text:
InFocus

InFocus Corporation is a privately owned American company based in the state of Oregon. Founded in 1986, the company develops, manufactures, and distributes DLP and LCD projectors and accessories as well as large-format touch displays, software, LED televisions, tablets and smartphones. InFocus also offers video calling services. Formerly a NASDAQ listed public company, InFocus was purchased by Image Holdings Corp., owned by John Hui, in 2009 and is now a wholly owned subsidiary headquartered in Tigard, Oregon.

History
InFocus was formed by Steve Hix and Paul Gulick in 1986. It is one of three companies in the computer display industry started by people who formerly worked for Tektronix (along with Planar Systems and Clarity Visual Systems). The company moved into a new headquarters building in Wilsonville, Oregon, in 2002. At that time the company employed 1,200 people.

In mid-2005 InFocus acquired the company TUN (The University Network), which provided digital media and thin screen television advertising to colleges, and then sold it in late 2006 to Submedia LLC. The company later became a publicly traded company on the NASDAQ exchange as INFS. On May 28, 2009, InFocus was taken private by Image Holdings Corporation and John Hui in a transaction valued at $39 million. In October 2009, they announced plans to move to Tigard, Oregon in December 2009 as their old headquarters were too big for the much smaller new company. The company was down to 110 employees at the time of the move, with just over half at the headquarters. As of 2012, the company had further shrunk to 90 employees and revenues of about $150 million. As of 2014, the company employed 120 people and is one of Oregon's 25 largest homegrown technology companies. In September 2015 InFocus named long-time board member, Mark Housely CEO. In October 2015 InFocus acquired Jupiter Systems, a company based in Hayward, California which developed video wall and collaboration systems.

Products
InFocus produces DLP and LCD projectors and LCD flat panel touchscreens for business users, educators, government entities, ProAV customers, mobile professionals and home theater enthusiasts. One touchscreen product is the Mondopad that is targeted at business and education customers. The Mondopad is a large-format high definition touchscreen PC with software for presenting, whiteboarding and videoconferencing. Other products include: BigTouch large-format touch PC, JTouch large-format touch display, MVP100 Video Phone, Q Tablet, and numerous accessories and peripherals. The company also produces software for digital annotation and video calling.

The company provides point-to-point and multi-endpoint video calling services as well called 121 Video Calling and ConX Video Meeting, respectively.

InFocus owns and operates the ASK Proxima brand, and in the past sold products under the names ASK, Proxima, and InFocus ScreenPlay.

In 2013, InFocus began offering budget high-specification smartphones, tablets and LED televisions in China, Taiwan, India and other East Asian markets in partnership with FIH Mobile Ltd. (富智康) and Foxconn (鴻海精密). The company announced its official entry into the Indian market in July 2015 at a press conference in New Delhi, followed by an expansion into key Middle Eastern, North African and South Asian emerging markets. The current range of InFocus smartphones includes the metallic unibody M812 and M808 models, the InFocus M550-3D with 3D image capture & naked eye 3D display technology, and the entry-level M370. In 2016, Infocus launched several budget end smartphones, tablets and low-end to high-end LED televisions in India.

In June 2017, InFocus launched the Turbo5 and Snap 4 Smartphones in India. Over the years, the company has built 409 service/e-waste-management centers across India. In 2018, InFocus launched the Vision 3 series with 5.7" full screen display and AL/proximity sensors.

title: InFocus


text:
Early thermal weapons

Early thermal weapons, which used heat or burning action to destroy or damage enemy personnel, fortifications or territories, were employed in warfare during the classical and medieval periods (approximately the 8th century BC until the mid-16th century AD).

Incendiary devices were frequently used as projectiles during warfare, particularly during sieges and naval battles: some substances were boiled or heated to inflict damage by scalding or burning; other substances relied on their chemical properties to inflict burns or damage. These weapons or devices could be used by individuals, thrown by siege engines, or utilised as army strategy. Incendiary mixtures, such as the petroleum-based Greek fire, could be launched by throwing machines or administered through a siphon. Sulfur- and oil-soaked materials were sometimes ignited and thrown at the enemy, or attached to spears, arrow and bolts and fired by hand or machine.

The simplest and most common thermal projectiles were boiling water and hot sand, which could be poured over attacking personnel. Other anti-personnel weapons included the use of hot pitch, oil, resin, animal fat and other similar compounds. Smoke was used to confuse or drive off attackers. Substances such as quicklime and sulfur could be toxic and blinding.

Fire and incendiary weapons were also used against enemy structures and territory, sometimes on a massive scale. Large tracts of land, towns and villages were frequently ignited as part of a scorched earth strategy. Some siege techniques—such as mining and boring—relied on combustibles and fire to complete the collapse of walls and structures.

Towards the latter part of the period, gunpowder was invented, which increased the sophistication of the weapons, starting with fire lances, which led to the eventual development of the cannon and other firearms. Development of the early weapons has continued ever since, with modern war weapons such as napalm, flame throwers, and other explosives having direct roots in the original early thermal weapons. Fire-raising and other destructive strategies can still be seen in modern strategic bombing.

"Fire and sword"
The destruction of enemy possessions and territory was a fundamental strategy of war, serving the dual purpose of punishment and deprivation of resources. Until the 5th century BC, the Greeks had little expertise in siege warfare and relied on a strategy of devastation to draw the enemy out; they destroyed crops, trees and houses. Centuries later, the Byzantines recommended this strategy, even though they had developed siege technology.

Fire was the easiest way of harrying and destroying territories, and could be done easily and quickly by small forces. It was a strategy put to good use by the Scots during the Wars of Independence; they repeatedly launched raids into northern England, burning much of the countryside until the whole region was transformed. King Edward II of England pursued one raiding party in 1327 by following the lights of burning villages.

The tactics were replicated by England during the Hundred Years' War; fire became their chief weapon as they laid waste to the French countryside during lightning raids called chevauchées, in a form of economic warfare. One estimate records the destruction of over 2000 villages and castles during one raid in 1339.

As well as causing the destruction of lands, food and belongings, fire could also be used to divert manpower. 13th century Mongol armies regularly sent out small detachments from their main forces to start grass fires and fire settlements as diversions.

Devastation by fire was not only used as an offensive tactic; some countries and armies employed "scorched earth" policies on their own land to deprive invading armies of all food and forage. Robert I of Scotland reacted to the English invasion of 1322 by launching punitive and diversionary chevauchées into north-west England, then retreating to Culross, burning as he went the Scottish lands which lay in the path of the English army. The English ran out of food and had to abandon the campaign.

Such acts of aggression were not limited to wars against territorial enemies, but could form part of the strategies of conquest, subjugation and punishment of rebellion. Alexander the Great suppressed a revolt in Thebes, Greece in 335 BC, after which he ordered the city to be torched and laid waste. Alexander ordered (or allowed) a similar arson at Persepolis in 330 BC. It was a policy which was repeated throughout the period. William I of England, following his conquest of England in the 11th century, asserted his control of Northumbria by destructive campaigns throughout the region: "He ordered that crops and herds, tools and food should be burned to ashes. More than 100,000 people perished of hunger", reported Orderic Vitalis, a contemporary chronicler. It was a scene repeated the following century, during the anarchy of Stephen of England's reign. Civil war erupted between Stephen's supporters and those of the Empress Matilda, a rival claimant for the throne. The Gesta Stephani tells of the deeds of one of Stephen's supporters, Philip of Gloucester, by describing how he "raged in all directions with fire and sword, violence and plunder", reducing territory to "bare fields and dreadful desert".

Techniques of use
At the simplest level, fire itself was used as a weapon to cause large-scale destruction, or to target specific enemy positions or machinery. It was frequently used against siege engines and wooden structures. Incendiary weapons could be used to set fire to towns and fortifications, and a wide range of thermal weapons were used against enemy personnel. Some armies developed specialised "fire-troops". By 837, many Muslim armies had groups of "naffatin" (fire archers), and when the Mamluk Sultanate raised a fleet for an attack on Cyprus they had "nafata", or firetroops.

Simple fire-raising
The burning of enemy positions and equipment was not necessarily a complicated procedure, and many fires were set by individuals using common materials. When William of Normandy's army besieged Mayenne in 1063, they shot fire into the castle to panic the garrison, while two boys stole into the castle in order to start a fire within. The garrison surrendered.

Besieged forces would sometimes launch sorties in an attempt to fire the attackers' camps or equipment. When Hugh Capet besieged Laon in 986–987, his troops became drunk one night, and Duke Charles's men sallied forth and torched the camp, forcing Hugh to abandon the siege.

The besieged were not the only ones who might fire siege equipment; when Frederick I Barbarossa abandoned his siege of Alessandria in 1175, he burned his own camp and equipment.

However, like all weapons, fire-raising had its own dangers. In 651 Penda of Mercia attempted to win Bamburgh Castle by building a pyre at its base from planks, beams, wattle and thatch. The wind changed direction and the fire blew back on Penda's men, who had to abandon the attack. This fortuitous wind-change was credited to Saint Aidan, who saw the smoke from the Farne Islands and prayed for the defenders.

Throwing machines

Various throwing machines were in use throughout the classical and medieval periods. Generally referred to as "artillery", these engines could hurl, fire or shoot missiles and most could be used or adapted for throwing thermal weapons, by attacking and defending forces. Barrels, fire pots and other breakable containers of pitch, Greek fire, and other incendiary mixtures could be thrown; other machines fired arrows and bolts, which could be ignited, or adapted to carry flammable mixtures. From the 12th century, Muslims in Syria were using clay and glass grenades for fire weapons, thrown by machines.

