text:
Talk:List of freeware video games

[untitled]
213.169.25.131 removed a lot of entries. Revert?

 * Jep, 213.169.25.131's definition of "proper freeware" is not supported in freeware-article, which says: "Freeware is computer software which is made available gratis/free of charge." Redistributability is not obligatory. --Mikko Paananen 18:04, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Well... Can we reinclude them in their own section as "not freeware but released for free?"

 * Thats called shareware --E-Magination 15:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Not necessarily. GTA 1 and 2 were released for free by Rockstar, but they are not redistributable, they may only be downloaded from their page. In the broad definition the Freeware article uses, they are freeware. If we used a stricter definition, they would not be (and they would be "not freeware but released for free"). In any event, they are not shareware.Sega381 16:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Grand Chase
The top section of the article states "Games that require a donation or fee, have nag screens, or require purchase for play time, game items, new content or features are shareware, and are not included in this list." Then, in the Gameplay section of Grand Chase's wiki article, one sees: "The game is free-to-play, but there are some items that can only be purchased with real-world currency." Shall I delete it? --207.216.210.189 (talk) 14:22, 10 April 2008 (UTC) There are other games like that. Well, at least there is Battlefield Heroes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.207.190.132 (talk) 11:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Alphabetic order
Please remember to keep the external links in alphabetic order when you add/remove links.

GTA
GTA is not freeware. It is distributed freely by rockstar games but can be downloaded solely through their website. Rockstar games themselves clearly state that it is not freeware:

"PLEASE NOTE that while this game may be downloaded for free by all who register by filling out the form on this page, it is NOT freeware and may not be mirrored or duplicated by any third parties without express written consent from Rockstar Games."

(www.rockstargames.com/classics)

So why have you re-added it to the list Nifboy?

Sapienza

 * GTA 1 and 2 were released for free by Rockstar, but they are not redistributable, they may only be downloaded from their page. In the broad definition the Freeware article uses, they are freeware, as they are avaliable fully and free of charge. If we used a stricter definition, they would not be (and they would be "not freeware but released for free"). In their page, Rockstare uses the stricter Freeware definition. In the article and list, the general definition is used. Sega381 16:18, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks like Rockstar Games themselves don't know the difference between freeware, public domain and open source software. Their game is definitely freeware. This term simply means you're allowed to download the full version for free. Public domain and open source (or even creative commons) are a bit different in their definitions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.253.186.62 (talk) 09:46, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Nethack
Nethack is not freeware. It's free software.
 * right, i remove it. --Dafuchs 10:49, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Slight POV problems in game descriptions?
I've noticed that there are several game descriptions that claim the game in question is "so good it got the creator a job" or "one of the best" or something along those lines. Should these be changed to make this list more NPOV? -Nmarchan

Rise of the Dragon
Does anybody have any references for Rise of the Dragon being freeware? I didn't find any, not even in the game's own article. I was suprised to see it here and normally would have removed it, but seeing that it has been on the list for more than 20 months I thought I'd better ask first. --Anym 17:07, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Looks more like abandonware to me, just like SimCity first of the name. As its publishers seem not to care about it anymore, I think it'd be safe to remove it. Unless others say otherwise ?

I say we create another list/article documenting abandonwares (games who are not sold/distributed anymore and whose creators have "forsaken", and are legitimately distributable if no profit is made) -- Omega Said 22:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Abandonware is not legitimately distributable. The concept of abandonware is not supported by law. In U.S. law copyrighted material is copyrighted to the owner for 70 years upon the date the copyright was issued. So even if they no longer sell the product the copyright is still in effect, and is legally protected by the law.69.225.9.90

Limits
I see a lot of unpopular games without an article, solely here for advertising. Should I remove them?--E-Magination 15:39, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, the list needed a cleanup. Some of the former propietary games that are now freeware need an article, and I think those shouldn't be deleted. But I'm not so sure about removing the information on former freeware games...Sega381 16:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Notability
I do not have time to do an exhaustive check right now, but many of the games on this page are probably not notable. Someone should go through and check. Andre (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Pretty much, DUH!. --=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 09:29, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

A Card-Ware Game
I just want to recommend a game for this article. Ancient Domains Of Mystery (ADOM). A very extensive text based game similar to nethack. 75.80.231.31 06:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Adding External Link - Freeware Forum
Dear all,

I would like to add a link here to a great freeware forum called CWF that has a growing community of dedicated gamers and was set up for as collection of links to freeware games and the discussion of games, to discuss commercial games and other things. Here is the link:

http://forum.connect-webdesign.dk/index.php

I did not want to add it without approval here first.

Thanks,

Parvini

Not approved.--=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 11:32, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

It's good to see people ask before add their site, very good manner. Too bad, it's forum and against WP:EL. So I'm afraid it won't fit in article. L-Zwei 11:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I am trying to figure out where this break the rules. Since I am the owner and one part of the administrator team of afore mentioned site, I would love it if we could get featured on Wikipedia. The link goes to the forum only because the main site had no real design for it yet. It is still in development and we are getting more involved in the making of the games now too. We plan to help developers in general get their games done through both helping the development hands on, or by financing future developments. If the site is not yet suitable for getting mentioned in this section I would appreciate it if we were allowed by you to mention our site once more later on when we find it to be more done than it is present. As said before it would be an honour to get mentioned on Wiki in this section.

Highests regards and best wishes from Christian Toft

Free To Play & Shareware Games
A lot of the games here are Free to play, meaning you can play for free, but you can pay money to unlock exclusive stuff. Shouldn't that stuff be removed? Most of the things here are free games, not freeware games. User:phbbt107

I have noticed alot of the games on here are "Free-to-play" games, that have aditional features that you can purchase for real money (e.g. Maple story and FlyFF), but wouldn't that techincly make them shareware? Mattyatty 16:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, you may remove them.--=='''[[User:E-Magination''' ==]] 18:06, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree, remove them. --W3stfa11 22:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and removed a bunch of free-to-play games. If someone could go and check if I missed any, that'd be great. --Lijnema 19:55, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

structure
I think it would be better if these were arranged by genres, don't you think? --W3stfa11 22:11, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm with you. When I'm looking for games, I never start searching at A, but I almost always look for games in a certain genre. Re-structuring the games by genre would be great.

The Zeroorez

F.E.A.R. Combat
Is there a reason for FEAR Combat not being included? On the 17th of August 2006 the multiplayer version of FEAR went freeware. Also see: First_Encounter_Assault_Recon, List_of_commercial_games_released_as_freeware and List_of_free_first-person_shooters The Zeroorez

Open Source vs. Freeware
Despite how the introduction states that open source games should go in the separate list dedicated to them, I spotted 3 open source games within minutes of skimming thru the entry. "Apophis" was even called an open source game in the description, right next to the link! (I've removed the erroneous entries that I've spotted.) Clearly, contributors are missing the distinction between the two lists. Understandable, I suppose, since the sentence that says open source games ought to go in the other list isn't particularly conspicuous. While we can, and should, go thru the list sooner or later to prune out the duplicate open source entries (making sure that they're placed on the open source list), I think that we should erect a prominent banner to prevent such problems in the future, or a similar measure. Thoughts? -Mysterius 06:49, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm not too interested in the debate, but I think the argument is that any game that is available for free is freeware, and this thus makes "freeware" a superset which includes all free software (aka open source) packages. --Gronky 08:17, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree. I've seen a number of games dropped from the Open Source list, because the game contained non-free content, and not added to this list. I think it would be best to have all free games in this list, open source and not. --Lijnema 17:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm not in any way against that, but the introduction should be edited, then, to reflect consensus. And if/when such a consensus is reached, then my previous deletions should be re-added to the list. -Mysterius 00:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, let's list the lot, making a note of which are open source. While we're at it, let's do something other than alphabetical order; categories can do that; perhaps by-genre, by-license, or by original release date? Marasmusine 06:45, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

