was a highly esteemed and prolific Dutch Golden Age painter of pastoral landscapes, populated with mythological or biblical figures, but also of a number of allegories and genre pieces.

He was a member of the second generation of "Dutch Italianate landscape" painters. These were artists who travelled to Italy, or aspired to, in order to soak up the romanticism of the country, bringing home sketchbooks full of drawings of classical ruins and pastoral imagery.

His paintings, of which he produced an immense number, (Hofstede de Groot claimed around 850, although many are misattributed), were in great demand, as were his 80 etchings and 500 drawings. His landscapes, painted in the Italian style of idealized rural scenes, with hills, mountains, cliffs and trees in a golden dawn are sought after. Berchem also painted inspired and attractive human and animal figures (staffage) in works of other artists, like Allaert van Everdingen, Jan Hackaert, Gerrit Dou, Meindert Hobbema and Willem Schellinks.

Biography
Born in Haarlem, he received instruction from his father Pieter Claesz, and from the painters Jan van Goyen, Pieter de Grebber, Jan Baptist Weenix, Jan Wils and Claes Cornelisz. Moeyaert. According to Houbraken, Carel de Moor told him that Berchem got his name from two words "Berg hem" for "Save him!", an expression used by his fellows in Van Goyen's workshop whenever his father chased him there with the intent to beat him. No trip or Grand Tour by Berchem was documented by Houbraken though he mentioned another story about the "Berg hem!" nickname which came from Berchem's conscription as a sailor; the man in charge of impressment knew him and sent him ashore with the words "Save him!". Today his name is assumed to come from his father's hometown of Berchem, Antwerp. According to the RKD he traveled to Italy with Jan Baptist Weenix, whom he called his cousin, in 1642–1645. Works by him are signed both as "CBerghem" and "Berchem".

In 1645 he became a member of the Dutch reformed church and married the year after. According to Houbraken he married the daughter of the painter Jan Wils, who kept him on a short allowance, but to finance his collection of prints he would borrow money from his pupils and colleagues and pay them back from the proceeds of paintings that he didn't tell her about. Around 1650 he travelled to Westphalia with Jacob van Ruisdael, where a dated piece showing Burg Bentheim is recorded. Maybe Berchem went to Italy after this trip and before he moved to Amsterdam – he is not clearly documented in the Netherlands between 1650 and 1656. Around 1660 he worked for the engraver Jan de Visscher designing an atlas. From 1661 to 1670 he is registered in Amsterdam and in 1670 he moved back to Haarlem, but was living back in Amsterdam by 1677, where he died in 1683.

He was a popular teacher and his pupils were Abraham Begeyn, Johannes van der Bent, his son Nicolaes, Isaack Croonenbergh, Simon Dubois, Karel Dujardin, Johannes Glauber, Pieter de Hooch, Jacob van Huchtenburg, Justus van Huysum, Dirk Maas, Hendrick Mommers, Jacob Ochtervelt, Willem Romeyn and possibly Jan Frans Soolmaker. He was the uncle of Govert van der Leeuw and his brother Pieter.

The French Rococo painter Jean-Baptiste Pillement was influenced by his works, as was the Dutch 'Cleves Romanticism' landscape painter, Barend Cornelis Koekkoek.

title: Nicolaes Pieterszoon Berchem


text:
Weapon focus

Weapon focus is the concentration on a weapon by a witness of a crime and the subsequent inability to accurately remember other details of the crime. Weapon focus is a factor that heavily affects the reliability of eyewitness testimony. This effect involves a witness to a crime diverting his or her attention to the weapon the perpetrator is holding, thus causing memory impairments and leaving less attention for other details in the scene, such as the attacker’s face, clothing or vehicle.

Several studies support the notion of weapon focus, particularly in terms of greater attention paid to the weapon and its effects on recognition and recall. Elizabeth Loftus, Yuille and Burns have all been associated with studies showing the existence of a weapon focus effect.

Background information
In the field of forensic psychology, researchers have validated the weapon focus effect and shown that a witness will remember less about a crime, or the perpetrator of a crime, when a weapon is present, as opposed to if the weapon is not present at an identical crime. As for the reason of the phenomenon, the two leading explanations attribute it to the cognitive arousal of the witness, or to the overall unusualness of the situation.

In one of the earliest known investigations of weapon focus, Johnson and Scott (1976) had two groups of participants come into what they thought was a laboratory study of human memory. In actuality, they were to take part in a simulated interaction intended to determine whether the presence of a weapon would influence eyewitness memory for an event. Participants in the control condition sat in a waiting room where they overheard a conversation between two people following which a man exited with greasy hands and a grease pen. In the weapon condition, participants sat in the same waiting room, but instead they heard a violent argument – including furniture being thrown around – following which a man came out holding a blood-stained knife. During a photo line-up, the control participants were more likely to accurately identify the man they saw in the waiting room relative to participants in the weapon condition (49% versus 33% correct identifications).

In 1979, initially Loftus postulated that it is an expected occurrence in the event where an individual is highly aroused, such as in the case of a frightening situation. This suggestion was criticized for its lack of supporting evidence, so its author conducted several studies in 1987 and finally demonstrated the viability of weapon focus. The study conducted by Johnson and Scott (1976) represents one of the few early simulation studies available, likely due to the ethical issues surrounding the exposure of research participants to a putatively threatening scenario. For this reason much of the research conducted on the weapon focus effect has made use of videos or slideshows. In one of the first such experiments, Loftus, Loftus and Messo (1987) had participants watch a video in which a young man approached the counter of a fast food restaurant, presented an object to the cashier, accepted money and left. In the control condition the man presented a cheque to the cashier whereas in the weapon condition the man presented a gun. Specialized equipment tracked the participant's gaze as they viewed the video to determine with what frequency (and for how long) they fixated upon the item of interest (the cheque or the gun). Relative to the control condition, participants in the weapon condition looked at the item the man was holding more frequently and for greater duration. Further, when tested for the details of the event, performance was better for the control condition relative to the weapon condition - with the exception that participants in the weapon condition were more likely to recall what object the man was holding (a gun).