Most of the terms used for throwing machines were vague, and could refer to different engines, all of which went through changes and developments over the period. Among the most common were the ballista, mangonel and trebuchet. The ballista was similar in form to a crossbow, though much larger, and used a string-winding mechanism to fire a missile or bolt placed in a groove. Other giant crossbows were used throughout the period, and an "espringal", based on the ballista, which threw large bolts, was developed in the 13th century. Torsion-powered arrow firers had been used from 400 BC, and were adapted for stones. A mangonel had a wooden spoon-shaped arm, to hold a stone or other projectile, which was manipulated under tension from a twisted rope. The trebuchet was an advanced development of the 12th or 13th century, which used a counter-weight to power the throwing arm, and was the major siege engine until the cannon became widespread.

In mining
Forces attacking a castle or other strong fortification sometimes sought to undermine the foundations by digging "mines" or tunnels underneath them. Usually, such mining or digging machinery was protected by a tortoise (also called a cat, sow, or owl): a covered shed on wheels, which shielded the miners from missile attack.

As the tunnels were constructed, they were generally supported by wooden beams and posts. Once the mine had been finished, the internal space was filled with combustibles, such as brushwood, firewood, resin, and other incendiary substances; once ignited, these would burn the supporting props, causing the mine to collapse, bringing down with it the structures lying above. From the 15th century, gunpowder was also used, although the aim remained to burn the props.

Defenders might sometimes dig counter-tunnels in order to reach the enemy's mines and launch an attack; frequently thermal weapons were used to drive the besiegers from the tunnels.

Rather than undermining a structure, some besiegers used borers to drill holes in the outer walls in an effort to destroy them; such methods were more effective than rams on brick walls (which tended to absorb the shocks from the ram). Borers differed in size and mechanism, but a typical machine was made from a log of wood, tipped with iron and supported and driven by windlasses or ropes. Once a series of holes had been bored along the length of a wall, the holes were typically filled with rods of dry wood, saturated with sulfur or pitch and then ignited. Bellows could be used to encourage a blaze.

Fire ships

Fire ships were used on several occasions throughout the period. In 332 BC Alexander the Great laid siege to Tyre, a coastal base of the Phoenicians. In order to bring his siege engines within range, Alexander ordered the construction of moles. The Tyrians responded by attacking the first mole with a large fireship, which destroyed it. A large horse transport ship was packed with cedar torches, pitch, dried brush and other combustibles; above this were suspended cauldrons of sulfur, bitumen and "every sort of material apt to kindle and nourish flame". This was towed to the mole, and lit by the Phoenicians before they jumped overboard and swam away.

Another example occurred during the 886 Siege of Paris, when the Vikings filled three warships with combustible material and pulled them upriver in a failed attempt to destroy the Franks' fortified bridges. Fire ships containing straw and powder were also used during the Chinese Battle of Lake Poyang in 1363.

Other methods
Often ingenious methods were developed for administering the weapons. The 10th-century Olga of Kiev is reported to have tied burning tinder to birds which, when released, flew back to their nests in the hostile town and set them alight. Siege towers and ladders could be fitted with a long, narrow tilting beam at the top, gouged with a groove, so that hot oil and water could be poured down on the enemy defenders during an escalade.

During an attack, castle or fortification defenders could launch or pour the substances on the heads of attackers below. This could be done over the battlements, but also through purpose-built holes such as machicolations and murder-holes. Indian records suggest smoke and fire was used defensively within a fortress to confuse and disorient attackers; iron grills could also be heated and used to block passageways. During night attacks, defenders could drop lighted bundles over the walls so the enemy could be seen; Chinese and Muslim sources also describe the light gained by torches hung on the walls.

Use against stone castles
Stone castles were susceptible to fire, since they contained many combustible materials. In 1139, Henry de Tracy forced the surrender of Torrington Castle by the simple expedient of tossing lighted torches through the keep's loopholes.

Stone was also susceptible to intense heat, which would cause it to crack and collapse. Byzantine sources recorded the demolition of stone structures caused by placing clay pots of burning charcoal at the base of walls moistened with vinegar or urine, and the 6th century treatise by an engineer in Justinian's army includes the lighting of fires beneath the walls amongst its instructions for sieges.

Stone castles sometimes offered other inflammatory targets. During the Crusades, Muslim defenders frequently hung bundles of straw against their walls as buffers against stones and rams; in turn, the Crusader archers would set these alight with flaming arrows.

Defense against thermal attack
Defense from thermal weapons and fire attacks was usually water or other liquids such as urine; hides were soaked and draped over vulnerable wooden hoardings and siege engines, vats and barrels of liquid were collected and stored by defenders and attackers. Hides were hung in an overlapping manner so that any water would run down the whole structure to extinguish flames. Some thermal weapons (such as quicklime or oil) could not be extinguished or eased by water, in which case sand or earth could be used. Wooden structures were frequently soaked in alum to increase their fire resistance. The Romans covered their tortoises (mobile siege sheds) with raw hides packed with vinegar-soaked seaweed or chaff, to serve as protection against regular and incendiary missiles. Throughout the period, sacks or nets might be filled with vinegar-moistened chaff, seaweed or wet moss and hung on the exterior. The wooden siege engines of the Crusaders were vulnerable to attack from the Byzantine and Muslim fire-weapons, so the troops inside siege towers kept stores of water and vinegar.

During the High Middle Ages, the majority of Poland's castles were still made of wood, so uncut stone was frequently added to the front to improve their fire defences.

Both attackers and defenders needed to be prepared for incendiary and thermal attack. When the Athenians besieged Syracuse in 416 BC they lost many siege engines to fire. The Syracusan ruler Dionysius I must have taken note of this success, for when he laid siege to Motya in 398 BC he organised special fire "brigades", who successfully doused the fires when his siege engines were bombarded.

During the First English Civil War, incendiary devices were used to raze city centers. Defenders in London were advised to combat the flames using milk, sand, earth, and urine. In Colchester, fires caused by hand grenades (the weapon was called "wildfire" by the combatants) were extinguished using wet clothes saturated in milk and vinegar.

Flaming arrows, bolts, spears, and rockets

Lit torches (burning sticks) were likely the earliest form of incendiary device. They were followed by incendiary arrows, which were used throughout the ancient and medieval periods. The simplest flaming arrows had oil- or resin-soaked tows tied just below the arrowhead and were effective against wooden structures. Both the Assyrians and the Judeans used flaming arrows at the siege of Lachish in 701 BC. More sophisticated devices were developed by the Romans which had iron boxes and tubes which were filled with incendiary substances and attached to arrows or spears. These arrows needed to be shot from loose bows, since swift flight extinguished the flame; spears could be launched by hand or throwing machine.

Flaming arrows required the shooter to get quite close to their desired target and most will have extinguished themselves before reaching the target. In response, another form of fire arrow was developed which consisted of curved metal bars connecting a tip and hollow end for the shaft. The resulting cage was filled with hot coals or other solid object which could be fired from a much stronger bow or ballista without fear of extinguishing and would be used to ignite straw or thatch roofs from a safer distance.

Flaming arrows and crossbow bolts were used throughout the period. Fifteenth-century writer Gutierre Diaz de Gamez witnessed a Spanish attack on the Moorish town of Oran in 1404 and later described how "During the most part of the night, the galleys did not cease from firing bolts and quarrells dipped in tar into the town, which is near the sea. The noise and the cries which came from the town were very great by reason of the havoc that was wrought."

Anna Komnene records that at the 1091 Battle of Levounion, lighted torches were fixed to spears.

The Chinese Song Dynasty created fire arrows – arrows with pouches of gunpowder, which were launched en masse through platforms, and later created rockets such as the huo long chu shui, a multistage rocket used in naval combat. Primitive rockets made from bamboo and leather were used by the Mongols, under Genghis Khan, but were inaccurate. However, the Fatimids used "Chinese arrows" from the 11th Century, which probably included saltpetre. The Mamluks experimented with a rocket-powered weapon described as "an egg which moves itself and burns".

A 2 m long iron crossbow-bolt probably designed to carry a fire cartridge was found in a 13th-14th-century castle in Vladimir, Russia. Such large machine-thrown bolts were ideal for incendiary weapons. The Mongols used an "ox-bow" machine to throw bolts which had been dipped in burning pitch, with a range of 2500 paces.

During the British Civil Wars (mid-17th century in Great Britain), both the Parliamentarian and Royalist armies used various incendiary devices to attack enemies and destroy property that might be used for military purposes, according to historian Stephen Porter in Destruction in the English Civil Wars. The flaming arrow attack was used to set fire to buildings at a distance. An arrow with a flammable substance attached to the shaft, close to the tip, was shot from a bow or short-muzzled musket. Such arrows shot from a musket had their feathers removed, to fit inside the muzzle, and were called fire-darts. These devices were cheap to make and easy to prepare. Although used infrequently during the wars, the flaming arrows and darts proved to be destructive. The Royalists shot flaming arrows into the thatched homes in the suburbs of Chester causing extensive damage. Lyme Regis was partly razed using flaming arrows.

Greek fire

Greek fire was one of the most effective thermal devices, although it was extremely dangerous for the users. A combustible liquid, it could be shot from siphons or catapults, and it burst into flames on impact. First developed by the Byzantines in the 7th century, it was later used by the Turks during the Crusades, and was probably first used in Western Europe in the 12th century. Early experiments by the Byzantines in the 6th century used a mixture of sulfur and oil, which would have been terrifying if not destructive. Various versions seem to have existed, and the recipes were frequently kept secret; experts today still debate the exact composition, although some recipes are known. It probably had regional variations; the Islamic derivative was known as "naft" and had a petroleum base, with sulfur; the Persian word for "petroleum" is نفت (naft).