 * And let's also split the list in two: packages that are free software but which use non-free level data, maps, images, etc., and packages that are entirely free software and free content. --Gronky 07:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

 * As long as we don't start listing each individual Doom source port in that latter section. Marasmusine 15:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Lumping treating "freeware" as an umbrella term under which to place "free software" is mistaken, overlooking the history of the term freeware, how Wikipedia describes it, etc. Please don't conflate terms here. D. Brodale 20:12, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Dhunters1.jpg
The image Image:Dhunters1.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --00:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

New link for freeware? or is it just free software... you people confuse me.
I'm not all that familiar with the term "freeware" vs. "free software", so, i'm going to leave it up to someone who actually understands that to post this link in the appropriate section. http://freeware.remakes.org/

thanks(and i'm not logged in. dang.) XIADEN74.77.105.188 (talk) 22:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Battle For Wesnoth - Free Software But Not Freeware?
Around 26/27-May-08 the following entry was deleted by Ciastek on the grounds that it is free software but not freeware: I don't understand the difference between free software and freeware. Please explain. John259 (talk) 06:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Battle for Wesnoth is a turn-based strategy/RPG game with a fantasy theme.

Nomination for deletion
I've nominated this for deletion, if there is a reason you feel it should not be deleted (or if you agree that it should be), please discuss here, thanks. <3 bunny  02:24, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

The individual articles on the games provide extremely useful information. Therefore this and similar lists of links to articles also provide extremely useful information and should be retained. However, there's a need to sort out whether the distinction between the terms free software and freeware is pedantry or justified. Just my opinion, obviously. John259 (talk) 06:28, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

 * You put emphasis on "extremely useful information" but you do not define what "extremely useful information" is and you do not prove that the links are so. Plus, a page with links to "extremely useful stuff" does not constitute a good article (and this page is classified as a stub accordingly), and it does not mean that it is reason for it to be kept. An IP user has removed my prod, without what I think is sound reason, stating: "I have removed the proposal for deletion. This page contains a list of worthwhile games for those who are new to the freeware gaming scene to try out, there is no serious reason for it to be deleted[... sic]"; however, Wikipedia is not a directory per WP:NOTDIRECTORY. Comments? <3  bunny  02:49, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

I see Wikipedia's role as that of providing useful and reliable information, not engaging in pointless pedantry. In my opinion no purpose would be served in deleting the page and such an action would only be harmful. John259 (talk) 07:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Okay. So you wonder what criteria we have to include games in the list, and how we avoid adversiting. I think things have worked well so far. Can you explain in what way you think it's failing? --Lijnema (talk) 12:48, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Every entries need to has article here, whenever red link entry added (or its article got deleted), editors will remove it. This mean each entry is at least notable enough to has article here, this list is place to collect them like index. That's why it's useful. L-Zwei (talk) 14:47, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

This is a list of Wikipedia articles, used for navigational purposes, complementing Category:Freeware games. See WP:Lists. This is quite different to a directory, which is why we are constantly snipping out external links. Marasmusine (talk) 16:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Duplication between this and List of commercial games released as freeware
As I understand it, this and the commercial game freeware list are mutually exclusive. However, some games appear on both lists. I removed ZZT from this list, since it was shareware before it was freeware. However, SubSpace also appears on both lists, but I do not know anything about the game, so I can't really say which list it belongs on. --Thunderbird8 (talk) 17:04, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Why not flash games, or at least notable ones
There are some great flash games out there that are completely free to play. Some of the flash games have had more plays by individual users than some Playstation games. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.194.193.194 (talk) 23:57, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

 * They should be notable enough to have an own article and then it would be good idea for an article List of free Browser games or something (not only Flash). --12:52, 9 January 2009 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.221.74.155 (talk)

Clarity, and a bit of housekeeping
Removed the C and C entry and played a bit with the article's writing. It's not totally proper english, but I feel the open source and commercial-as-freeware lists need the whitespace so idiots can see them... I missed it the first time and almost started putting all the open source games I liked onto the list. >_>

as to the flash games thing, maybe make a article/list for those? People look for it so I suppose a compiled list would be useful. Given how fast flash games develop though, it might be a liiiiitle more trouble than one might want.

142.59.56.26 (talk) 05:03, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Online games and freeware
I think we should be clear that freeware doesn't include client-server model online games, unless the server software itself is also available as freeware. This will filter out most "free-to-play" MMO games. Marasmusine (talk) 15:03, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Why shouldn't you guys add http://alldownloads4less.t83.net to the list of external sites. It's a great site for freeware games —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.5.211 (talk) 11:56, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We're not a web directory. Marasmusine (talk) 15:51, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Rename
Anyone think renaming to "List of notable freeware video games" would be more accurate? 71.169.130.75 (talk) 17:25, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

deleted duplicates with List of open source games
I have deleted the following games from this list. Some of these have restricted licenses for content, but the other page currently accepts that.

Allegiance Angband AssaultCube Bitfighter Battle for Wesnoth BZFlag C-evo Enigma Frets on Fire Frozen Bubble Nexuiz TORCS Torus Trooper Tremulous —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.85.42.110 (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Some Content has been removed
I have removed a few games from the list because they does not fit the criteria of "closed source" Freeware games as stated at the top of the page. These games include:

- Simutrans

- Slingshot

- Spring project

- Star Wars Tactics

- Stepmania - Wormux

If you feel one (or more) of the games should not have be deleted, please discuss here. Thanks.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by DeltaSpeeds (talk • contribs) 19:57, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Instead of adding 'this should be moved' to a handful of things on the list, it would be better form to just be bold and move them. -- Jelly Soup (talk) 20:46, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

The Elder Scrolls
Should the first two games (Arena and Daggerfall) be listed? They originally were not free however Bethesda has been giving the first away for free on their site for years and daggerfall since 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.204.135.150 (talk) 21:04, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Filter by game genre?
Could someone modify this page so that one could sort through all listed games by their genre? This page has things done that way: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_open-source_video_games

Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.119.217.157 (talk) 17:12, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

Nitronic Rush?
There is a game called Nitronic Rush that you can download and play for free. Should this game be listed?
 * Whilst we don't list every freeware game that exists, Nitronic Rush has had some coverage in a few places. If you want to list it, I suggest citing Ars Technica which is a reliable source. Marasmusine (talk) 12:53, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Problems in "F" category
I removed FlightGear as that's definitely open source, therefore it doesn't belong here. What about flOw, though. Being a Flash game, doesn't that put it in the not-included browser game bracket? OrbiterSpacethingy (talk) 17:25, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

table
this page has a list, the open-source page has a table and the 'commercial released as free' page has another kind of table; I feel they should all be tables, and be around the same type of table. I prefer the one on the 'commercial released as free' page. of course, on the open-source list there needs to be a column for licences but otherwise I think that certain information such as the platform is needed 189.78.163.65 (talk) 05:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Merge from List of free PC titles
List of free PC titles duplicates this page, both in scope and mostly in content. I think it's fairly obvious that the newer duplicate needs to be merged into this one, and I have tagged both pages accordingly. If someone wants to, they probably could just tag the duplicate page for speedy deletion, but I did note a few titles from the duplicate page that were apparently not listed here. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:53, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