Another significant challenge to the studies on the weapon focus effect has been their ecological validity. Specifically, many theorists have argued that the effect is limited to the laboratory design. These claims have been supported by the relative absence of applied evidence supporting the effect. Several reports have been published looking for evidence of a weapon focus effect using records of actual crimes. According to the laboratory findings summarized above, the prediction had been that eyewitness memory would be worse for weapon crimes compared to non-weapon crimes. Many primary studies have failed to support this prediction. Even so, a recent meta-analysis conducted by Fawcett et al. (2013) has demonstrated that when the data for all of the applied studies are combined, there is a small but reliable effect suggesting that weapon presence impairs actual eyewitness memory. This is extremely significant when one considers how jurors tend to overvalue eyewitness testimony. This finding adds to the ecological validity of the laboratory studies conducted on this topic. One reason why this effect's ecological validity may be hard to support could be the difficulty in testing this effect on actual eyewitnesses and their memory of a crime.

On the other hand, a study published in 2004 found the opposite when confronted with weapon focus. It found that the exposure to firearms was associated with significantly better eyewitness descriptions especially regarding basic features such as gender, height, build, age, and ethnicity.

Causes of weapon focus
A leading explanation for a cause of weapon focus is the unusualness of the situation, being a witness to a crime. Since the initial research conducted by Johnson and Scott (1976) and Loftus et al. (1987), others have demonstrated a similar effect using unusual objects rather than weapons. These findings are described as the "Unusual Item Hypothesis." This effect is seen when an object does not fit with the schema of the situation. Attention is then drawn to the out-of-place object and less attention is paid to other objects in the scene making recalling these other objects more difficult. This effect was observed in Toronto in 1997 when a robber entered a coffee shop and demanded money while threatening to strangle a goose he was holding if he did not receive the money. Meanwhile, the customers were too focused on the strangeness of a goose in the coffee shop to observe any details about the perpetrator himself. This effect has also been observed in the lab. For example, Pickel (1998) demonstrated an effect comparable to weapon focus using a video in which a man approached a cashier and presented a whole raw chicken or miniature Pillsbury Dough Boy instead of an expected item such as a wallet. From her finding, Pickel (1998) argued that the weapon focus arose from the unusual nature of the object in the relation to the context in which it was presented. Another study by Mansour et. al (2018) presented subjects with a video of a crime scene. From their findings, subjects remembered more about a scene when a crime was committed with a binder, which represented an ordinary object, compared to unusual objects such as a gun or knife. This was also seen in a study done in 2013 which examined weapon focus, and determined whether or not a gun automatically engages visual attention. There were two experiments that were conducted, which included targets that either depicted a gun, or another object. The conclusion of this experiment was that images of a gun did not engage attention more than that of images of other objects, including a tomato and a pocket watch. It was discovered that in order for an object to be viewed as threatening, the environment and context of the situation is of utmost importance. The context of the situation will ultimately determine whether or not weapon focus is existent in an instance of eyewitness testimony. Furthermore, in her article, Kerri L. Pickel determined that the peculiarity of an object is a reason for the weapon focus effect. Being unusual attracts more attention to the weapon, but the object does not necessarily have to be a weapon to produce this effect. This contributes to the idea that the context of the situation has more importance than the actual weapon a victim witnesses. The mere unusual aspect of a situation with a foreign object is enough to elicit the weapon focus response.

In their 2013 meta-analysis, Fawcett et al. (2013) presented the issues surrounding the arousal/threat hypothesis. This is one of the oldest explanations connected to the weapon focus phenomenon, and relies on the Yerkes-Dodson law that links arousal and performance; emotionally arousing states, such as stress, can enhance performance up to a point, but after this there are detrimental impacts on cognitive functions, like memory and learning. The amygdala, a brain region located near the center of the brain, is responsible for fear processing and emotional response to both negative and positive stimuli. Research by Sander and Grafman has suggested that the amygdala serves to not only process fear-inducing stimuli but also to determine which information is relevant for encoding. This suggests that the amygdala plays a role in determining what to pay attention to during the crime. In situations where a weapon is present, witnesses tend to focus on the object of arousal and miss peripheral details, like the identity of the perpetrator. This explanation relies on Easterbrook's (1959) theory that stress causes a reduction in mental resources, thus the range of cues a subject can attend to in this situation will be significantly reduced. In a dangerous situation where a weapon is present, survival becomes the most important facets and peripheral information is overlooked. This means that the witness has a heightened memory for the weapon, but may struggle to recall other information. Over time, research into the role of anxiety on weapon focus has produced inconsistent findings, causing researchers to look at alternative causes of the phenomenon. The relative contributions of both arousal and unusualness remain one of the primary theoretical issues in this literature, with some authors arguing for a contribution of both.

Another potential cause of weapon focus is the "automatic capture" explanation. This suggests that the attention paid to a weapon is automatic and unintentional. Studies have been performed that show that even if a subject is asked to ignore specific stimuli they are unable to, thus indicating an automatic response. Remington et al. (1992) conclude that a participant might intend to ignore an event, but their attention is often automatically captured by it - as such, an eyewitness may not intend to solely focus on a weapon, but if their diversion of attention to it cannot be controlled, they possess little ability to ignore it. Yantis and Jonides (1996) suggest that it makes adaptive sense for humans to divert attention towards new objects, as a new representation has to be created for that object, presenting another explanation for the weapon focus phenomenon. However, they also conclude that attention focus is not automatic and can be directed on command, especially if attention is already focused somewhere specific. If attention is already focused away from a certain stimulus, then automatic capture is avoidable.