The combustible liquid could be shot from catapults, and would burst into flames on impact. Siphons, frequently of copper, were also developed, first appearing in the 10th and 11th centuries. The siphons could shoot a blazing stream, which a 10th-century Mesopotamian source claimed could engulf twelve men. Mardi bin Ali al-Tarsusi, who wrote a military manual for Saladin in the 12th century, suggested that "naft" could be placed inside blown eggshells, which could be thrown from horseback. From the 12th century, mouth-blown tubes were developed for use in mines.

Similar petroleum and bitumen-based incendiary mixtures had been known for centuries before the invention of Greek fire, but this new recipe created a blaze which was extremely difficult to extinguish. It burned on water, and was used effectively in naval warfare, although it was primarily an anti-personnel weapon rather than a ship-burner. It remained effective at sea even after its use had declined on land after the 13th century.

The Greek fire recipes continued to be developed over the centuries, and by the High Middle Ages was much more sophisticated than the early versions. Saltpetre (also called "Chinese salt") was added to the mixture in the Islamic world, and China developed a dry saltpetre mixture in the 12th century, which eventually became gunpowder. Both the Parliamentarian and Royalist armies used Greek-fire-like petroleum-based incendiary devices known as "wildfire" during the British Civil Wars.

Duarte Barbosa ca. 1514 listed weapons made by Javanese people, including Greek fire. Zhang Xie in Dong Xi Yang Kao (1618) mentioned that city of Palembang, which has been conquered by Javanese, produces the furious fiery oil (ming huo yu), which according to the Hua I Kao is a kind of tree secretion (shu chin), and is also called mud oil (ni yu). Zhang Xie wrote: "It much resemble camphor, and can corrode human flesh. When ignited and thrown on water, its light and flame become all the more intense. The barbarians use it as a fire-weapon and produce great conflagrations in which sails, bulwarks, upperworks and oars all catch fire and cannot withstand it. Fishes and tortoises coming in contact with it cannot escape from being scorched."Because there was no mention of projector pump, the weapon is probably breakable bottles with fuses.

Hot oil
Oil of various kinds could be heated to high temperatures and poured over an enemy, although, since it was extremely expensive, its use was limited, both in frequency and quantity. Moreover, it could be dangerous and volatile. Since the smoke point of oil is lower than its boiling point, the oil was only heated and not boiled.

Pouring-oil was used in historic battles, and Josephus described its use at Jotapata in AD 67, saying "the oil did easily run down the whole body from head to foot, under their entire armour, and fed upon their flesh like flame itself."

Oil was usually used to create incendiary devices. The Roman-Byzantine armies of the 6th century created "fire-pots", oil-based incendiary weapons which could be launched by hand or with ballistae. During the siege at Montreuil-en-Bellay in 1147, a mixture of oils from nuts, cannabis and flax, was heated in iron containers, launched by mangonel, and burst into flames on impact. The Chinese made early grenades out of oil-soaked hemp and cotton, which were ignited and thrown by mangonels.

Another use of oil can be seen in the naval battle of La Rochelle during the Hundred Years' War; the Castilians sprayed oil on the decks of English ships then ignited it by shooting flaming arrows down.

Water, sand and other heated missiles
Hot oil was considerably less common than boiling water or heated sand, which were cheap and extremely effective; even "dust from the street" could be used. These would penetrate armour and cause terrible burns. Sand, especially, could work its way through very small gaps in armour. The Phoenicians at the Siege of Tyre (332 BC) dropped burning sand down on the attacking Greeks, which got in behind the armour and burned the flesh.

Such heated missiles have also been used in mining situations; the 1st century Roman writer Vitruvius describes a counter-mine dug above the attackers' gallery by defenders at the siege of Apollonia. Piercing the floor between the mines, the Apollonian defenders poured down boiling water, hot sand and hot pitch onto the heads of their enemy. Other mixtures were more innovative; the defenders at Chester in 918 boiled a mixture of water and ale in copper tubs and poured it over the Viking besiegers, causing their skin to peel off.

When Holy Roman Emperor Frederick Barbarossa besieged Crema, Italy in the 12th century, the defenders threw red-hot iron objects down on their attackers.

Pitch, tar and resin
Burning pitch was used on occasion. The Sasanians threw fire pots containing sulfur, pitch, and naptha ("oil of Medea") against Byzantine siege engines during the Siege of Petra (550–551). the Mongols were known to fire containers of burning tar during sieges using catapults and trebuchets. Wheels could be covered in pitch, set alight, and rolled along; this technique was commonly used during the Crusades. The besieged Carthaginians in Motya, 398 BC, set alight the siege engines of the attacking Syracusan forces under Dionysius I by dropping burning charred logs and resin-soaked oakum; however, the Syracusans were able to put out the fires.

Pitch was a base ingredient in many incendiary devices throughout the period. The Boeotians developed a fire machine, which they used against the Athenian wooden fortifications during the Battle of Delium in 424 BC. A cauldron of burning coals, pitch and sulfur was suspended at one end of a hollowed-out log and bellows were fixed to the other end. A similar mixture was used 1700 years later by the Scots, when they dropped bales of wood, tar and sulfur by crane onto the English "sow" (a large protective shield covering the battering ram) at the 1319 siege of Berwick-upon-Tweed.

Animal renderings and parts
At the 1215 siege of Rochester Castle, King John ordered that fat from 40 pigs be used to set fire to the mines beneath the keep, which caused it to collapse; a cheap and effective technique in place of the more complicated mixture of sulfur, tallow, gum, pitch and quicksilver he had used in France the previous year. Animal fat was not uncommon as an accelerant; in the 13th century French sortie-parties would often be equipped with animal fat, straw and flax to use as fuel when setting fires amongst enemy siege engines.

There were some other intriguing uses of animal parts; during the Siege of Paris in 886 AD, the Franks dropped bucket-loads of a hot mixture of pitch (or oil), wax and fish on the attacking Vikings; the mixture got under the armour and stuck to the skin. Konrad Kyeser's  Bellifortis of 1405 describes a poisonous mixture of sulfur, tar and horses' hooves. Other incendiary ingredients included egg yolks, and pigeon and sheep droppings.

Some documented uses of animals were not thermal or incendiary. Live insects were also used, to sting the enemy. 4th century BC writer Aeneas Tacticus suggested defenders should let wasps and bees into enemy mines, and jars of scorpions were sometimes fired during early bombardment in naval battles. In 189 BC Ambracia was besieged by the Romans, who dug mines under the walls. The defenders filled a clay jar with chicken feathers, which they then lit, using bellows to blow the acrid smoke down the tunnel; unable to approach the pot due to defensive spears, the Romans were forced to abandon their works.

Quicklime, sulfur and smoke
The 15th-century engineer Taccola recommended quicklime, although its use went back to ancient times, and might well have been a component of Greek fire. Quicklime reacts violently with water, and can cause blindness and burns. While quicklime was used in some naval battles, it does not appear to have been standard issue on board ships, due to the danger of the quicklime blowing back and burning the user.

Other substances smoked rather than flamed. Sacks of burning sulfur were effective at clearing enemy mines due to the toxic smoke produced. Any smoke could be used in small confines; the Greek military writer Aeneas Tacticus recommended burning wood and straw to drive out enemy sappers by the smoke.

Gunpowder and cannons

The discovery of gunpowder was probably the product of centuries of alchemical experimentation. Saltpetre was known to the Chinese by the mid-1st century AD and there is strong evidence of the use of saltpetre and sulfur in various largely medicinal combinations. The impetus for the development of gunpowder weapons in China was increasing encroachment by tribes on its borders. The earliest known formula for gunpowder can be found in a Chinese work dating probably from the 9th century. The Chinese wasted little time in applying it to warfare, and they produced a variety of gunpowder weapons, including flamethrowers, rockets, bombs, and mines, before inventing firearms. European descriptions of gunpowder first appear in Opus Maius and Opus Tertium, written by the English philosopher Roger Bacon in the mid-13th century, although the mixture was not very effective. The composition of gunpowder varied throughout the period, and did not settle into the current ratios of saltpetre, sulfur and charcoal until the 17th century.

The years 904–906 saw the use of incendiary projectiles called 'flying fires' (fei-huo). Needham (1986) argues that gunpowder was first used in warfare in China in 919 as a fuse for the ignition of another incendiary, Greek fire. Initially, gunpowder mixtures were utilised through traditional engines and throwing mechanisms; containers and grenades were thrown by mangonels and trebuchets, and explosive rockets and arrows were developed, along with gunpowder flamethrowers.

Like firearms, cannons are a descendant of the fire-lance, a gunpowder-filled tube used as a flamethrower; shrapnel-like material was sometimes placed in the barrel so that it would fly out together with the flames. In due course, the proportion of saltpeter in the propellant was increased to increase its explosive power. To better withstand that explosive power, the paper and bamboo of which fire-lance barrels were originally made came to be replaced by metal. And to take full advantage of that power, the shrapnel came to be replaced by projectiles whose size and shape filled the barrel more closely. With this, we have the three basic features of the gun: a barrel made of metal, high-nitrate gunpowder, and a projectile which totally occludes the muzzle so that the powder charge exerts its full potential in propellant effect.

Firearms remained in use in China throughout the following centuries. Meanwhile, gunpowder and firearms spread elsewhere very quickly. Gunpowder seems to have been widely known by the 13th century. The Europeans, Arabs, and Koreans all obtained firearms in the 14th century. The Turks, Iranians, and Indians all got firearms no later than the 15th century, in each case directly or indirectly from the Europeans. The Japanese did not acquire firearms until the 16th century, and then from the Portuguese rather than the Chinese.