 * No, that wouldn't work. List of free PC titles has incompatible content with this list (as well as vice versa). This list contains non-PC games that are only freeware. List of free PC titles contains free-to-play titles, which are not freeware. The information on this list is brand new and still undergoing construction. Give the new list a couple more weeks to mature and demonstrate its differences before proposing merges with other lists. Wikinium (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * It's pointless to have two lists of freeware video games. We can create a list of free-to-play online games if there isn't one already, but the other list can not duplicate this one. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:10, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Again, this is platform-specific list that includes all types of free games. Whether this be online or singleplayer, open-source, free, free-to-play, etc. This list just isn't compatible with the one you decided it needed to be merged with. There is some information that could go in both, but why does this mean you need to destroy a perfectly legitimate list? IF you're interested in growing this list, that's fine, but you don't need to kill the PC one to get the data out of it that you want. Wikinium (talk) 01:16, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

I alerted WikiProject Video Games and gave a pointer to this discussion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:44, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

GROW (series)
Shouldn't the GROW series not be included on this list, since they are flash games and not "traditional executable files that must be downloaded and installed"?

TheWizardG (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2015 (UTC)TheWizardG

Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon Phantoms is not freeware!
According to its Wikipedia article, it has over $1,000 worth of paid DLC available. TheWizardG (talk) 18:43, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of freeware video games. 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/20150929015808/http://magestorm.org/ to http://www.magestorm.org/

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) 13:04, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Charityware / Careware
Is charityware considered freeware? Donationware says that it's a type of freeware. Whisperjanes (talk) 19:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Can someone add Eversion please?
Eversion is a 2008 freeware puzzle platformer with a Lovecraftian twist. Downloads are at archive.org when you search "eversion freeware" on browsers. I think it fits on this page and would be a cool addition. 186.172.42.64 (talk) 19:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Done. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:00, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of freeware video games


text:
Alla breve

Alla breve – also known as cut time or cut common time – is a musical meter notated by the time signature symbol  (a C with a vertical line through it), which is the equivalent of. The term is Italian for "on the breve", originally meaning that the beat was counted on the breve.

Alla breve is a "simple-duple meter with a half-note pulse". The note denomination that represents one beat is the minim or half-note. There are two of these per bar, so that the time signature may be interpreted as "two minim beats per bar". Alternatively this is read as two beats per measure, where the half note gets the beat.

The name "common time" refers to, which has four beats to the bar, each of a quarter note (or crotchet).

Modern usage
In contemporary use, alla breve suggests a fairly quick tempo. Thus, it is used frequently for military marches. From about 1600 to 1900, its meaning with regard to tempo varied, so it cannot always be taken to mean a quick tempo. Using alla breve helps the musician read notes of short duration more cleanly with fewer beats.

Historical usage
Prior to 1600 the term alla breve derives from the system of mensural or proportional notation (also called proportio dupla) in which note values (and their graphical shapes) were related by the ratio 2:1. In this context it means that the tactus or metrical pulse (now commonly referred to as the "beat") is switched from its normal place on the whole note (semibreve) to the double whole note (breve).

Early music notation was developed by religious orders, which has resulted in some religious associations in notation. The most obvious is that music in triple time was called tempus perfectum, deriving its name from the Holy Trinity and represented by the "perfect" circle, which has no beginning or end.

Music in duple time was similarly called tempus imperfectum. Its symbol was the broken circle, , which is still used – although it has evolved to mean, or "common time", today. When cut through by a vertical line "", it means – "cut common", or alla breve.

The use of the vertical line or stroke in a musical graphical symbol, as practiced in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance, and now referred to by the modern term of "cut time", did not always have the same meaning as alla breve. It sometimes had other functions, including non-mensural ones.

Example
The following is an example with the same rhythm notated in and in :

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

title: Alla breve


text:
Daniel Dunglas Home

Daniel Dunglas Home (pronounced Hume; 20 March 1833 – 21 June 1886) was a Scottish physical medium with the reported ability to levitate to a variety of heights, speak with the dead, and to produce rapping and knocks in houses at will. His biographer Peter Lamont opines that he was one of the most famous men of his era. Harry Houdini described him as "one of the most conspicuous and lauded of his type and generation" and "the forerunner of the mediums whose forte is fleecing by presuming on the credulity of the public." Home conducted hundreds of séances, which were attended by many eminent Victorians. There have been eyewitness accounts by séance sitters describing conjuring methods and fraud that Home may have employed.

Family
Daniel Home's mother, Elizabeth ("Betsy") Home (née McNeill) was known as a seer in Scotland, as were many of her predecessors, like her great uncle Colin Uruqhart, and her uncle Mr. McKenzie. The gift of second sight was often seen as a curse, as it foretold instances of tragedy and death. Home's father, William Home, was the illegitimate son of Alexander, the 10th Earl of Home. Evidence supports the elder Home's illegitimacy, as various payments meant for William were made by the 10th Earl. Elizabeth and William were married when he was 19 years old, and found employment at the Balerno paper mill. The Homes moved into one of small houses built in the mill for the workforce, in Currie (six miles south-west of Edinburgh). William was described as a "bitter, morose and unhappy man" who drank, and was often aggressive towards his wife. Elizabeth had eight children while living in the mill house: six sons and two daughters, although their lives were not fully recorded. The eldest, John, later worked in the Balerno mill and eventually managed a paper mill in Philadelphia, Mary drowned in a stream at the age of 12 years in 1846, and Adam died at sea at the age of 17 while en route to Greenland, which Home says he saw in a vision and reportedly confirmed five months later.

Early life
Daniel Home was Elizabeth's third child, and was born on 20 March 1833. He was baptised by the Reverend Mr. Somerville three weeks after his birth at Currie Parish Church on 14 April 1833. The one-year-old Home was deemed a delicate child, having a "nervous temperament", and was passed to Elizabeth's childless sister, Mary Cook. She lived with her husband in the coastal town of Portobello, 3 mi east of Edinburgh. According to Home, his cradle rocked by itself at the Cooks' house, and he had a vision of a cousin's death, who lived in Linlithgow, to the west of Edinburgh.

United States
Sometime between 1838 and 1841, Home's aunt and uncle decided to emigrate to the United States with their adopted son, sailing in the cheapest class of steerage as they could not afford a cabin. After landing in New York, the Cooks travelled to Greeneville, near Norwich, Connecticut. The red-haired and freckled Home attended school in Greeneville, where he was known as "Scotchy" by the other students. The 13-year-old Home did not join in sports games with other boys, preferring to take walks in the local woods with a friend called Edwin. The two boys read the Bible to each other and told stories, and made a pact stating that if one or the other were to die, they would try to make contact after death. Home and his aunt soon moved to Troy, New York, which is about 155 mi from Greeneville, although Home in his own book stated it was 300 mi away. Home lost contact with Edwin until one night when Home, according to Lamont, saw a brightly lit vision of him standing at the foot of the bed, which gave Home the feeling that his friend was dead. Edwin made three circles in the air before disappearing, and a few days later a letter arrived stating that Edwin had died of malignant dysentery three days before Home's vision.