Differences in weapon focus effects
Differences in eyewitness memory can be attributed to whether the perpetrator holding a weapon is consistent with the eyewitness's schema. People use schemas to organize knowledge and provide a basis for future understanding. Researcher Kerri Pickel posits that if the object held by the target falls in line with the witness's schema, they will not divert as much attention to it and the characteristics of the perpetrator will be encoded normally - it is only when the combination of the perpetrator and the object is not consistent with the schema that the weapon focus effect will be significant in distorting memory.

Pickel looked into some differences in the memory of the eyewitnesses, when the physical traits of the perpetrator change. Firstly, the difference in memory was examined between eyewitnesses that saw a white perpetrator versus a black perpetrator. Her research, conducted in 2009, showed that the weapon focus effect weakens with 'black' perpetrators in comparison to 'white' perpetrators, and that the weapon focus effect is not significant when a "Black perpetrator wore a style of clothing that is strongly associated with Black men". It is suggested that individuals who observe a black perpetrator who is armed automatically activates a stereotype that links black men with weapons and crime. As a consequence, this reduces the unusualness of the weapon and increases the likelihood of attracting attention.

In the same year, Pickel also looked at the weapon focus effect on memory for female versus male perpetrators. The experiments involved participants watching videos that either had a male or female perpetrator, holding either a gun or a neutral object. Overall, the weapon focus effect was strongest when the gun was held by a woman as opposed to a male perpetrator. Participants rated the presence of the gun as more unusual when it was held by a woman versus when it was held by a man, less accurately described the physical traits of the perpetrator when they were holding a gun and the overall memory falsities were greater in the conditions where the gun was held by a female. The presence of the gun in the possession of the female perpetrators was more unexpected, thus participants allocated more of their attention to the weapon over their physical traits. Pickel did, however, find that the weapon focus effect was mitigated when participants were primed and the perpetrators were categorized as dangerous and aggressive.

A different effect of weapon focus can be used in a way to reduce change blindness. A study in 2017 aimed to find a way to reduce change blindness by making use of weapon focus. What they found was that the group of subjects that make use of weapon focus was less susceptible to change blindness when the change in the picture was a weapon they focused on. This shows that weapon focus can be used in a less negative way.

Weapon focus effect on children
In light of research recommendations, some more recent research has looked into the individual differences surrounding the weapon focus phenomenon, where not all samples of participants have reacted in the same way to the presence of a weapon, namely children. In some situations, like domestic violence, children can be crucial eyewitnesses, so recent research has looked at the age at which the weapon focus effect becomes influential. One study looked at the impacts of a surprising object on the memory of children, using a syringe filled with red dye in place of a classic weapon. The presence of the syringe caused a reduction in performance on a memory task, suggesting that the children diverted a significant proportion of their attention to the weapon, so that their recall ability was negatively impacted. This implies that the weapon focus effect does not exclusively occur in adults. At a similar time, Pickel et al. (2008) conducted comparable research, which used videos containing either a weapon or neutral object. Again, children recalled significantly less accurate information when a knife was involved as opposed to a water bottle. The researchers attributed this to the unexpected nature of the knife and schema violation. Adults were found to be more accurate in general with their recollection of the perpetrator than children; language abilities, appreciation for the situation and differing locations were all implicated in these asymmetries.

Reducing weapon focus and its impact on criminal cases
Pickel, Ross, and Truelove (2006) decided to take a more in depth look at these ideas and apply them specifically to reducing weapon focus. If weapon focus is an automatic process, then the capture of attention may be out of an eyewitness' control. However, if there is no automatic capture of the witness' attention, then weapon focus effect may be able to be overcome. Specific training can be developed to teach a person who may be at risk of an armed robbery, such as a bank teller or cashier, to perform an identification that is comparable to if there was no weapon present. The data indicate that weapons do not capture attention automatically and involuntarily. If a witness was given a lecture about weapon focus and the problems that can arise in memory formation in an incident when a weapon is present at the scene, they can more accurately identify a perpetrator of a crime. This shows that with proper training weapon focus effect can be overcome and an eyewitness' testimony becomes more accurate. These findings, however, are theoretical and need to be replicated in real world situations to really assess the usefulness of them. They show great promise that weapon focus effect and be counteracted by education on the topic, but they will remain theoretical until further research and implementation of the idea can be conducted. Later research by Pickel and Sneyd (2018) showed that subjects reported more correct details of a crime scene if the perpetrator was White compared to a Black perpetrator. Stereotypes regarding race where measured in the study and concluded that memory performance was not related to subject prejudices. Ratings showed that the subjects had a high awareness of stereotypes, and had a low endorsement of prejudices. The findings imply that the presence of a weapon may make it more difficult for law enforcement to bring White offenders over Black offenders to justice.