In 1326, the earliest known European picture of a gun appeared in a treatise entitled "Of the Majesty, Wisdom and Prudence of Kings". On February 11 of that same year, the Signoria of Florence appointed two officers to obtain canones de mettallo and ammunition for the town's defense. A reference from 1331 describes an attack mounted by two Germanic knights on Cividale del Friuli, using gunpowder weapons of some sort. Cannons were first used by the Muslims at Alicante in 1331, or Algeciras in 1343. The French raiding party that sacked and burned Southampton in 1338 brought with them a ribaudequin and 48 bolts (but only 3 pounds of gunpowder). The Battle of Crécy in 1346 was one of the first in Europe where cannons were used.

However, early cannons were not very effective, the main benefits being psychological, frightening men and horses. Short barrelled, large-calibre "bombards" were used up until the late 15th century in Europe, during which period they grew increasingly larger. In the mid-15th century, mortars also appeared. Various smaller weapons also existed, including the serpentine, ribaudequin and cropaudin. The powder was of poor quality and was used in small quantities – to prevent explosion of the barrel – so the effective range of these cannons was rarely more than 200–250m.

The barrels of the cannons were forged or cast, and each gun generally differed in calibre and length. Early powder resembled a paste, and tended to burn slowly. Its composition varied in different geographical areas, the powder of Europe being quite different to that used in the Islamic world. The projectiles used were generally stone balls for bombards and mortars. Forged iron balls were used in smaller-calibre cannons, and coated with lead to make them smooth. From the 15th century, cast iron balls were used, which caused great destruction. As they were denser than stone, even small balls could be destructive. Thus, cannons became smaller in calibre, and longer barrels increased the range.

Later development
The use of incendiary devices had decreased by the 14th century, perhaps due to the economic realities of war where it became increasingly important that captured castles and towns were undamaged. Moreover, fewer wooden engines and structures were employed in the battlefield after the late 13th century, perhaps because of the prior success of the incendiary weapons at destroying them.

While the incidence of use dropped, towards the latter end of the Middle Ages the incendiary devices became more sophisticated, and the principle of wielding fire with sword remained present throughout the Early Modern and Modern periods; improving technology merely allowed the process to become more efficient.

The principle of fire and sword
Fire itself remained a part of warfare. In his reminisces of the Peninsular War (1807–1814), a British soldier recorded that the French soldiers would "regularly burn to the ground every place they pass through. In following them we find each town and village a heap of smoking ruins." During World War I, Leuven, in Belgium was "looted and burned in medieval fashion", when German soldiers set fire to much of the town, destroying the library and other cultural buildings, and causing outrage around the world. Yet the tactic was not dispensed with. In World War II, firebombing with incendiary bombs was carried out by the Germans against Britain during the Blitz, and by the Allies against Germany and Japan. After one heavy raid on Tokyo in March 1945, the resulting conflagration destroyed a quarter of the predominantly wooden buildings. Much as the Ancient Greeks before them, it was a strategy of devastation. Fire has continued to be used as a destructive measure in warfare. During the 1991–1992 Gulf War, Iraq set fire to three-quarters of Kuwait's oil wells.

Fire remained an extremely successful weapon. During naval warfare of the Napoleonic Wars, "the one thing most likely to destroy a ship was fire". Sometimes the fires were merely a side effect of weapon technology. Early firearms proved incendiary in their use and could start fires. During the Peninsular War, both Talavera and Salamanca battlefields were wracked by tremendous grassfires, first started by the guns. At the Battle of Trafalgar, 1805, the French ship of the line Achille caught fire when musket-flashes from her own men's guns set fire to the tar and grease on the sail rigging; the ship eventually exploded.

Smoke screens have continued to be used by attackers and defenders as a means of sowing confusion and hiding movements. During naval battles in the 18–19th centuries, shots were sometimes fired early so a defensive screen was erected before the ships converged, to spoil the aim of the enemy.

Development and continued use of weapons
The major development of weapons in the early modern and modern periods occurred with firearms, which became progressively more efficient. Gunpowder settled into its standard ratio in the 17th century, and general ballistic technology improved. Initially, iron round shot replaced the earlier stone balls for cannons then, latterly, different types of shot were invented.

A carcass was a hollow projectile usually formed either by an iron cage of ribs joining two small rings or a cast iron ball with holes. A carcass was so named because the iron cage was thought to resemble the ribs of a body. A carcass was filled with a highly flammable mixture. Carcasses were used for the first time by the French under Louis XIV in 1672.

For short range use against personnel, canister and the smaller naval grapeshot were popular during the 19th century; it comprised smaller iron or lead pellets contained within a case or bag, which scattered on explosion. In 1784, Lt Henry Shrapnel invented a spherical case-shot, which was later named after him. The case was a hollow iron sphere which was filled with musket balls and was detonated by a gunpowder charge. Shot fired from cannons could be so hot that it scorched or set fire to materials that it brushed.

The incendiary liquids of the ancient and medieval periods were also developed, and have their modern equivalents. World War I saw the development of the flamethrower, a modern version of the Byzantine siphons, which used gas under pressure to squirt a mixture of inflammable oil and petrol, ignited by a burning taper. Similarly, the carcass projectile found new use in the Livens Projector, a primitive mortar that could throw a large canister of inflammable liquid (it was soon used for poison gas instead).

Technology improved throughout the 20th century, and the latter half saw the development and use of napalm, an incendiary liquid formed in part from naphtha, which was the main ingredient of the Arabic "naft".

Flames continued to be used for defensive light until artificial lights were developed. At the Siege of Badajoz in 1812, the French defenders flung down burning "carcasses" of straw so that the attacking British might be seen. Like the sieges of old, the British were met by incendiary weapons, but now these took the form of explosive grenades, mines and powder barrels as well as the enemy's guns.

Specific weapons from the ancient and medieval periods continued to develop, and many have modern equivalents. Rocket technology, originally trialled by the Mongols, Indians and the Chinese, amongst others, was improved by the 19th century; one example was the incendiary Congreve rocket, which had a tail, a fuse, and a powder charge (saltpetre, sulfur and carbon) inside a hollow shell. Grenades continued to develop, although still retaining some aspects of their medieval equivalents. The grenades carried on board British Royal Navy ships in the late 18th century and early 19th century were constructed from hollow cast iron, filled with gunpowder; the fuse was a hollow wooden tube filled with combustible material. During World War I, grenades were still occasionally launched by ballistae.

The use of some weapons continued with little change. The Koreans used fire arrows against the Japanese at the Battle of Hansan Island in 1592. At Trafalgar, in 1805, the British ship Tonnant shot wads covered in sulfur, which set fire to the Algésiras. Fireships were used in later periods. In 1588, the English sent fireships loaded with gunpowder, pitch and tar amongst the anchored Spanish Armada; the Spanish fleet broke formation, setting them up for the later battle. The last battle under sail was the Battle of Navarino (1827), part of the Greek War of Independence, during which fireships were utilised by the Turks.

Chemical warfare had been experimented with during the early period with sulfur, quicklime (calcium oxide), and others, and developments continued. World War I saw many gases used, including the extremely effective sulfur mustard (mustard gas).

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

title: Early thermal weapons


text:
Talk:Lorraine Kelly

Birthplace
I would have thought it very unlikely that she was born in East Kilbride as the article states. She has a broad Glasgow accent which I doubt if she would have developed had she been born in East Kilbride in 1959 and as far as I can see there is no record of a Lorraine Kelly ever having been born in East Kilbride during the period 1855 till 2006. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.40.202.237 (talk) 01:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Rewrite
That's weird. This is a brand new article, but it appeared on my watchlist - without me ever reading it. And what is stranger, I thought I had written this article before ?! Pcb21| Pete 11:38, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * How odd. Could it have been deleted?  There are some delphic comments in User talk:Pcb21/Archive1. -- ALoan (Talk) 12:07, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Ah yes of course. I deleted a copyviolation, and never got round to re-writing it, though clearly thought I had! Thanks for your marvellous detective work. Pcb21| Pete 12:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Controversy while Rector of Dundee University
I remember reading somewhere that, during her time as rector, she'd been criticised for saying that it was OK for students to go out binge drinking. This could probably be attributed from one or more reliable sources (i.e. several different newspapers' online articles) and added to this article.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 10:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Lorraine Kelly. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100712104848/http://www.gm.tv:80/presenters/51267-gmtv-changing-name-daybreak.html to http://www.gm.tv/presenters/51267-gmtv-changing-name-daybreak.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:41, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Lorraine Kelly. 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/20101107040853/http://www.primeperformers.co.uk:80/personal-appearances/lorraine-kelly to http://www.primeperformers.co.uk/personal-appearances/lorraine-kelly

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) 17:24, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 8 external links on Lorraine Kelly. 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/20100327190920/http://www.gm.tv/presenters/biographies-of-the-gmtv-presenters/442-lorraine-kelly.html to http://www.gm.tv/presenters/biographies-of-the-gmtv-presenters/442-lorraine-kelly.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.primeperformers.co.uk/personal-appearances/lorraine-kelly
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100823090031/http://tv.sky.com/lorraine-kellys-big-fat-challenge to http://tv.sky.com/lorraine-kellys-big-fat-challenge
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100128102418/http://www.thebiographychannel.co.uk/shows/lorraine-kellys-big-fat-challenge/about.html to http://www.thebiographychannel.co.uk/shows/lorraine-kellys-big-fat-challenge/about.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100130210200/http://reallives.sky.com/lorraine-kelly-seeks-families-of-missing-mums to http://reallives.sky.com/lorraine-kelly-seeks-families-of-missing-mums
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100623073514/http://www.sundaypost.com/lorraine.htm to http://www.sundaypost.com/lorraine.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100430002630/http://www.rafnews.co.uk/readstory.asp?storyID=272 to http://www.rafnews.co.uk/readstory.asp?storyID=272
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090911095212/http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/calendar/senate/honorary.htm to http://www.somis.dundee.ac.uk/calendar/senate/honorary.htm