A few years later Home and his aunt returned to Greeneville, and Elizabeth Home emigrated from Scotland to America with the surviving members of the family to live in Waterford, Connecticut, which was 12 mi away from the Cook's house. Home and his mother's reunion was short-lived, as Elizabeth appeared to foretell her own death in 1850. Home said he saw his mother in a vision saying, "Dan, 12 o'clock", which was the time of her death. After Elizabeth's death Home turned to religion. His aunt was a Presbyterian, and held the Calvinist view that one's fate has been decided, so Home embraced the Wesleyan faith, which believed that every soul can be saved. Home's aunt resented Wesleyans so much that she forced Home to change to Congregationalist, which was not to her liking, either, but was more in line with her own religion. The house was reportedly disturbed by rappings and knocking similar to those that had occurred two years earlier at the home of the Fox sisters. Ministers were called to the Cooks' house: a Baptist, a Congregationalist, and even a Wesleyan minister, who all believed that Home was possessed by the Devil, although Home believed it was a gift from God. According to Home, the knocking did not stop, and a table started to move by itself, even though Home's aunt put a bible on it and then placed her full body weight on it. According to Lamont, the noises did not stop and were attracting the unwanted attention of Cook's neighbours, so Home was told to leave the house.

Fame
The 18-year-old Home stayed with a friend in Willimantic, Connecticut, and later Lebanon, Connecticut. Home held his first séance in March 1851, which was reported in a Hartford newspaper managed by W. R. Hayden, who wrote that the table moved without anyone touching it, and kept moving when Hayden physically tried to stop it. After the newspaper report, Home became well known in New England, travelling around healing the sick and communicating with the dead, although he wrote that he was not prepared for this sudden change in his life because of his supposed shyness.

Home never directly asked for money, although he lived very well on gifts, donations and lodging from wealthy admirers. He felt that he was on a "mission to demonstrate immortality", and wished to interact with his clients as one gentleman to another, rather than as an employee. In 1852, Home was a guest at the house of Rufus Elmer in Springfield, Massachusetts, giving séances six or seven times a day, which were visited by crowds of people, including a Harvard professor, David Wells, and the poet and editor of the New York Evening Post, William Cullen Bryant. They were all convinced of Home's credibility and wrote to the Springfield Republican newspaper stating that the room was well lit, full inspections were allowed, and said, "We know that we were not imposed upon nor deceived". It was also reported that at one of Home's demonstrations five men of heavy build (with a combined weight of 850 pounds) sat on a table, but it still moved, and others saw "a tremulous phosphorescent light gleam over the walls". Home was investigated by numerous people, such as Professor Robert Hare, the inventor of the oxy-hydrogen blowpipe, and John W. Edmonds, a trial court judge, who were sceptical, but later said they believed Home was not fraudulent.

In his book, Incidents in My Life, Home claims that in August 1852, in South Manchester, Connecticut, at the house of Ward Cheney, a successful silk manufacturer, he was reportedly seen to levitate twice and then rise to up to the ceiling, with louder rappings and knocking than ever before, more aggressive table movements and the sounds of a ship at sea in a storm, although persons present said that the room was badly lit so as to see the spirit lights.

New York was now interested in Home's abilities, so he moved to an apartment at Bryant Park on 42nd street. His most verbal critic in New York was William Makepeace Thackeray, the author of Vanity Fair. Thackeray dismissed Home's abilities as "dire humbug", and "dreary and foolish superstition", although Thackeray had been impressed when he saw a table turning. Home thought that Thackeray was "the most sceptical inquirer" he had ever met, and as Thackeray made his thoughts public, Home faced public scepticism and further scrutiny. Home travelled between Hartford, Springfield, and Boston during the next few months, and settled in Newburgh by the Hudson River in the summer of 1853. He resided at the Theological Institute, but took no part in any of the theological discussions held there, as he wanted to take a course in medicine. Dr. Hull funded Home's studies, and offered to pay Home five dollars a day for his séances, but Home refused, as always. His idea was to fund his work with a legitimate salary by practicing medicine, but he became ill in early 1854, and stopped his studies. Home was diagnosed with Tuberculosis, and his doctors recommended recuperation in Europe. His last séance in America was in March 1855, in Hartford, Connecticut, before he travelled to Boston and sailed to England on board the Africa, at the end of March.

Europe
Home's name was originally Daniel Home, but by the time he arrived in Europe he had lengthened it to Daniel Dunglas Home, in reference to the Scottish house of Home, of which his father claimed to be a part. In London, Home found a believer in spiritualism, William Cox, who owned a large hotel at 53, 54 and 55 Jermyn Street, London. As Cox was so enamoured of Home's abilities, he let him stay at the hotel without payment. Robert Owen, an 83-year-old social reformer, was also staying at the hotel, and introduced Home to many of his friends in London society. At the time Home was described as "tall and thin, with blue eyes and auburn hair, fastidiously dressed but seriously ill with consumption". Nevertheless, he held sittings for notable people in full daylight, moving objects that were some distance away.

Some early guests at Home's sittings included the scientist Sir David Brewster (who remained unconvinced), the novelists Sir Edward Bulwer-Lytton and Thomas Adolphus Trollope, and the Swedenborgian James John Garth Wilkinson. As well as Brewster, fellow scientists Michael Faraday and Thomas Huxley were prominent contemporary critics of Home's claims. It was the poet Robert Browning however, who proved to be one of Home's most adamant critics. After attending a séance of Home's, Browning wrote in a letter to The Times that: 'the whole display of hands, spirit utterances etc., was a cheat and imposture'. Browning gave his unflattering impression of Home in the poem, "Sludge the Medium" (1864). His wife, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, was convinced that the phenomena she witnessed were genuine and their discussions about Home were a constant source of disagreement. Frank Podmore writes of a Mr Merrifield's first-hand account of experiencing Home's fraudulence during a séance.

Home's fame grew, fuelled by his ostensible feats of levitation. William Crookes claimed Home could levitate five to seven feet above the floor. Crookes wrote "We all saw him rise from the ground slowly to a height of about six inches, remain there for about ten seconds, and then slowly descend."

In the following years Home travelled across continental Europe, and always as a guest of wealthy patrons. In Paris, he was summoned to the Tuileries to perform a séance for Napoleon III. He also performed for Queen Sophia of the Netherlands, who wrote: "I saw him four times...I felt a hand tipping my finger; I saw a heavy golden bell moving alone from one person to another; I saw my handkerchief move alone and return to me with a knot... He himself is a pale, sickly, rather handsome young man but without a look or anything which would either fascinate or frighten you. It is wonderful. I am so glad I have seen it..."

In 1866, Mrs Jane Lyon, a wealthy widow, adopted Home as her son, giving him £60,000 in an attempt to gain introduction into high society. Finding that the adoption did not change her social situation, Lyon changed her mind, and brought a suit for the return of her money from Home on the grounds that it had been obtained by spiritual influence. Under British law, the defendant bears the burden of proof in such a case, and proof was impossible since there was no physical evidence. The case was decided against Home, Mrs Lyon's money was returned, and the press pilloried Home's reputation. Home's high society acquaintances thought that he behaved like a complete gentleman throughout the ordeal, and he did not lose a single important friend.