One method that has become more and more prevalent to reduce negative consequences that can stem from errors in eyewitness testimony, including errors that can arise from weapon focus effect, is expert witness testimonies by research psychologists about eyewitness testimony. This is an educational session, which a judge has to allow, given by a forensic psychologist to a jury as part of the trial. This form of expert testimony has been called social framework testimony, defined by Cronin as "expert testimony that presents conclusions based on social science research to assist the court in making a decision." The expert testimony would provide the jury with a context for evaluating eyewitness testimonies and the jury is meant to factor that into its decision making process. These educational sessions in the courtroom will help make the presentation of eyewitness testimony as rigorous as possible and put as much scrutiny on the social evidence as what is put on physical, scientific evidence. Eyewitness testimony is very often wrong, and the scrutiny put on it greatly reduces the number of false convictions. Another way eyewitness testimony can be impaired even more by weapon focus is if the person in question is intoxicated. A study conducted in 2020 was done to observe what would happen if a person that was witnessing a crime was intoxicated and how it would affect their ability to retrieve crime scene data. The study found that if a person was intoxicated, they were more likely to focus on the weapon than people who weren’t intoxicated. This should be taken into consideration when retrieving information from people in the incident and will help to get better eyewitness testimony.

The major problem with this strategy is that many judges do not allow this expert testimony in their courts. For example, in the court case Blasdell v. State (2010, 2015) a woman who had been robbed at gunpoint by an unknown man was able to describe the gun in great detail but could only provide very imprecise details of the perpetrator. The defense was unable to present expert testimony on the concept of weapon focus and the suspect was convicted based on the eyewitness testimony. Despite cases like these, reasoning behind judges not permitting expert testimony is Their reasoning is usually that they think what the social framework testimony will present is common knowledge. However, the data overwhelmingly shows that the typical jury member does not know most of the information presented by the expert. The fallibility of eyewitness testimony is not common knowledge and eyewitness psychology can offer valid and constructive information to juries. Even with this knowledge, jury decisions cannot perfectly serve justice without exceptions, but perfection in the legal system is an unattainable goal. However, any information that can be presented about the shortcomings of eyewitness testimony can better serve justice in the long run. According to a 2001 survey of experts on eyewitness testimony, 87% found the weapon focus effect to be sufficiently reliable to form the basis of expert testimony in criminal trials. Regarding eyewitness testimony, another study by Shaw and Skolnick (1994) discovered that sex plays a role in eyewitness memory and recall of a crime. Both men and women identified targets of their own sex more easily than target persons of the opposite sex. Women identified other women more accurately and men identified men more accurately than the women did.

There can be some ethical concerns to these expert witnesses. There are arguments that suggest that these social framework testimonies discredit the eyewitnesses and put the victims and bystanders on trial. This is not the purpose of the experts though. These testimonies are merely attempting to educate jury members of problems that can arise from eyewitnesses. There can also be issues raised about the credibility of the expert testimonies. The screening process of the experts is not very stringent and the criteria of an expert witness are not laid out in black in white. This can lead to a battle of the experts between prosecution and defense. Any testimony the prosecution or defense deems relevant to contradict the opposing side may be introduced if the judge allows it, so an expert can be called and a battle of the experts can ensue. This takes away from the central point of a trial and can overwhelm the jury.

title: Weapon focus


text:
Talk:Great Zasechnaya cherta

I've changed Tatars back to Mongolo-Tatars since the name Tatars is very largely used and can mean several (about 10) different tribes, folks and nations. The term Mongolo-Tatars is MUCH more strict (although still not enough strict).

And what's also importaint, the major part of Tatars from Great Tataria (on Volga) as well as Crimean Tatars treat the term Tatars offencive, if it is used in this context. Imagine that you live in a country X and belong to the folk Y and the teacher teaches you that 1000 years ago the Y came to X and made thousands of terrible things. Nobody want to hear this only because the name of that ancient tribe and your current ethnic group are the same (although they have very little in common in reality).

I hope this will help.

User: Arseni April 18 2004 13:50 UTC

Map?
Can we have some kind of map of where these lines were. please.

IceDragon64 (talk) 19:59, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 one external links on Zasechnaya cherta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.cultinfo.ru/fulltext/1/001/008/044/168.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110814113440/http://defensive-works.ru/zasechnaja-cherta.html to http://defensive-works.ru/zasechnaja-cherta.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100721055915/http://simbir-archeo.narod.ru:80/Russian/17vek/simbir.line/Line.htm to http://www.simbir-archeo.narod.ru/Russian/17vek/simbir.line/Line.htm
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110807044046/http://www.fortification.ru/oldforum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=19&topic=2118 to http://www.fortification.ru/oldforum/index.php?action=vthread&forum=19&topic=2118

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Засечная черта.Южный рубеж.2010г.х.,м.90х180.jpg

title: Talk:Great Zasechnaya cherta


text:
Jan Baptist Weenix

Jan Baptist Weenix, also spelled Jan Baptiste Weeninx (1621–c. 1659), was a painter of the Dutch Golden Age. Despite his relatively brief career, he was a very productive and versatile painter. His favourite subjects were Italian landscapes with large figures among ruins, seaside views, and, later in life, large still life pictures of dead game or dogs. He was mainly responsible for introducing the Italian harbour scene into Dutch art, in mid-size paintings with a group of figures in the foreground.

Life

Weenix was born near Amsterdam's harbour, the son of an architect. He could not speak well, apparently from a medical condition, and because he very much liked to read books, his mother sent him to work for a bookseller, who was not able to deal with him. He drew whenever he could, according to Jan Weenix his son, who told the story to Arnold Houbraken.

Weenix first studied under Jan Micker, who was the brother-in-law of his oldest sister Lysbeth. He then studied in Utrecht under Abraham Bloemaert, and later back in Amsterdam under Claes Corneliszoon Moeyaert. In 1639, he married Josijntje d'Hondecoeter, the daughter of Gillis d'Hondecoeter. In 1643, Weenix travelled to Rome with Nicolaes Pieterszoon Berchem, who had also studied with Moeyaert. He had left his home in secret, but his wife traced him to Rotterdam. He was allowed to stay away for four months. In Rome, he became a member of the Bentvueghels with the name Ratel (meaning rattle, because a voice defect), and was much esteemed and worked for Pope Innocent X. He returned to Amsterdam after four years; his wife had refused to come to Rome.