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) 18:41, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorraine Kelly. 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://gmtv.co.uk/index.cfm?articleid=442
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130530042134/http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/lorraine-kelly-misses-daughter-after-1321694 to http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/entertainment/celebrity/lorraine-kelly-misses-daughter-after-1321694

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) 02:19, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorraine Kelly. 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/20160918062343/http://www.locatetv.com/tv/liquid-eurovision/442420/episode-guide to http://www.locatetv.com/tv/liquid-eurovision/442420/episode-guide

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) 09:12, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lorraine Kelly. 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://archive.is/20120912223815/http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/University-honour-TV-host-Kelly/article-193868-detail/article.html to http://www.thisisgloucestershire.co.uk/news/University-honour-TV-host-Kelly/article-193868-detail/article.html

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) 12:04, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Matthew Kelly/Press-template
, am I reading this right? It was added here and the same day Liverpool Echo had an article about it? What a coincidence. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:56, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

 * No, the timing of the edit I removed yesterday suggested it was a response to the Liverpool Echo article. I gave up trying to find the earlier false edit Lorraine Kelly refers to after a 20-30 minute search; this article has suffered too much vandalism for an easy search. While there is a possibility someone might be the aunt of someone 13 years older, no source indicates Henry Kelly is a relation. Philip Cross (talk) 11:07, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

 * I searched for "Matthew" with WikiBlame, but only got that hit, maybe I'm doing it wrong. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:16, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

 * I tried the same yesterday and did not gain any result (probable replication lag). I tried "mother" (a common enough word) as well with the same result. Philip Cross (talk) 12:36, 13 July 2019 (UTC)

 * This is reminiscent of the Olivia Colman birth date controversy. Nobody could find an edit in the distant past of her article which supported the claim. Prior to 12 July 2019, nobody here has found a vandal edit mentioning Henry or Matthew Kelly.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 15:01, 14 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That was the one I tried to remember!, perhaps you'll be interested in this one too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another one I wondered about: Talk:John_O._Brennan. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:44, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads-up Gråbergs Gråa SångAlexandre Hocquet (talk) 04:49, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Teletubbies
Re this edit: It's true that in March 2017, Dipsy gave Lorraine Kelly a big hug. However, the tabloids were convinced that he had grabbed her breast, the naughty sod.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 06:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Tax Case
She was involved in a well-known and encyclopedic income-tax case (which she won) in which one issue is easy to understand (was she a self-employed contractor or was she an employee?) but another issue is worthy of a detailed analysis as to why is it relevant: the judge rules that it is relevant whether she is appearing as herself on TV or whether she is portraying a character. I think most people will have no idea as to why that would be relevant. You can be yourself on TV and be either of (a) an independent contractor or (b) an employee. And you can portray a character and be either one of those things too. So this article needs some paragraphs about that case (and in the U.S.A. that is THE single most famous thing ABOUT her) and why the judge deemed it relevant (to her contractor/employee status) whether or not she is portraying a character (or "brand") or is appearing as herself. I am somewhat appalled that Wikipedia does not have that discussion in this article. Is there some sanitation/censorship going on? Has the subject of the article threatened litigation if you mention this tax-issue (in which she was totally EXONERATED)?2600:8804:8C40:401:1C64:8308:33BC:E2D6 (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2023 (UTC)Christopher L. Simpson
 * Do you have any reliable sources for what you're talking about? OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:07, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
 * It's covered here and did receive a fair amount of news coverage at the time. It hasn't been censored because of legal threats, which assumes bad faith on the part of Ms Kelly.-- ♦Ian Ma c M♦  (talk to me) 08:06, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2023
Please remove "when she can be bothered to turn up" from under the occupation description Sewalsh.2016 (talk) 09:37, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Done. -- Mvqr (talk) 11:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 April 2023 (2)
Vandalism on this account. Please remove 'when she can be bothered to turn up' under the Occupation section. This is not factual. Thanks Miradortalent (talk) 09:39, 13 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Pictogram voting wait.svg Already done Jamietw (talk) 11:17, 13 April 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 June 2024
Change this- 82.37.183.81 (talk) 15:42, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. RudolfRed (talk) 17:17, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lorraine Kelly


text:
Talk:Schengen Agreement

Denmark and Sweden
I understand that customs and passport control are different. However, being British, we do not (yet) have id cards and any official who may request id must be given my passport, even if they are only customs.

I rented a car in Germany (German plates) and drove to the Danish border near Flensburg. I passed the "Danmark" sign, the road surface changed and thought that I would see no border control at all. However, a Danish police or customs officer flagged all the cars I could see (prob not the ones with Danish plates) and me into a picnic area where I voluntarity presented my passport and complied with requests for a quick rifle thru my suitcase for drugs etc. Then I went on my way.

After the Oresund Bridge you land in Sweden and go through the toll booths to pay for using the bridge. A short distance after the booth I was flagged down by a Swedish customs officer to whom I again presented my passport before being asked for it. I expect Swedish/Danish cars are not flagged down. After a couple of how long/where/why questions I was allowed on my way.

Crossing the border from Sweden towards Oslo there is a toll booth for the motorway but no customs for cars, but I think there is a lane for trucks.

So there is customs control and stopping of traffic at both these borders which are both internal to the Schengen area. This is quite proper and I think a good idea, but doesn't the article at least IMPLY that there are no controls at all.

It still seems to depend a lot on the car, the plates and the time of day. Swiss border points are almost always guarded. Eastern European cars get a lot more attention and are made to leave the queue and every piece of luggage is searched. But then they are often economic migrants with ALL their posessions. --81.105.243.17 (talk) 00:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * There are controls, especially at the Swedish side of the Oresund bridge. You had a little bad luck because from my experience there are rarely controls at the other mentioned borders. After the german-danish border you had a police control, not customs control, since in Denmark drugs is a police matter, not customs matter. They are checking local cars also, but some nationalities and personal looks (like dark skin) is little more suspicious than other. --BIL (talk) 11:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

 * As pointed out in the "Customs controls" part of the article, stops are permitted as long as they are not "equivalent to border controls", which means that a person is stopped at or near the border merely for crossing it. However, checks based on police intelligence (also profiles) are still permitted - in some jurisdictions (e.g. Bavaria) even on all transit routes. Or, to take another example, the German Federal Police is entitled to ask anyone present at a German airport or train station for indentification (but not more, they may, e.g., not search a person without proper reason). In other jurisdictions (e.g. the German state of Nordrhein-Westfalen), police may not ask for identification without a suspicion, but they may check the drivers license and vehicle papers of any driver without further reason (leading persons to identify themselves), and may require the presentation of the mandatory warning triangle (which allows them to have a look into the trunk, as the triangle is usually stored there). Thus, police know many ways to perform legal inland checks. And those are considered mere inland and not border controls, being subject to the local police laws. It could also happen to anyone to be pulled over on London Orbital. However, I cannot count how many times I had passed Schengen internal borders, and I have never been checked there. --DanSchultz (talk) 22:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Sweden systematically breaches and breaks international treaties, conventions and agreements. Since 2015 the train traffic over the Oeresound bridge is halted for bordercontrolls. Even if such rarely takes place since 2020 passangers are still warned and terrorised of their possiblility by announcement and a uncalled for delayed stop at the first station in Sweden.

[Sweden also activly breaks the treaty of the European Union through activly promoting and selling nicontin pouches, refusing to introduce or even allow use of €uro. Sweden breaches the Vienna convention on diplomatic relations through policesupported and court allowed desecration of Quorans outside muslim embassies. Worse is the breaches of the Geneva convention and the UN Mandela rules on treatment of prisoners where one lets many people die of dehydration and hypotermia in isolated slammer cells in custody without trial or counsil.]

CS 03:30, 13 October 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSjoholm (talk • contribs)

Length
This article really needs to be shortened. it is very lengthy in parts. lots of it seem copy and paste of Schengen policy verbatim with no summary. like what is the need for Judicial Cooperation section? Michellecrisp (talk) 15:03, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * The need for the judicial cooperation section simply is that judicial cooperation forms a an original part of the Schengen Agreements and a very important part of the Schengen and overall EU policies, and, without it, the abolishment of border controls would have failed. Of course, it would be possible to shorten the article, and to simply tell (to put it to an extreme, not meant personally): "Yeah, can crossa border withouta visa and withouta some guy stopping 'ya, an whenna overstayed, yeah, looka at the Wikipedia whatcha gonna say then to da cops", but the overall (and multi-topic) concept of the agreement would not be explained. It would, perhaps, well be possible to split up the article and create some sub-topics, but the wealth of all the information should not be put into the trashbin.