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, a spiritualist who supported the mediumship of Home, stated that he was unusual in that he had four different types of mediumship: direct voice (the ability to let spirits audibly speak); trance speaker (the ability to let spirits speak through oneself); clairvoyant (ability to see things that are out of view); and physical medium (moving objects at a distance, levitation, etc., which was the type of mediumship in which he had no equal).

According to Eric Dingwall, a lady acted as a medium and used to help Home during the séances attended by Henrietta Ada Ward.

Alleged levitations
A feat of low levitation by Daniel Dunglas Home was recorded by paranormal historian Frank Podmore. "We all saw him rise from the ground slowly to a height of about six inches, remain there for about ten seconds, and then slowly descend." The Balducci levitation is a levitation illusion first described by Ed Balducci. Its inventor is unknown. The performer stands at an angle facing away from the spectators. The performer appears to levitate a few inches above the ground. The effect generally does not last for more than five seconds. The performer's feet return to the ground, and the effect is complete.

Home met one of his future closest friends in 1867; the young Lord Adare (later the 4th Earl of Dunraven). Adare was fascinated by Home, and began documenting the séances they held. The following year, Home was said to have levitated out of the third storey window of one room, and back in through the window of the adjoining room in front of three witnesses (Adare, Captain Wynne, and Lord Lindsay).

Lord Adare stated that Home "swung out and in" of a window in a horizontal position. However, John Sladek has pointed out that all three witnesses gave contradictory information about the levitation, even contradicting themselves about specific details:

"The incident took place at 5 Buckingham Gate, Kensington (Adare); at Ashley Place, Westminster (Adare); at Victoria Street, Westminster (Lindsay). There was a ledge 4 inches wide below the windows (Adare); a ledge 1½ inches wide (Lindsay); no foothold at all (Lindsay); balconies 7 feet apart (Adare); no balconies at all (Lindsay). The windows were 85 feet from the street (Lindsay); 70 feet (Lindsay); 80 feet (Home); on the third floor (Adare); on the first floor (Adare). It was dark (Adare); there was a bright moonlight (Lindsay). Home was asleep in one room and the witnesses went into the next (Adare); Home left the witnesses in one room and went himself into the next (Adare)."

Trevor H. Hall who researched the case in detail established that the levitation took place at Ashley Place in Westminster at a height of 35 feet and suggested rather than levitating Home had stepped across a gap of four feet between two iron balconies. Gordon Stein also noted that the gap between the two balconies was only four feet making passing between them entirely feasible.

Joseph McCabe wrote regarding the alleged levitation:

"No one professes to have seen Home carried from window to window. Home told the three men who were present that he was going to be wafted, and he thus set up a state of very nervous expectation... Both Lord Crawford and Lord Adare say that they were warned. Then Lord Crawford says that he saw the shadow on the wall of Home entering the room horizontally; and as the moon, by whose light he professes to have seen the shadow, was at the most only three days old, his testimony is absolutely worthless. Lord Adare claims only that he saw Home, in the dark, 'standing upright outside our window.' In the dark—it was an almost moonless December night—one could not, as a matter of fact, say very positively whether Home was outside or inside; but, in any case, he acknowledges that there was a nineteen-inch window-sill outside the window, and Home could stand on that."

A few days before the levitation, scaring Lord Lindsay, Home had opened the same window, stepped out and stood on the outside ledge in the presence of two witnesses. Ivor Lloyd Tuckett argued that Home did this to provide "a rough sketch of the picture which he aimed at producing". Another possible natural explanation for Home's famous levitation was proposed by the psychical researcher Guy William Lambert who suggested he had attached a rope to the chimneys on the roof of the building, and hung the rope down unseen to the third floor. During the alleged levitation Home "swung out and in" the room by using a double rope maneuver. Lambert's rope hypothesis was supported by the magician John Booth.

Arthur Conan Doyle said there were many cases on record of Home levitating, but skeptics assert the alleged levitations occurred in darkened conditions susceptible to trickery.

Science historian Sherrie Lynne Lyons has stated that a possible explanation for Home's alleged levitation phenomena was revealed in the twentieth century by Clarence E. Willard (1882–1962). Willard revealed his technique in 1958 to members of the Society of American Magicians. He demonstrated how he could add two inches to his height by stretching. According to Lyons "it is quite likely that [Home] used a similar technique to the one that Willard used decades later".

Author Donald Serrell Thomas has asserted that Jean Eugène Robert-Houdin, the French stage magician was refused admission to Home's séances. In opposition to this, spiritualists have said that Houdin was unable to explain the phenomena at a Home séance. Regarding both these claims, Peter Lamont has noted:

"It is probably worth noting, if only to avoid confusion, that such claims (much like those made by spiritualists that conjurors were unable to explain the phenomena) were often unfounded. For example, spiritualists claimed that Robert-Houdin had been unable to explain what happened at a Home seance, and critics claimed that Home had refused an invitation to perform in front of Robert-Houdin. There is, however, not a shred of evidence for either of these claims."

Historian Simon During has suggested the levitation of Home was a magic trick, influenced by Robert-Houdin.

Allegations of fraud

It is often claimed in parapsychology and spiritualist books that Home was never caught in fraud. However, skeptics have stated that this claim does not hold up to scrutiny as Home was caught utilizing tricks by different witnesses on different occasions. Gordon Stein has noted that "While the statement that Home was never caught in fraud has been made many times, it simply is not true... It is simply that Home was never publicly exposed in fraud. Privately, he was caught in fraud several times. In addition, there are natural explanations both possible and likely for each of his phenomena."

At a séance in the house of the solicitor John Snaith Rymer in Ealing in July 1855, a sitter (Frederick Merrifield) observed that a "spirit-hand" was in fact a false limb attached on the end of Home's arm. Merrifield also claimed to have observed Home use his foot in the séance room.

The poet Robert Browning and his wife Elizabeth attended a séance on 23, July 1855 in Ealing with the Rymers. In 1895, after the deaths of Robert and Elizabeth, the journalist Frederick Greenwood alleged that Browning had told him that during the séance he had taken hold of a luminous object that appeared above the edge of the table, which turned out to be Home's naked foot. Later Browning's son Robert, in a letter to the London Times, 5 December 1902, also referred to the incident, saying that Browning had caught hold of Home's foot under the table. The allegation was repeated by Harry Houdini and later writers. But detailed descriptions of the séance written soon afterwards by Robert and Elizabeth make no mention of any such incident. Browning's account states that, although he was promised that he would be allowed to hold a "spirit-hand," the promise was not kept.

Writing in the journal for the Society for Psychical Research, Count Perovsky-Petrovo-Solovovo described a letter by Dr. Barthez, a physician in the court of Empress Eugenie, which claimed a sitter Morio de l'lle caught Home using his foot to fake supposed spirit effects during a séance in Biarritz in 1857. Home wore thin shoes, easy to take off and draw on, and also cut socks that left the toes free. "At the appropriate moment he takes off one of his shoes and with his foot pulls a dress here, a dress there, rings a bell, knocks one way and another, and, the thing done, quickly puts his shoe on again." Home positioned himself between the empress and Napoleon III. One of the séance sitters known as General Fleury also suspected that Home was utilizing trickery and asked to leave but returned unobserved to watch from another door behind Home. He saw Home slip his foot from his shoe and touch the arm of the Empress, who believed it to be one of her dead children. The observer stepped forward and revealed the fraud, and Home was conducted out of the country: "The order was to keep the incident secret." The allegations described by Dr. Barthez and General Fleury are second hand and have caused dispute between psychical researchers and skeptics.