In 1649, he became master of the guild of St. Luke in Utrecht, and also painted a portrait of René Descartes. When his brother-in-law Gijsbert d'Hondecoeter died, he trained his nephew Melchior d'Hondecoeter, together with his own son Jan Weenix. Weenix rented the castle at Haarzuilens outside Utrecht, to concentrate on his work or for health reasons (plague). On 25 April 1659 the inventory of his estate was auctioned off. His widow, who had been living on Wittevrouwenstraat, in Utrecht, was buried on 6 October 1662.

He painted a few religious scenes, one of the rare pieces of this kind being the "Jacob and Esau" (Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister, Dresden). In the National Gallery, London, is a "Hunting Scene" by Weenix, and Glasgow has a characteristic painting of ruins. Weenix is represented at most of the important continental galleries, notably at Munich, Vienna, Berlin, Amsterdam, and St Petersburg.

Public collections
Among the public collections holding works by Jan Baptist Weenix are:

 * Museum de Fundatie in Zwolle, Netherlands
 * Teylers Museum, in Haarlem, Netherlands
 * Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen in Rotterdam, Netherlands
 * Philadelphia Museum of Art in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
 * Wallace Collection, London, England

Literature
Attribution:
 * Anke A. Van Wagenberg-Ter Hoeven (2018) Jan Baptist Weenix & Jan Weenix: The Paintings, Zwolle: Waanders & De Kunst. ISBN 9789462621596
 * Anke A. Van Wagenberg-Ter Hoeven (2018) Jan Baptist Weenix & Jan Weenix: The Paintings, Zwolle: Waanders & De Kunst. ISBN 9789462621596

title: Jan Baptist Weenix


text:
Jan Weenix

Jan Weenix or Joannis Wenix (between 1641/1649 – 19 September 1719 (buried)) was a Dutch painter. He was trained by his father, Jan Baptist Weenix, together with his cousin Melchior d'Hondecoeter. Like his father, he painted various subjects, but is mostly known for his paintings of dead game and hunting scenes. Many paintings in this genre were formerly ascribed to the elder Weenix, but are now generally considered to be the work of the son.

Life

Jan Weenix was born in Amsterdam according to his notice of marriage in 1679 but his date of birth is not exactly known as the baptismal record of this catholic church did not survive. Between 1643 and 1647 his father (Jan Baptist) worked in Italy, but the family moved to Utrecht around 1649. His father subsequently moved into a castle near Vleuten, but died rather young in 1659.

By the age of twenty Jan Weenix rivalled and later surpassed his father in breadth of treatment and richness of colour. Jan Weenix was a member of the Utrecht guild of painters in 1664 and 1668.

Marriage and children

In 1679, Jan Weenix married the 20-year-old Pieternella Backers (he told the schepen he was "around thirty"). Between 1680 and 1700, the couple had 13 children who were baptized in a hidden church. At least four were sons –Jan Baptista (1680-), Willem Ignatius (1690-1764), Jacobus (1693-), Nicolaes Andreas (1699-1757) – and two were daughters: Sara and Maria Weenix (1697–1774).

In 1697 he painted a portrait of Peter the Great, visiting the Republic to study shipbuilding, science, and the art of fortification building. In Amsterdam, Weenix was frequently employed to decorate private houses with wall-paintings on canvas.

He painted five fixed paintings or wallpaper on canvas for Jacob de Granada; these became very popular in the second half of the 18th century when nature and Rousseau were fashionable and copied. The paintings survived in the house until 1922. Then the enormous "paintings" were sold before an auction to William Randolph Hearst in a private arrangement. After Hearst went bankrupt, the paintings were dispersed; one is in the National Galleries of Scotland in Edinburgh, two are in the Hotel Carlyle in New York, one has been in the Allen Memorial Art Museum since 1953 and one is lost.

Between 1702 and 1712 Weenix was occupied with an important series of twelve large hunting pictures for the Elector Palatine Johann Wilhelm's castle of Bensberg, near Cologne. Also Eglon van der Neer, Rachel Ruysch, Adriaen van der Werff had a very good relationship with the court, being paid well or knighted as ridder and probably meeting an international crowd of artists and musicians. The treasury was empty when Jan Wellem, as he was called in Düsseldorf, died. Most of this collection is now at the Munich Gallery.

Weenix' pupils were his daughter Maria Weenix and Dirk Valkenburg. Jan Weenix lived most of his life in a house across the Mint Tower and was buried in Nieuwezijds Kapel a nearby catholic church on the Rokin. His widow and daughters stayed in the masonry business, selling stones and tiles.

Work
Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was impressed by the treatment of animals in Weenix pictures which he saw in Munich. He devoted a poem to Weenix's technique, in which he stated that Weenix equaled and even surpassed nature in his treatment of animal textures such as hair, feathers and claws.

Many of his best works are to be found in English private collections. The National Gallery, London has two paintings, including "A Deerhound with Dead Game and Implements of the Chase", while the Wallace Collection (also in London) has thirteen paintings, including "Flowers on a Fountain with a Peacock."