 * BTW: This article contains much more precise information than anything what you can read on the EU pages on europa.eu (some of which had not been updated for some ten years). I myself added a lot of information on the judicial coooperation piece, and I did not "copy and paste" anything on this, in particular not from "Schengen policy verbatims". Even more, I referenced everything I wrote. Could you please clearly identify (stating the URL or other source) even one "verbatim" you are blaming the authors of "copying and pasting" from? If you cannot (and I am sure you cannot), please stop flaming the many co-authors here in the discussion box and read some article about "AGF", which means: "Assume good faith". --DanSchultz (talk) 22:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Having taken an occasional interest in this article, I disagree with the contention that it's too long. The article, as it currently stands, is fairly tightly edited.  The subject merits the detailed discussion given by the article.  Or do you have suggestions for compressing it?  Is there fluff, or information peripheral to the subject? Teemu Leisti (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

 * I think the problem is more about organisation, the amount of data seems overwhelming and it is hard to understand where it all fits in. Perhaps better summeries at the top of sections and moving some of the detail out to other pages (which could help make this page less technical)?- J Logan t: 10:10, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, the subject is dry and technical, and hard to make into a ripping yarn. On the other hand, I don't quite understand your point about fitting in; the text and its subdivisions seem quite clear to me. But if anyone has suggestions on how exactly to improve the article, they'll be quite welcome, I'm sure. But I'm opposed to moving anything out of the current article elsewhere, since I don't really see anything in the article that is peripheral to its subject. Teemu Leisti (talk) 10:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Could we not at least put the history section at the top? Most people who read this article will be far more interested in the history of it and the way that it has affected Europe (which doesn't seem to be dealt with at all) than the legal details of it. I say this as a lawyer myself. Art Markham (talk) 14:07, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Usually, the history of some currently existing thing (institution, mechanism, etc.) is not dealt with at the top. For example, in the article "United States of America", you would at first like to learn what that currently is (a state, a republic, a federation, etc.), the territory, political system, demographics, economy, and so on. After that, you get the information how everything has developed to what it is today. BTW, what most people who read this article probably want to know is - if they need a visa, and how to get it (but this is an encyclopedia and not a travel handbook). --DanSchultz (talk) 11:49, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Livigno and Campione d'Italia.j
It is disputable if Livigno is part of Schengen or not. Technically it is: the Guardia di Finanza check goods and not passports, but we could say that Livigno is not part of the EU customs area. In Livigno there is the "Polizia di Frontiera" (border police, part of the State Police) and the Carabinieri that check passports on the borders that Livigno has with Switzerland (and the Guardia di Finanza check the goods). The Polizia di Frontiera will stay (like on other Italian borders) to check passports randomly.

Campione d'Italia on the other hand is not part of Schengen as being surrounded by Switzerland the checks are actually done by the Swiss border guards when entering Switzerland. There is no border between Switzerland and Campione d'Italia but the Swiss authorities cannot access the area and the Carabinieri are the police force there. There is no "Polizia di Frontiera" there. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.45.128.112 (talk) 17:30, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you provide citation?- J.Logan`t : 10:50, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

 * At the moment I have not found anything, but it is something clear that if you find Guardia di Finanza on the border they will be more interested about your goods rather than your passport/ID card. They can still check but under Italian legislation Polizia di Frontiera (part of Polizia di Stato) and Carabinieri Servizio di Frontiera are in charge of fix passport checks on non Schengen borders and random checks on Schengen borders. Guardia di Finanza can still do checks on passports but are more involved in fighting illegal immigration on the Mediterranean sea.

 * WP:OR I'm afraid, we need a source. And please sign your posts with ~ - J.Logan`t : 10:32, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
 * There's no sources to confirm that Livigno is part of Schengen...81.174.61.193 (talk) 08:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)- 81.174.61.193 (talk) 14:16, 11 September 2008 (UTC)-
 * It's academic, as in a few weeks Switzerland will be part of Schengen, so Livigno, Campione d'Italia and Büsingen (the other exclave inside Switzerland) will all be in Schengen TiffaF (talk) 06:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Livigno is NOT an enclave in Switzerland and has always been part of Schengen. There are no references to demonstrate that Livigno is not part of Schengen. I've been there many times and was never asked for a passport. The Guardia di Finanza do not check people entering Livigno, they check people exiting Livigno but mainly goods. 81.174.61.193 (talk) 16:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)-
 * If they ask for passport/ID card it is probably because they want to know the identity from a police perspective, not for immigration control. For example if you are stopped at a road for alcohol check in my country, the first thing the police asks is for the drivers licence. --BIL (talk) 10:30, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * That's right, in Italy they can ask for ID anytime but that does not mean that Italy is not part of Schengen. Livigno has been put as not being part of Schengen without any references! I have removed Livigno from not being part of the Schengen area. 81.174.61.193 (talk) 08:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)-
 * Actullay, you deleted the whole entry for Italy. Twice.  Halx (talk) 14:14, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, can we proceed to take off Livigno from being outside Schengen?81.174.61.193 (talk) 12:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)-

Switzerland
Switzerland is now a member of the Schengen zone.--Ami in CH (talk) 06:18, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Uniforms
Could include note on Schengen uniforms: search this article 161.76.193.214 (talk) 11:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

What about railways?
The article says about Switzerland "Initially border controls of travellers with a schengen visa will be lifted only for roadways, while for airways the controls will be lifted on 29 March 2009, subject to certain conditions." I know Switzerland has major international railway links. (Waterways may also be an issue, but a significantly lesser one.) --NE2 09:51, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I can provide links to articles, but they'd be in German. This article describes what will change in Switzerland because of full Schengen membership. For railways in particular, see this article. --Ami in CH (talk) 22:56, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Can you fix the article? --NE2 10:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I changed "road border crossings" to "land borders". Controls have been lifted for all land borders, be it roads, railways, footpaths, ferries, swimming across the Rhine or whatever. TiffaF (talk) 07:13, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Would "surface borders" be better, since a river technically isn't land? --NE2 07:49, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * EU terminology only knows land, sea, and air borders, an I think this is common usage everywhere, at least also in the U.S. (DHS refers to land borders and not to "surface borders"). --DanSchultz (talk) 11:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)
 * A lot of (but certainly not all) European borders crossings are at rivers. I've been to the Netherlands a few times and have always been asked to show a passport at the ticket office when buying international (i.e. to Germany) train tickets and at the last station before the border the Dutch police boarded the train and asked to see everyone's passport/ID card. Oddly I've been able to buy tickets to the Netherlands and Poland from machines in German train stations without any interaction with the authorities ? 86.166.76.47 (talk) 00:08, 10 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The real border control was performed by the police at the border. The railway company might have asked for passport/ID in order to avoid delays at the border, and maybe even penalities.--BIL (talk) 15:45, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Middle Eastern visitors
I am not sure but I have observed long term stays by some wealthy Middle Eastern citizens in Europe over the summers of several years. This is often done as a long holiday and to escape the heat of the area in the summer. I believe that what used to happen was that they would obtain a Schengen visa which is valid for France or Britain and then spend 3 months on it in London or Paris 5 star hotels, but they would extend their European stay by having also obtained a separate Visa for a 3 month stay in Switzerland, and then stay in 5 star hotels perhaps in Zurich or Geneva.

1. Am I right in saying that because the UK was part of the JUDICIAL cooperation of Schengen that non-European citizens were required to have a Schengen visa for the UK rather than a UK one because although the UK still has border controls, that is the ONLY difference.

and

2. Am I right in saying that since Switzerland joined Schengen 12/12/08, any stay in the CONTINENT of Europe now that goes beyond 3 months would require one to leave the zone for Andorra, Liechtenstein, the former Yugoslavia, Ukraine, Romania etc. rather than anywhere inside it?

3. Since Liechtenstein has few embassies, the Swiss embassies always decided on who to let in and did the issuing of the visas. Are they therefore now issuing Liechtenstein visas but not Swiss ones? --LeedsKing (talk) 19:21, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

 * The UK does not belong to the Schengen area. You can stay up to 6 months in the UK as a tourist. The stay in the Schengen area (now including Switzerland) is limited to 90 days per semester.
 * re 1) The UK does not issue Schengen visas. It has its own, separate visa system.
 * re 2) The only countries on the European continent (apart from the UK/Ireland) that are now non-Schengen are : Russia, Belarus, Ukraine, Moldova, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia, Albania & Kosovo. Andorra is also theroetically extra-Schengen, but since no-one requires a visa to enter but everyone must have a valid (double-entry) Schengen visa to pass and return to Spain or France, which are not issued for tourists, it in essence is only accessible to Europeans, resident aliens and non-visa nationals, or business travellers with multiple entry visas. Liechtenstein's status is still pending and will be sorted out in the comming months.
 * re 3) Previously Switzerland & Liechtenstein had a common visa area. That has now changed, so in theory Swiss police will have to introduce border checks at the Liechtenstein border. It remains to be seen if these will actually be implemented. Currently Liechteinstein is not issuing visas. Passportguy (talk) 22:35, 13 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've got it. I would have understood before if the link to European Union visa lists hadn't been in tiny writing in the article. --LeedsKing (talk) 02:28, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Re point (2): Cyprus is not in Schengen and has the same legal status for this purpose as Bulgaria and Romania. Given the division of the island, it will probably join Schengen after the other two states, if at all. Xenos2008 (talk) 04:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo, border controls and Schengen
The inclusion (or not) of Kosovo as a country in this article should be related to its formal position in the Schengen world. Since the declaration of indepenendence, I do not know what has happened with passports etc. There used to be a dual system with UNMIK identity travel documents and Serbian passports (which most Kosovars refused to touch). If this has changed, then it would seem reasonable to call Kosovo a country, although maybe some note about the administrative arrangements would be in order. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.129.195.216 (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I removed the whole sentence since it's unreferenced. I think this save us the trouble to guess what the status is. Moreover, I don't think that Greece for example, has a different procedure for citizens from different regions of Servia. According to Greece's POV a citizen from Kosovo has the same rights with a citizen for Belgrade. -- Magioladitis (talk) 20:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Greece is the most pro-Serb country in the EU, so it is hardly typical. I do not know if a Schengen visa can be issued to a UNMIK travel document. Somehow, I doubt it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.229.168 (talk) 21:46, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Kosovo is not recognized by all Schengen countries. Greece, Slovakia and maybe others didn't recognize it. Kosovo is not a part of the Schengen Zone, so I don't think there is a reason to speak about this area (country or Serbian province Kosovo i Metohija). --Zik2 (talk) 15:52, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Criticism?
There seems to be little if anything in the article on criticisms of the Schengen Agreement. There must be arguments against it; what are they? --Richardrj talkemail 10:47, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Some criticisms can be found here: http://www.ewi.info/pdf/VisapoliciesinSee.pdf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.75.229.168 (talk) 12:26, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There is criticism from the United States. They build walls, fences and expensive security systems against their neighbours. Free and unchecked movements of European citizens are very suspicious to them. That is why they always fiddle around in our inner affairs, and why they treat Europeans like criminals at their immigration counters .... --84.141.7.157 (talk) 12:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Why are the United states be interested in how European countries conduct their internal affairs ? Theres no more need for border controls between Austria and Italy than there is need for border controls between New York and New Jersey. 86.166.76.47 (talk) 23:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Pre-Schengen free-travel zones in Europe
The statement "Before World War I, one could travel from Paris to Saint Petersburg without a passport" is a quote from a historian being interviewed as part of a newspaper article, and is really just an example of what you could do at the time (and continued with "European culture that went from Lisbon to Moscow"). It is also only moderately informative (why those particular cities?), as it could be compatible with a variety of border control regiems. For example it could mean:
 * A particular railway route between Paris and St. Petersburg was not subject to border controls.
 * There were uncontrolled borders between France, Russia, and intervening countries.
 * No European countries had border controls.
 * Any of the above, but with "no border controls" replaced with "border controls that did not require passports".
 * There were border/passport controls, but they could be waived under certain circumstances.
 * There were border/passport controls, but they were lax and easily circumvented