The journalist Delia Logan who attended a séance with Home in London claimed that Home had used a phosphorus trick. During the séance luminous hands were observed and the host told Logan that had seen Home place a small bottle upon the mantle piece. The host slipped the bottle into his pocket and when examined the next day, it was found to contain phosphorus oil.

The neoclassical sculptor Hiram Powers who was a convinced spiritualist attended a séance with Home, but wrote a letter to Elizabeth Browning claiming Home had faked the table-turning movements.

Speculations on trickery

The researchers Frank Podmore (1910), Milbourne Christopher (1970), Trevor H. Hall (1984) and Gordon Stein (1993) were convinced that Home was a fraud and have provided a source of speculation on the ways in which he could have duped his séance sitters.

Skeptics have criticized the lighting conditions of Home's séances. Home and his followers claimed that some of the séances took place in "light" but this was nothing more than a few candles, or some glow from a fireplace or open window. Home would adjust the lighting to his needs with no objections from his séance sitters. For example, there is this report from a witness: "The room was very dark ... Home's hands were visible only as a faint white heap". Home selected the séance sitters who sat next to him, his hands and feet were not controlled and according to Frank Podmore "no precautions were taken against trickery."

Home was never searched before or after his séances. Science historian Sherrie Lynne Lyons wrote that the glowing or light-emitting hands in his séances could easily be explained by the rubbing of oil of phosphorus on his hands. It has been suggested that the "spirit hands" in the séances of Home were made of gloves stuffed with a substance. Robert Browning believed they were attached to Home's feet. Home was a sculptor and his studio in Rome contained sculpted hands. Lyons has speculated that he may have substituted the sculptor hands, leaving his real hands free to perform phenomena in the séance room.

Home was known for his alleged feat of handling a heated lump of coal taken from a fire. The magician Henry Evans speculated that this was a juggling trick, performed using a hidden piece of platinum. Hereward Carrington described Evans hypothesis as "certainly ingenious" but pointed out William Crookes an experienced chemist was present at a séance whilst Home performed the feat and would have known how to distinguish the difference between coal and platinum. Frank Podmore wrote that most of the fire feats could have easily be performed by conjuring tricks and sleight of hand but hallucination and sense-deception may have explained Crookes' claim about observing flames from Home's fingers.

William Crookes investigation
Between 1870 and 1873, chemist and physicist William Crookes conducted experiments to determine the validity of the phenomena produced by three mediums: Florence Cook, Kate Fox, and Home. Crookes' final report in 1874 concluded that the phenomena produced by all three mediums were genuine, a result which was roundly derided by the scientific establishment. Crookes recorded that he controlled and secured Home by placing his feet on the top of Home's feet. Crookes' method of foot control later proved inadequate when used with Eusapia Palladino, as she merely slipped her foot out and into her sturdy shoe. In addition, Crookes' motives, methods, and conclusions with regard to Florence Cook were called into question, both at the time and subsequently, casting doubt on his conclusions about Home. In a series of experiments in London at the house of Crookes in February 1875, the medium Anna Eva Fay managed to fool Crookes into believing she had genuine psychic powers. Fay later confessed to her fraud and revealed the tricks she had used.

Home was investigated by Crookes in a self-built laboratory at the rear of his house at Mornington Road, North London in 1871. No plans of the laboratory have been found and there is no contemporary description of it. Crookes wrote the board and spring balance experiment was a success with Home and had proven "beyond doubt" the existence of a "psychic force." However, the experiment could be easily dismissed as the result of vibrations caused by the passage of Euston trains in the large railway cutting near his house in London. The experiment was not repeatable and sometimes failed to produce any phenomena. The experiment was rejected and ridiculed by the scientific community for lack of scientific controls. In the experiment Home refused for Crookes to be near him and would draw attention to something on the other side of the room, or make conversation for diversionary signals.

In 1871, Balfour Stewart in an article for Nature noted that the experiments were not conducted in broad daylight before a large unbiased audience and the results were inconclusive. Stewart suspected the phenomena observed were "subjective, rather than objective, occurring in the imaginations of those present rather than in the outward physical world." In the same year, J. P. Earwaker wrote a science review that heavily criticized the Crookes' experiments for their poor design concluding they were pseudoscientific. According to Earwaker "For in truth they are the very opposite of scientific. Even to call them unscientific is not strong enough; clumsy and futile are much nearer the truth."

The engineer Coleman Sellers questioned the origin and weight of the board used with the balance spring apparatus. Sellers wrote that a standard mahogany board weighs around thirteen and half pounds but the one used in Crookes' experiment may have been at fault at only six pounds. Crookes responded to Sellers claiming the board weighed six pounds and this was not a mistake, he also stated he had the board for about sixteen years and it was originally cut in a lumber yard.

P. H. Vanderweyde noted that Crookes was already a believer in psychic powers before he obtained the results of the experiments. Vanderweyde stated the spring balance used in Crookes' experiment was unreliable as it was easy to manipulate by deception and suggested he should repeat the experiment by using a chemical balance.

According to Barry Wiley during the board and spring balance experiment, Home refused for Crookes to sit near him and he was occupied by writing notes. Wiley suspected Home used resin on his finger tips to tamper with the apparatus which managed to fool Crookes into believing a psychic force was being displayed. Regarding Crookes, the magician Harry Houdini wrote:

"There is not the slightest doubt in my mind that this brainy man was hoodwinked, and that his confidence was betrayed by the so-called mediums that he tested. His powers of observation were blinded and his reasoning faculties so blunted by his prejudice in favor of anything psychic or occult that he could not, or would not, resist the influence."

Historian Ruth Brandon in an article for the New Scientist noted that William Huggins, Serjeant Cox, Crooke's wife and daughter, his laboratory assistant, and a Mrs Humphrey were all present during the Crookes experiments with Home. However, Barry Wiley has written that when Crookes published his report on the experiments in the Quarterly Journal of Science in 1871 he did not mention all the names of the observers present in the room. Wiley has stated that four females were present during the experiments as was Crookes' brother and the original report by Crookes did not refer to any spirits but many years later in 1889 he revealed in his Notes of séances with D. D. Home the names of the observers and claimed Home was in communication with spirits.

Crookes' assistant was the glass blower Charles Henry Gimingham (1853–1890) who had built the experimental apparatus. Wiley suspected that Gimingham worked as a secret accomplice for Anna Eva Fay in her experiments with Crookes. Wiley noted that "Gimingham had free and open access to Crookes' laboratory and frequently worked there unsupervised with Crookes' full trust."

Joseph McCabe criticized the Crookes experiments for lack of scientific controls and wrote Home was "daily in and out of Crookes's laboratory, and it appears that he closely watched the development of the tests and was prepared in advance." Before the experiments, Crookes was present with Home whilst he changed dress but Frank Podmore noted this would not have prevented Home from slipping into his pocket apparatus to cheat on the experiments. Edward Clodd wrote that Home chose his séance sitters and "if test experiments were suggested, he imposed the conditions."

The physicist Victor Stenger commented that the experiments were poorly controlled; he gave the example of Home requesting all hands to be removed from the table whilst all those present complied. Stenger noted that "Crookes gullibly swallowed ploys such as this and allowed Home to call the shots... his desire to believe blinded him to the chicanery of his psychic subjects."