Outside the United Kingdom, Jan Weenix is well represented in the galleries of Amsterdam, The Hague, Haarlem, Rotterdam, Berlin, Lisbon and Paris. A medium-sized Weenix, "Still Life with Dead Game", hangs in the dining room of the Filoli estate in California. A certain "Still Life with Hunting Trophies" hangs in the Ackland Art Museum, Chapel Hill, NC, and a large "Peacock with Hunting Trophies" hangs in the Museu Calouste Gulbenkian. "Boy with Toys, Pet Monkey and a Turkey" is in the Kresge Art Museum. "Still Life with Dead Hare" in the Museum of Western and Oriental Art in Kyiv.

title: Jan Weenix


text:
Allaert van Everdingen

Allaert van Everdingen (, bapt. 18 June 1621 – 8 November 1675 (buried)), was a Dutch Golden Age painter and printmaker in etching and mezzotint.

Biography
Van Everdingen was born at Alkmaar, the son of a government clerk. He and his older brothers, the painters Jan and Caesar van Everdingen, according to Arnold Houbraken, were taught by Roelandt Savery at Utrecht. Allaert moved in 1645 to Haarlem, where he studied under Pieter de Molijn. In February of that year he married Janneke Cornelisdr. Their first child, Cornelis, was born a year later. Allart finally settled about 1657 in Amsterdam, where he died in 1675.

Style
It would be difficult to find a greater contrast than that presented by the works of Savery and Everdingen. Savery inherited the brilliant style of the Brueghels, which he carried into the 17th century; whilst Everdingen realized the large and effective system of coloured and powerfully shaded landscape which characterises the precursors of Rembrandt. A fascination with the exotic is probably what inspired Allaert to travel himself, though it is quite within the range of probability that he acquired his approach from his drawing master, Pieter de Molijn.

Norwegian waterfalls
In 1644 Everdingen travelled to Norway and Sweden, a trip that was to have profound consequences on his art. According to his biographer Arnold Houbraken, his visit to Norway was unscheduled, but occurred when his ship, en route to the Baltic Sea, ran into a heavy storm and moored there for shelter. In the manner of Frans Post, Everdingen took advantage of this mishap by making sketches of the Norwegian landscape, which would have seemed very exotic to his Dutch countrymen. His annotated drawings document visits to the south-east Norwegian coast and to Bohusland and the Göteborg area in western Sweden. These sketches, which he later painted in his studio, became very popular, and though now scarce, exhibit a broad and sweeping mode of execution, differing but slightly from that transmitted at the dawn of the 17th century from Jan van Goyen to Salomon van Ruysdael. He returned to the Netherlands by 21 February 1645, when he married Janneke Cornelisdr Brouwers in Haarlem. He died in Amsterdam.

Haarlem school of landscape artists
Molijn wielded his own influence on his gifted disciple, but the school of landscape painters in Haarlem brought forth many young, talented artists who incorporated the tonal qualities of van Goyen. This can be seen in the development of Isaac van Ostade, who abandoned the genre techniques of his brother Adriaen van Ostade for the broader landscapes of the Ruisdael family. In Utrecht Allert would have also met Savery's nephew and namesake, the landscape artist and engraver Roelant Roghman, who probably returned with him on his trips to Alkmaar, where he made many prints. Alkmaar, itself a busy trading place near Texel island, had little of the picturesque for an artist except polders and dunes or waves and sky. Accordingly, we find Allaert at first a painter of coast scenery. But on one of his expeditions he is said to have been cast ashore in Norway, and during the repairs of his ship he visited the inland valleys, and thus gave a new course to his art.

Works
In early pieces he cleverly represents the sea in motion under varied, but mostly clouded, aspects of sky. Their general intonation is strong and brown, and effects are rendered in a powerful key, but the execution is much more uniform than that of Jacob van Ruisdael. A dark scud lowering on a rolling sea near the walls of Flushing characterizes Everdingens Mouth of the Schelde in the Hermitage at St Petersburg. Storm is the marked feature of sea-pieces in the Staedel or Robartes collections; and a strand with wreckers at the foot of a cliff in the Munich Pinakothek may be a reminiscence of personal adventure in Norway. But the Norwegian coast was studied in calms as well as in gales; and a fine canvas at Munich shows fishermen on a still and sunny day taking herrings to a smoking hut at the foot of a Norwegian crag.

The earliest of Everdingen's sea-pieces bears the date of 1640. After 1640 we meet with nothing but representations of inland scenery, and particularly of Norwegian valleys, remarkable alike for wildness and a decisive depth of tone. The masters favorite theme is a fall in a glen, with mournful fringes of pines interspersed with birch, and log-huts at the base of rocks and craggy slopes. The water tumbles over the foreground, so as to entitle the painter to the name of inventor of cascades. It gives Everdingen his character as a precursor of Jacob van Ruisdael in a certain form of landscape composition; but though very skillful in arrangement and clever in effects, Everdingen remains much more simple in execution; he is much less subtle in feeling or varied in touch than his great and incomparable countryman.

Five of Everdingen's cascades are in the museum of Copenhagen alone: of these, one is dated 1647, another 1649. In the Hermitage at St Petersburg is a fine example of 1647; another in the Pinakothek at Munich was finished in 1656. One of his best-known masterpieces is the Norwegian glen belonging to Lord Listowel. Of his etchings and drawings there are much larger and more numerous specimens in England than elsewhere. Being a collector as well as an engraver and painter, he brought together a large number of works of all kinds and masters; and the sale of these by his heirs at Amsterdam on 11 March 1676 gives an approximate clue to the date of the painters death.

His two brothers, Jan and Caesar, were both good painters according to Houbraken, though Jan had a civil job that kept him from his hobby.