Does anyone have any more detailed information about what controls (if any) there were between and within European countries (I know some countries at certain periods had internal movement controls)? And was this former "European culture that went from Lisbon to Moscow" the result of any formal agreements/ treaties/ understandings, or just the result of no-one caring about border controls? And were there external border controls, as with Schengen? Wardog (talk) 11:12, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Before WW1, there were only two international borders between Paris and Moscow: France/Germany and Germany/Russia. (Poland didn't exist then as a soverign state, the area where ethnic Poles live was carved up between Germany, Austria and Russia.) According to this document Germany did indeed not require passports for international travel at the time, so the statement is likely to be true. However it does not say there were no border controls, presumably there were. And the situation was not the result of any Schengen-like passport union but of an individual country's decision to conduct relaxed border controls.

 * The statement about European culture is not about a formal agreement, but a historical one as you wold expect from a historian. The civilisation(s) of all European country are directly rooted in European antiquity (Rome and Greece) and share many similar traits in all fields, their languages are related (with some exceptions), and their religion is mostly Christian. That is probably what he means. Anorak2 (talk) 12:14, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

The authoritative source for understanding the historical evolution of European border controls and documentation of inidividuals is The Invention of the Passport, John Torpey (Cambridge UP, 2000). It takes quite some reading to answer the above questions. but the general context is that most European countries had started to dismantle border controls and travel restrictions in the mid-late 19th century, and they were reimposed just before or after WWI. It is all part of the nationalism trend of the build-up to the two world wars and anti-globalisation policies of that period. The evolution of Schengen can therefore be most easily identified as the post-war co-operation (Benelux, in particular) that occurred in parallel with the Treaty of Rome. Of course, you should be aware that there were no real travel restrictions for the rich and powerful, so we are talking all the time in this context about the poor and common people. Xenos2008 (talk) 13:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Switzerland - passport requirement
Do citizens of Schengen-states need a passport to visit Switzerland, Norway, Iceland? Inside the EU they can travel only with ID-card, but what about non-EU Schengen states? 199.64.72.252 (talk) 13:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

 * It's absolutely the same. A ID-card (or passport) is necessary but there are not systematic border controls within Schengen (EU + non-EU, except in the airports for security reasons) and there's free movement of persons. In the case of Switzerland, they maintain only border goods control (being outside European Customs Union and European Union Value Added Tax Area where there's a free movement of goods). I don't know for goods in other Non-EU Schengen countries (like Norway and Iceland which are EEA members...). For the movement of persons between Switzerland and EU, before Schengen and from many decades there was only checks of ID-cards, following previous agreements between EU, single member countries and the Confederation. --Dch (talk) 08:56, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

There is really no difference in terms of border controls between EU states and those states associated with the EU through bilateral treaties like the Schengen association agreement. Since many of the EU policies have been generated from the top down, Switzerland with his traditionally independent and democratic institutions casts a popular vote on policies related to the European Union. This is politically relevant and interesting for Europe as a whole. I therefore urge to keep my short sentence, corrected, in the context of the Schengen Agreement as is. But correctly, of course, no non-EU states can directly join the Schengen agreement, even those which fully join the EU later on! (Osterluzei (talk) 22:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC))

Proposed article split
I propose to split this article. I think this article's quite large, but this isn't the real reason I'll like to split it. I really think we should have an article on the Schengen Area. That article could concentrate on the current rules and extent of the area, while this article could concentrate on the agreement itself and their history. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 12:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Very good suggeston. Fully support the idea. BritishWatcher (talk) 12:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * While it is good to have a separate Schengen Area article, exactly how is the content of each defined? Doesn't the border rules under area come under Agreement such as much as Area. I think some clarification is needed here.- J.Logan`t : 11:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree there is a fair possibility of overlap, but I'm pretty that the Agreement is basically an artefact of history. Post-Amsterdam new member states don't actually sign the Agreement. This article should eventually become an history article, while the Schengen Area article documents the current arrangements. — Blue-Haired Lawyer 23:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

 * good, so now there are two articles. Problem : the map illustrating the Agreement isn't relevant neither to the situation at the time of the signing nor the current situation. Besides, it contradicts a variation of the same map illustrating the article Schengen Area. Herix (talk) 22:11, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Air security
The article currently states that "when travelling by air between Schengen countries, or within a single Schengen country, identification (usually passport or national ID card) is requested at the airport check-in counters." This is not true in general; at least on some Swedish SAS routes passengers can travel without being identified. A passenger with checked in their luggage, must however prove that he or she also boards the plan by providing a matching fingerprint scan at check-in and boarding.

The article further states: "Also, the nationals who need a visa for Schengen countries are asked to present it together with a valid passport. Although immigration control is generally not applied at points of departure or arrival (essentially, the flight is classed as 'domestic'), this lower form of border control is performed at airport check-in counters." Here, a reference supporting this claim would be most welcome. Filur (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Borders
if the internal borders within most of the EU countries are lifted anyone knows why EU's maps still show countries with borders?--Melitikus (talk) 14:18, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Because the Union is a forum for co-operation, not a country in itself. The countries are still separate. You can now go across a border and be under a different government and laws without going through a border post with guards, but you are still in a different country and the borders are in the places they have been since each country was created. But now the border are basically just lines on map and the only physical obstructions are natural ones like rivers, seas and mountain tops. But apart from police and customs checks, the idea is that nobody is stopped simply for crossing between the countries. e.g. you could go from Belgium to France which have different sex and drug laws and a different judicial system and never see a single border control. The maps still show the borders because maps are supposed to show what land belongs to which country and it's national government, and what laws apply where. France is still France and ruled from Paris, Germany is still ruled from Berlin. We are not yet a United States of Europe. --90.220.241.72 (talk) 20:58, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

? "Schengen white list" http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/at-last-serbs-win-passport-to-freedom-1845113.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events/2009_December_19 ...
 * Serbians are able to travel to continental Europe without a visa from this day on. (The Independent)

"Serbia, Macedonia and Montenegro were put on what is known as the "Schengen white list" on 30 November, which permits their citizens to travel anywhere in the Schengen visa-free zone and stay for up to 90 days." per http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/at-last-serbs-win-passport-to-freedom-1845113.html 99.24.249.96 (talk) 15:01, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Where it was signed
The article just said that it was signed in a boat anchored in Schengen in Luxembourg.

News sources say that it was signed in the middle of the river, see e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4738063.stm

The BBC article emphasises that the river forms the border between Luxembourg and Germany. Their article omits to mention France in this, but given the extremely close proximity of Schengen to the point where all three borders meet, and the obviously highly relevant symbolic importance of this, I don't think it is too much of a speculation for me to conclude from the reported fact that it was signed mid-river that the exact point was the one where the borders all meet. In fact, it is really pretty much inconceivable for it to have been otherwise. So that's what I wrote. No name is good name (talk) 18:37, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Schengen Wall
Schengen Wall redirects to here. It most probably refers to the notion of Schengen visa to be a hindrance for non-EU nationals to enter the EU, like a wall - and maybe it is a reference to the Iron curtain... Anyway, I think we should have some "reactions" section were the various positions should be shown (positive and negative agreement). Alinor (talk) 05:57, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately I think POV redirects are allowed. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 14:06, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge with Schengen Area

 * Support Same infobox, same problems as the Schengen Area article. Why not merge these two? --E4024 (talk) 21:56, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

 * Support I strongly support it too. The two articles are same. No need to keep this one. Free ottoman (talk) 22:43, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose With the schengen area coming from an agreement which in now within EU-law (but which was not) it is useful to keep two articles… L.tak (talk) 21:53, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Strongly oppose there article were split from the old Schengen Agreement article because of size. Please see WP:SIZERULE. The Schengen Area article needs to be split more not merged with this article. — Blue-Haired Lawyer t 23:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The Schengen cooperation is actually an enhanced cooperation
I would like to draw your attention to this discussion here about the Schengen cooperation being an enhanced coopertion. --Glentamara (talk) 09:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

UK - Spain Gibraltar Deal
Gibraltar appears to be joining the Schengen Area as part of the UK-Spain deal on its status per Financial Times "Spain and UK agree deal to keep Gibraltar land border open" ( https://on.ft.com/3rHCLNl )

How do we want to handle this? When the treaty is ratified do we want to add the UK to the Infobox as a party, Gibraltar, or none?