Accordion experiment
In the accordion experiment, Home sat at a table, with Crookes and another observer on either side of him, each with a foot on one of Home's feet. Home inserted his hand inside a wire cage that was pushed under the table. One of Home's hands was placed on the top of the table, and the other inside the cage which held an accordion on the non-key side, so the keyed end was hanging downwards. The accordion was reported to have played musical sounds. However, the amount of light in the room was not stated, and the accordion was not observed in good light. According to Frank Podmore there was no evidence the accordion played at all, as the keys were not observed to have moved. Podmore suggested the musical sounds could have come from an automatic instrument that Home had concealed.

In 1871, William Benjamin Carpenter wrote a critical evaluation of the Crookes experiments with Home in the Quarterly Review. Carpenter wrote that although Crookes, his assistant and Sergeant Cox claimed to have observed the accordion float in the cage; Dr. Huggins did not testify to this, and no information was given to whether the keys and bellows were seen to move. According to Carpenter no solid explanation could be given until the experiment is repeated, however, he suggested that the accordion feat that Home performed may have been a conjuring trick achieved with one hand. Carpenter concluded that Crookes should repeat the experiment in open daylight without the cage in the presence of other witnesses.

J. P. Earwaker heavily criticized the design of the accordion experiment as it took place under a dining room table. Earwaker who read Crookes' report noted that "no reason for this strangest of all strange positions is even hinted at." He also wrote "it never occurred to [Crookes] to notice whether the keys were depressed or not... it would be obvious that if the keys were not pressed down, it was impossible for the music really to have come from the accordion, and its true source must have been looked for elsewhere."

The magician John Nevil Maskelyne also criticized the design of the experiment for taking place under a table. The psychologist Millais Culpin wrote the experiment was not scientific and questioned why the experiment was done under the table instead of in a more convenient position on top of it. Before the accordion experiment with Crookes, Home had performed the accordion feat for over fifteen years under various conditions but always under his control. It was reported by sitters and Crookes that Home's accordion played only two pieces, Home Sweet Home and The Last Rose of Summer. Both contain only one-octave.

The psychical researcher Hereward Carrington and spiritualism expert Herbert Thurston have claimed the accordion experiment was not the result of deliberate fraud. This is in opposition to magicians and skeptical researchers who evaluated Crookes' reports from the experiment.

The magician Henry Evans suggested the accordion feat was Home playing a musical box, attached to his leg. Skeptic Joseph McCabe wrote that Home may have placed a musical box in his pocket or on the floor. According to McCabe "the opening and shutting of the accordion could be done by hooks, or loops of black silk. So with the crowning miracle, when Home withdrew his hand, and the accordion was seen suspended in the air, moving about in the cage (under the dark table). It was probably hooked on to the table." The 19th-century British medium Francis Ward Monck was caught using a music box in his séances that he had hidden in his trousers. The fraudulent medium Henry Slade also played an accordion while held with one hand under a table. Slade and Home played the same pieces. They had at one time lived near each other in the U.S.A. The magician Chung Ling Soo exposed how Slade had performed the trick.

The writer Amos Norton Craft suggested a false keyboard:

"The trick has since been often repeated and explained. The medium must have the semblance of key-board, made of some light material, concealed in his coat sleeve or about his person. This he attaches to the bottom of the accordion which he holds in his hand. Then when unobserved, while the learned professor is 'taking down his notes' for the public press, he reverses the accordion, and attaching the false keyboard on the bottom by means of a small hook attached to it, fastens it to the side of the basket; having now the real keyboard in his hand he is able to produce musical sounds. Afterward the accordion floated about in the basket under the table, without the contact of Mr. Home's hand. This subsequent phenomenon was given to avoid immediate examination of the first by keeping Professor Crookes in suspense, and giving the medium time to reverse the instrument and conceal in his clothing the false key-board which had been on the bottom of the instrument. The accordion was suspended by means of a small hook fastened to dark thread, which would be invisible in the gas-light."

Researcher Ronald Pearsall in his book The Table-Rappers (1972) suggested that a loop of catgut was attached to the accordion so Home could turn it round. Paul Kurtz wrote that other mediums had used a loop of catgut to obtain a similar effect with the accordion.

Other researchers have suspected that a secret accomplice was involved. The magician Carlos María de Heredia claimed to have replicated the accordion feat of Home and suggested it was a trick performed by an accomplice playing a hidden accordion. Ruth Brandon considered the possibility of an accomplice playing a concertina, or Home playing a hidden music box. However, Brandon dismissed the accomplice hypothesis as unlikely.

Skeptic James Randi stated that Home was caught cheating on a few occasions, but the episodes were never made public, and that the accordion feat was a one-octave mouth organ that Home concealed under his large moustache. Randi writes that one-octave mouth organs were found in Home's belongings after his death. According to Randi, "around 1960", William Lindsay Gresham told Randi he had seen these mouth organs in the Home collection at the Society for Psychical Research.

Gordon Stein wrote:

"Home could easily have produced the sound of the accordion (concertina) by the use of a small harmonica concealed in his mouth. The up and down movement of the accordion could easily have been produced by catching the bottom of the accordion in a loop of black thread, or on a hook."

The claim that the accordion feat was performed by Home using a small harmonica was originally suggested by J. M. Robertson in 1891. The psychical researcher Eric Dingwall who catalogued Home's collection on its arrival at the SPR did not record the presence of the mouth organs, and Lamont speculates that it is unlikely Dingwall would have missed these or not made them public. The accordion in the SPR collection is not the actual one Home used. They display a duplicate.

Personal life
Home married twice. In 1858, he married Alexandria de Kroll ("Sacha"), the 17-year-old daughter of a noble Russian family, in Saint Petersburg. His Best Man was the writer Alexandre Dumas. They had a son, Gregoire ("Grisha"), but Alexandria fell ill with tuberculosis, and died in 1862. In October 1871, Home married for the second, and last time, to Julie de Gloumeline, a wealthy Russian, whom he also met in St Petersburg. In the process, he converted to the Greek Orthodox faith.

In 1869 Lord Adare revealed in his diaries under the title Experiences in Spiritualism with D. D. Home that he had slept in the same bed with Home. Many of the diary entries contain erotic homosexual overtones between Adare and Home.

Death
Home retired due to ill health; the tuberculosis, from which he had suffered for much of his life, was advancing and he said his powers were failing. He died on 21 June 1886 at the age of 53 and was buried in the Russian cemetery of St. Germain-en-Laye, in Paris.

title: Daniel Dunglas Home


text:
Zhongma Fortress

Zhongma Fortress (Chinese: 中馬城) — also Zhong Ma Prison Camp or Unit Tōgō — was a prison camp where the Japanese Kwantung Army carried out covert biological warfare research on human test subjects. Built in Beiyinhe, outside of Harbin, Manchukuo during the Second Sino-Japanese War, the camp served as a center for human subject experimentation and could hold up to 1,000 prisoners at any given time. In 1937 the prison camp was destroyed and testing operations were transferred to Pingfang under Unit 731.

Background
In 1930 Doctor Shirō Ishii, an Imperial Japanese Army researcher in biological and chemical warfare, petitioned the Japanese War Ministry to establish a biological weapons program. With the support of Army Minister Sadao Araki and the dean of the Tokyo Army Medical College, Koizumi Chikahiko, a biological weapons program was initiated under a newly formed department of immunology. Ishii began his research in biological warfare as the head of the "Epidemic Prevention Research Laboratory." Although protecting Japanese troops from disease was part of the agenda, the laboratory's primary objective was to develop an effective means to spread epidemics. Encouraged by preliminary results with lab animals, Ishii sought to replicate these outcomes with human trials. Due to containment issues and ethical constraints, human experimentation could not be conducted in his laboratory in Tokyo.