Exhibitions
Allart van Everdingen (1621–1675), Het ruige landschap. Stedelijk Museum Alkmaar, 9 September 2021 through 16 January 2022. Exhibition catalogue edited by Christi M. Klinkert and Yvonne Bleyerveld. Translation by Lynn Richards. Allart van Everdingen, 1621–1675: Master of the Rugged Landscape. Rotterdam: nai010, 2021.

title: Allaert van Everdingen


text:
Carlos Seixas

José António Carlos de Seixas (11 June 1704 – 25 August 1742) was a pre-eminent Portuguese composer of the 18th century. An accomplished virtuoso of both the organ and the harpsichord, Seixas succeeded his father as the organist for Coimbra Cathedral at the age of fourteen. In 1720, he departed for the capital, Lisbon, where he was to serve as the organist for the royal chapel, one of the highest offices for a musician in Portugal, a position which earned him a knighthood. Much of Seixas' music rests in an ambiguous transitional period from the learned style of the 17th century to the galant style of the 18th century.

Life
Seixas was born in Coimbra to Francisco Vaz and Marcelina Nunes. From a young age, he was surrounded by musical activity; his father served as the cathedral organist, and the flurry of musical activity in the local monastery of Santa Cruz had an equally important role in his musical training. In 1718, a few days before his father's death, Seixas succeeded his father as cathedral organist. Two years after, in 1720, he moved to Lisbon to take up his new position in the court of John V of Portugal as court organist and harpsichordist.

Citing his elegance and agility on the keyboard, he was a favorite teacher of many noble families, including the family of Luís Xavier Furtado de Mendonça, the Viscount of Barbacena, where he gave harpsichord lessons to the Viscount's wife and daughters in exchange for artistic patronage. In Lisbon, Seixas met Italian composer Domenico Scarlatti, who was working in Portugal from 1719 to 1728 as appointed director of the court cathedral. In an account by José Mazza in his Diccionario biographico de Musicos portugueses e noticia das suas composições of 1780, the king's brother, Dom António, arranged for Scarlatti to give Seixas harpsichord lessons. Scarlatti, immediately recognizing Seixas' talent, replied, "You can give me lessons."

In 1731 he was married at age twenty-eight to D. Maria Joana Tomásia da Silva, with whom he had two sons and three daughters. He was knighted in 1738 by the king, inducted into the Order of Christ. Four years later, in 1742, he died of a rheumatic fever, and was buried in the Santa Maria Basilica in Lisbon.

Works
Seixas' keyboard works were written for a variety of instruments, including the organ, harpsichord, and the clavichord. Stylistically speaking, however, his sonatas showcase a range of musical styles: some are exemplary of a Baroque toccata; some are firmly in the galant style; some are clearly influenced by the German Empfindsamer Stil (literally 'sensitive style'). Despite rarely, if ever, traveling outside of Lisbon, his work also includes various geographical styles, such as the German Mannheim school, the French minuet, and the Italian style as composed by Scarlatti, his colleague and contemporary. Santiago Kastner, Seixas' biographer and editor of his pieces, describes Seixas' works as "unoccupied" with a particular form, and given over to frequent improvisation. Much of his work was destroyed in the earthquake that devastated Lisbon in 1755. Only three orchestral pieces and around one hundred keyboard sonatas out of over an alleged seven hundred survived, plus a handful of choral works for liturgical use (much more conservative than what one would expect from his instrumental music).

Macario Santiago Kastner published collections of the sonatas in Portugaliae Musica.

Choral works

 * Mass in G.
 * Tantum ergo;
 * Ardebat vincentius;
 * Conceptio gloriosa;
 * Gloriosa virginis Mariae;
 * Hodie mobis caelorum;
 * Sicut cedrus;
 * Verbum caro;
 * Dythyrambus in honorem et laudem Div. Antonii Olissiponensis.

Instrumental works

 * Overture in D;
 * Harpsichord Concerto in A major;
 * Harpsichord Concerto in G minor;
 * Symphony in B flat;
 * Harpsichord and organ sonatas and toccatas.

Selected recordings

 * Amon Ra CD-SAR 43 Harpsichord Sonatas played by Robert Woolley on a harpsichord made by Joaquim José Antunes in Portugal in 1785. The instrument is in the Finchcocks collection, Goudhurst, Kent, United Kingdom. The recording was made at Finchcocks in December 1988.
 * Deutsche Grammophon 453-182. Two motets (Ardebat Vincentius and Tantum Ergo), in a two-disc collection also containing sacred music by Sousa Carvalho, António Teixeira, and F. A. de Almeida. Originally recorded in 1970, with the Gulbenkian Chamber Orchestra and Chorus conducted by Pierre Salzman and Michel Corboz.
 * Stradivarius STR 33544 Keyboard Sonatas played by Bernard Brauchli on a copy of a clavichord after Manuel Carmo, Porto 1796. The recording was made in Switzerland in December 1998.
 * Virgin Veritas 45114 Harpsichord Concerto, etc. played by Norwegian Baroque Orchestra - Ketil Haugsand.
 * Virgin Veritas 45115 Missa Dixit Dominus, etc. played by Camara de Lisboa / Norwegian Baroque Orchestra - Ketil Haugsand.
 * Portugaler 20102 SPA Música Sacra, Segréis de Lisboa, Coral Lisboa Cantat, Manuel Morais dir.
 * Vox PVT 7171 Minuet and Toccata (Largo-Allegro) played by Elena Polanska
 * Fandango - Scarlatti in Iberia - 6 sonatas played by Sophie Yates- UPC:095115063521 cf theclassicalshop.net CHAN 635
 * Numerica, 2007. Fortepiano Sonatas played by Cremilde Rosado Fernandes on a copy by Denzel Wright of an original pianoforte built by Bartolomeo Cristofori. Recorded in Germany in 2005.
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2012. Harpsichord Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. I), played by José Carlos Araújo on a historic harpsichord made by Joaquim José Antunes in Lisbon in 1758, the earliest surviving Antunes harpsichord. The instrument is in the Lisbon Music Museum collection, Portugal.
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2012. Organ Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. II), played by José Carlos Araújo on a historic organ built by Fr. Manuel de São Bento in the Benedictine Monastery of São Bento da Vitória (Porto) in 1719, the largest and most important historic organ in Porto. This is the world premiere recording of this historic organ and the first complete CD recording of Seixas' organ sonatas.
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2013. Harpsichord Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. III), played by José Carlos Araújo on a historic harpsichord made by Joaquim José Antunes in Lisbon in 1758. The instrument is in the Lisbon Music Museum collection, Portugal.
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2013. Harpsichord Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. IV), played by José Carlos Araújo (harpsichords by Ton Amir and Johannes Klinkhamer (2006) after Chr. Vater, 1738, and Reinhard von Nagel (1992) after G. B. Giusti, 1693).
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2013. Pianoforte Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. V), played by José Carlos Araújo on a historical pianoforte made by Henri-Joseph van Casteel in Lisbon in 1763. The instrument is in the Lisbon Music Museum collection, Portugal.
 * Melographia Portugueza, 2014. Organ Sonatas (Complete Recording, vol. VI), played by José Carlos Araújo on a historic organ built by D. Manuel Benito Gomez de Herrera in the Monastery of Arouca in 1739, one of the most important 18th-century organs in the Iberian Peninsula.