IntUnderflow (talk) 00:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Schengen Agreement


text:
Făgăraș

Făgăraș (Fogarasch, Fugreschmarkt, Fogaras) is a city in central Romania, located in Brașov County. It lies on the Olt River and has a population of 26,284 as of 2021. It is situated in the historical region of Transylvania, and is the main city of a subregion, Țara Făgărașului.

Geography
The city is located at the foothills of the Făgăraș Mountains, on their northern side. It is traversed by the DN1 road, 66 km west of Brașov and 76 km east of Sibiu. On the east side of the city, between an abandoned field and a gas station, lies the geographical center of Romania, at 45.83333°N, 24.98333°W.

The Olt River flows east to west on the north side of the city; its left tributary, the Berivoi River, discharges into the Olt on the west side of the city, after receiving the waters of the Racovița River. The Berivoi and the Racovița were used to bring water to a since-closed major chemical plant located on the outskirts of the city.

The small part of the city that lies north of the Olt is known as Galați. A former village first recorded in 1396, it was incorporated into Făgăraș in 1952.

Name
One explanation is that the name was given by the Pechenegs, who called the nearby river Fagar šu (Fogaras/Făgăraș), which in the Pecheneg language means ash(tree) water.

According to linguist Iorgu Iordan, the name of the town is a Romanian diminutive of a hypothetical collective noun *făgar ("beech forest"), presumably derived from fag, "beech tree". Hungarian linguist István Kniezsa deemed this idea unlikely.

Another interpretation is that the name derives from the Hungarian word fogoly (partridge).

There has also been speculation that the name can be explained by folk etymology, as the rendering of the words fa ("wooden") and garas ("mite") in Hungarian. Legends state that money made out of wood had been used to pay the peasants who built the Făgăraș Citadel, an important fortress near the border of the Kingdom of Hungary, around 1310. This view is in harmony with an idea advanced by Iorgu Iordan, who suggested a diminutive derivation from *făgar, found elsewhere in Romania as well.

History

Făgăraș, together with Amlaș, constituted during the Middle Ages a traditional Romanian local-autonomy region in Transylvania. The first written Hungarian document mentioning Romanians in Transylvania referred to Vlach lands ("Terra Blacorum") in the Făgăraș Region in 1222. (In this document, Andrew II of Hungary gave Burzenland and the Cuman territories South of Burzenland up to the Danube to the Teutonic Knights.) After the Tatar invasion in 1241–1242, Saxons settled in the area. In 1369, Louis I of Hungary gave the Royal Estates of Făgăraș to his vassal, Vladislav I of Wallachia. As in other similar cases in medieval Europe (such as Foix, Pokuttya, or Dauphiné), the local feudal had to swear oath of allegiance to the king for the specific territory, even when the former was himself an independent ruler of another state. Therefore, the region became the feudal property of the princes of Wallachia, but remained within the Kingdom of Hungary. The territory remained in the possession of Wallachian princes until 1464.

Except for this period of Wallachian rule, the town itself was centre of the surrounding royal estates. During the rule of Transylvanian Prince Gabriel Bethlen (1613–1629), the city became an economic role model city in the southern regions of the realm. Bethlen rebuilt the fortress entirely.

Ever since that time, Făgăraș was the residence of the wives of Transylvanian Princes, as an equivalent of Veszprém, the Hungarian "city of queens". Of these, Zsuzsanna Lorántffy, the widow of George I Rákóczy established a Romanian school here in 1658. Probably the most prominent of the princesses residing in the town was the orphan Princess Kata Bethlen (1700–1759), buried in front of the Reformed church. The church holds several precious relics of her life. Her bridal gown, with the family coat of arms embroidered on it, and her bridal veil now covers the altar table. Both are made of yellow silk.

Făgăraș was the site of several Transylvanian Diets, mostly during the reign of Michael I Apafi. The church was built around 1715–1740. Not far from it is the Radu Negru National College, built in 1907-1909. Until 1919, it was a Hungarian-language gymnasium where Mihály Babits taught for a while.

A local legend says that Negru Vodă left the central fortress to travel south past the Transylvanian Alps to become the founder of the Principality of Wallachia, although Basarab I is traditionally known as the 14th century founder of the state. By the end of the 12th century the fortress itself was made of wood, but it was reinforced in the 14th century and became a stone fortification.

In 1850 the inhabitants of the town were 3,930, of which 1,236 were Germans, 1,129 Romanians, 944 Hungarians, 391 Roma, 183 Jews, and 47 of other ethnicities, meanwhile in 1910, the town had 6,579 inhabitants with the following proportion: 3,357 Hungarians, 2,174 Romanians, and 1,003 Germans. According to the 2011 census, the city of Făgăraș had 30,714 residents; of those for whom data was available, 91.7% were Romanians, 3.8% Roma, 3.7% Hungarians, and 0.7% German. At the 2021 census, the city had a population of 26,284, of which 73.29% were Romanians, 8.58% Roma, and 2.24% Hungarians.

Făgăraș's castle was used as a stronghold by the Communist regime. During the 1950s it was a prison for opponents and dissidents. After the fall of the regime in 1989, the castle was restored and is currently used as a museum and library.

The city's economy was badly shaken by the disappearance of most of its industries following the 1989 Revolution and the ensuing hardships and reforms. Some of the city's population left as guest workers to Italy, Spain, or Ireland.

Jewish history
A Jewish community was established in 1827, becoming among southern Transylvania’s largest by mid-century. Yehuda Silbermann, its first rabbi (1855–1863), kept a diary of communal events. This is still extant and serves as a source on the history of Transylvanian Jewry. In 1869, the local community joined the Neolog association, switching to an Orthodox stance in 1926. A Jewish school opened in the 1860s.

There were 286 Jews in 1856, rising to 388 by 1930, or just under 5% of the population. During World War II, local Germans as well as the Iron Guard attacked Jews and plundered their property. Sixty Jews were sent to forced labor. After the 1944 Romanian coup d'état rescinded anti-Semitic laws, many left for larger cities or emigrated to Palestine. The last Jew of Făgăraș died in 2013.

Climate
Făgăraș has a humid continental climate (Cfb in the Köppen climate classification).

Administration
The political composition of the town council after the 2020 Romanian local elections is the following one:

Personalities

 * Radu Negru (Negru-Vodă), legendary ruler of Wallachia (1290–1300).
 * Gabriel Bethlen (1580–1629), Prince of Transylvania between 1613–1629.
 * Inocențiu Micu-Klein, (1692–1768), bishop of Alba Iulia and Făgăraș (1728–1751) and Primate of the Romanian Greek-Catholic Church, had his episcopal residence in Făgăraș between 1732–1737.
 * Ioan Pușcariu, captain of Făgăraș.
 * Aron Pumnul (1818–1866) scholar, linguist, philologist, literary historian, teacher of Mihai Eminescu, leader of the Revolution of 1848 in Transylvania.
 * Nicolae Densușianu (1846–1911), historian, Associate member of the Romanian Academy.
 * Aron Densușianu (1837–1900), poet and literary critic, Associate Member of the Romanian Academy.
 * Badea Cârțan (Gheorghe Cârțan) (1848–1911), fighting for the independence of the Romanians in Transylvania.
 * Ovid Densusianu (1873–1938), Aron Densușianu's son, philologist, linguist, folklorist, poet and academician, professor at the University of Bucharest.
 * Johanna Korner who founded the Madame Korner cosmetic business in Australia was born here in 1891.
 * Ștefan Câlția, painter (born in Brașov in 1942).
 * Ion Gavrilă Ogoranu (1923–2006) member of the fascist paramilitary organization the Iron Guard, in the group of the Făgăraș Mountains, former student of the present Radu Negru National College, class of 1945.
 * Octavian Paler (1926–2007), writer and publicist, former student of the present Radu Negru National College, class of 1945.
 * Laurențiu (Liviu) Streza (born in 1947), Orthodox archbishop and metropolitan of Transylvania, former student of the present Radu Negru National College, class of 1965.
 * Horia Sima (1906–1993), Co-Conducător of Romania in 1940–1941, and second leader of the Iron Guard. Former student of the present Radu Negru National College, class of 1926.
 * Mircea Frățică (born in 1957) Judoka who won the European title in 1982, and bronze medals at the 1980 European Championships, 1983 World Championships and 1984 Olympics (Romania's first Olympic judo medalist).
 * Nicușor Dan (born in 1969), mathematician, activist, and politician.
 * Mihail Neamțu (born 1978), writer and politician.
 * Mircea Dincă (born 1980), chemist.

title: Făgăraș


text:
Foy Draper

Foy Draper (November 26, 1911 – February 1, 1943) was an American track and field athlete who won a gold medal in 4 × 100 m relay at the 1936 Summer Olympics. As a University of Southern California student, Draper won the IC4A championships in 200 m in 1935.

He reportedly held the world record for the 100-yard dash, which at the time would have been a hand-timed 9.4, made all the more remarkable by Draper standing only 5 ft.

At the Berlin Olympics, Draper ran the third leg in the American 4 × 100 m relay team, which won the gold medal in a world record time of 39.8.

During World War II, Draper served as a pilot on a twin-engine attack bomber A-20B 'Havoc' in Thelepte, Tunisia. On January 4, 1943, Draper took off to take part in the battle of Kassarine Pass. Draper and his two crewmen never returned and his death date is usually given as February 1, 1943. He is buried in the North Africa American Cemetery and Memorial administered by the American Battle Monuments Commission in Carthage, Tunisia. His gravestone shows January 4, 1943 as his date of death.

title: Foy Draper