Scores

 * Alvarenga, João Pedro: Carlos Seixas: 12 Sonatas (Lisbon: Musicoteca, 1995).
 * Doderer, Gerhard: Carlos Seixas: Ausgewählte Sonaten I-XV (= Organa Hispanica: Iberische Musik des 16., 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts für Tasteninstrumente, volume 7) (Heidelberg: Süddeutscher Musikverlag, 1982).
 * Doderer, Gerhard: Carlos Seixas: Ausgewählte Sonaten XVI-XXX (= Organa Hispanica: Iberische Musik des 16., 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts für Tasteninstrumente, volume 8) (Heidelberg: Süddeutscher Musikverlag, 1982).
 * Kastner, Macário Santiago: Cravistas Portugueses, volume 1 (Mainz: B. Schott's Söhne, 1935).
 * Kastner, Macário Santiago: Cravistas Portugueses, volume 2 (Mainz: B. Schott's Söhne, 1950).
 * Kastner, Macário Santiago: Carlos Seixas. 80 Sonatas para Tecla (= Portugaliae Musica, vol. 10) (Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 1965).
 * Kastner, Macário Santiago and João Valeriano: Carlos Seixas. 25 Sonatas para Instrumentos de Tecla (= Portugaliae Musica, vol. 34) (Lisbon: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian, 1980).
 * Lourenço, José (ed.): 12 Toccatas: Carlos Seixas (Ava Musical Editions, 2007).
 * Vasconcellos, Jorge Croner de and Fernandes, Armando José: Carlos Seixas: Tocatas e Minuetes (Lisbon: Biblioteca Nacional de Lisboa, 1975).

title: Carlos Seixas


text:
500 home run club

In Major League Baseball (MLB), the 500 home run club is a group of batters who have hit 500 or more regular-season home runs in their careers. There are twenty-eight players who are members of the 500 home run club. Seven 500 home run club members—Hank Aaron, Willie Mays, Eddie Murray, Rafael Palmeiro, Albert Pujols, Alex Rodriguez and Miguel Cabrera—are also members of the 3,000 hit club. In the past, membership in the 500 home run club was a guarantee of eventual entry into the Baseball Hall of Fame, although some believe the milestone has become less meaningful in recent years and many members have not been enshrined in Cooperstown.

All 15 players who became members of the 500 home run club between 1929 and 1996 are members of the Hall of Fame. Of the 11 players who made the 500 homer club between 1999 and 2015 who are Hall of Fame eligible, only four have been enshrined in Cooperstown. Seven eligible club members—Barry Bonds, Alex Rodriguez, Mark McGwire, Palmeiro, Manny Ramirez, Gary Sheffield and Sammy Sosa—have not been elected to the Hall. Bonds is one of only four members in the 700 home run club and Rodriguez and Sosa are members of the 600 homer club, all of whose other members are Hall of Famers except for the recently retired Albert Pujols, who hit 703 career home runs and is not eligible until 2027.

Bonds and Sosa made their first appearance on the Hall of Fame ballot in ; Bonds received only 36.2% and Sosa 12.5% of the total votes, with 75% required for induction. Eligibility requires that a player has "been retired five seasons" or be deceased for at least six months. Some believe the milestone has become less important with the large number of new members; 10 players joined the club from 1999 to 2009. Additionally, several of these recent members - including all seven aforementioned eligible members - have had ties to performance-enhancing drugs. Some believe that by not electing McGwire to the Hall the voters were establishing a "referendum" on how they would treat players from the "Steroid Era". On January 8, 2014, Palmeiro became the first member of the club to be removed from the BBWAA Hall of Fame ballot after failing to appear on at least 5.0% of ballots.

On August 11, 1929, Babe Ruth became the first member of the club. Ruth surpassed Roger Connor's record of 138 career homers during the 1921 season, and was the first player to hit 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 and 700 career home runs. Ruth ended his career with 714 home runs, a record which stood from 1935 until Hank Aaron surpassed it in 1974. Aaron's ultimate career total, 755, remained the record until Barry Bonds set the current mark of 762 during the 2007 season. The most recent player to reach 500 home runs is Miguel Cabrera, who hit his 500th home run on August 22, 2021; As of the end of the 2023 season, there are no active members of the club.

Members

 * Stats updated as of the end of the 2023 season.

title: 500 home run club