In 1932 the Japanese Imperial Army invaded Manchuria following the Manchurian Incident. The subsequent occupation of Manchuria provided an environment conducive to Ishii's research as human test subjects "could be plucked from the streets like rats." Ishii relocated his laboratory to a military facility near Harbin. However, the facility's highly populated surroundings threatened to compromise the secrecy of the ongoing human experimentation. Consequently, a second site, about 100 kilometers to the south of Harbin at the village of Beiyinhe, was selected. Beiyinhe was a diffuse village of about 300 homes known to the local populace as Zhong Ma City. The Imperial Japanese Army cleared out the local inhabitants and burnt down the village, except for a large building suitable for use as a headquarters.

Description
The prison camp had 3 m earthen walls topped with electrified barbed wire and a moat with drawbridge surrounded the buildings within. There were hundreds of rooms and smaller surrounding laboratories, office buildings, barracks and dining facilities, warehouses and munitions storage, crematoria, and the prison cells. The Japanese Imperial Army conscripted local Chinese labor for the construction. Due to secrecy, laborers were escorted by armed guards and forced to wear blinders so they could not figure out what they were constructing. Those who worked on the most sensitive areas of the prison camp, such as the inner section of medical laboratories within the prisoners' quarters, were executed once construction was complete to ensure secrecy. The prisoners brought to Zhongma included common criminals, captured bandits, anti-Japanese partisans, as well as political prisoners and people rounded up on trumped up charges by the Kempeitai.

Human experimentation
A variety of medical experiments conducted on the prisoners within the camp. Prisoners were generally well fed on the usual diet of rice or wheat, meat, fish, and occasionally even alcohol, with the intent of keeping prisoners in their normal state of health at the beginning of experiments. In many cases, prisoners were drained of blood over several days, with careful records kept on their deteriorating physical condition. Others were subject to experiments on nutrient or water deprivation. Prisoners were also injected with microbes and plague bacteria. Data sheets reveal that in at least one case, after prisoners developed a fever of 104 F, they were vivisected while unconscious.

The average life expectancy of a prisoner at the camp was one month. Prisoners who survived the experiments, but who were deemed too weak for further tests, were killed. The facility was estimated to have held between 500-600 prisoners at any one time, with a capacity for over 1000.

Closure
In August 1934, at the time of the traditional summer festival, the prisoners were given a ration of special foods. One prisoner, named Li, managed to overpower his guard, seize the keys and freed about forty of his fellow prisoners. Although their legs were shackled, their arms were free, and the prisoners were able to climb the outside walls. A heavy downpour had knocked out the facility's electricity, deactivating the searchlights and electric fence. Some ten of the escapees were shot by guards while others were recaptured and subjected to sadistic treatment as reprisal, but roughly sixteen managed to escape. Some of the men soon died from exposure, hunger, cold, and the injuries from their experiments but several managed to survive, and spread word of the crimes against humanity being conducted by Shiro and his subordinates. Although the Kuomintang took no notice of these reports, Zhongma Fortress was closed down due to the significant publicity, and its activities transferred to a new site closer to Harbin called Pingfang (Heibo), which came to be known as Unit 731. The testimony of one of the escapees, Ziyang Wang, was collected by Xiao Han, deputy director of the Pingfang museum, in the 1980s. The graphic novel Maruta 454 (2010), by Paul-Yanic Laquerre, Song Yang and Pastor, depicts the escape of 12 Chinese prisoners from Unit Tōgō, based on Wang's testimony.

title: Zhongma Fortress


text:
Iceland University of the Arts

Iceland University of the Arts (Listaháskóli Íslands ) is an Icelandic institution of higher art education, located in Reykjavík, which offers the only university-level degrees in the arts in Iceland. The institution was founded on 21 September 1998 by consolidating the Iceland Drama School and the Reykjavík Arts School, and classes began in autumn 1999.

Education
Following the standards of the Bologna process, IUA offers bachelor's degree programmes (3 years, 180 ECTS credits, Bachelor of Fine Arts), and master's degree programmes (2 years, 120 ECTS credits, Master of Fine Arts).

There are seven study programmes available at IUA:

 * Architecture
 * Arts Education
 * Design
 * Film
 * Fine Art
 * Music
 * Performing Arts

Notable alumni & faculty
Faculty members of IUA are all practising artists and experts in their field of work. Distinguished former students and faculty members at IUA include:

Fine Art: Bryndís H. Snæbjörnsdóttir, Carl Boutard, Egill Sæbjörnsson, Elín Hansdóttir, Hekla Dögg Jónsdóttir, Hrafnhildur Arnardóttir (Shoplifter), Hugleikur Dagsson, Ólöf Nordal, Ragnar Kjartansson, Sigurður Guðjónsson, Monika Larsen Dennis.

Music: Atli Ingólfsson, composer. Bára Gísladóttir, composer and musician. Guðmundur Steinn Gunnarsson, composer and musician. Hildur Guðnadóttir, composer and musician. Ólöf Arnalds, singer/songwriter and musician.

Performing Arts: Baltasar Kormákur, director and actor. Ebba Katrín Finnsdóttir, actress. Halldóra Geirharðsdóttir, actress and musician. Hannes Óli Ágústsson, actor. Karl Ágúst Þorbergsson device theatre. Katrín Gunnarsdóttir, dancer and choreographer. Kristín Þóra Haraldsdóttir, actress. Matthías Haraldsson, vocalist of Hatari & playwright. Ólafur Darri Ólafsson, actor. Sigríður Soffía Níelsdóttir, dancer and choreographer. Stefán Karl Stefánsson, film and stage actor. Þorleifur Örn Arnarson, theatre director and playwright.

title: Iceland University of the Arts


text:
Robert Stopford

Robert Wright Stopford, (20 February 1901 – 13 August 1976) was a British Anglican bishop.

Early life and education
Stopford was born in Garston, Merseyside (then in Lancashire) to John William Stopford, a timber merchant born in Galway, Ireland. He was educated at Coatham School in Redcar and Liverpool College, where he was Head of House (Littler's). He continued his education at Hertford College, Oxford, where he graduated with a Master of Arts degree. At Oxford he obtained first classes in classical honour moderations (1922) and modern history (1924). He was subsequently an Honorary Fellow of Hertford College, Oxford, and a Fellow of King's College London. He received a Doctor of Divinity degree from the University of London and a Doctor of Civil Law degree from the University of Durham. Stopford was married with two children.

Ministry

 * Michaelmas 1932 made deacon
 * Michaelmas 1933 ordained priest
 * 1932–1935 Chaplain, Oundle School
 * 1935–1940 Principal of Trinity College (Kandy), Ceylon
 * 1940–1946 Principal of Achimota College, Gold Coast
 * 1946–1947 Rector of Chipping Barnet
 * 1947–1955 Moderator—Secretary, Council of the Church Training Colleges
 * 1952–1955 Honorary Chaplain to the Queen; General Secretary, the National Society; Secretary, the Schools Council
 * 11 June 1955 consecrated bishop
 * 1955–1956 Bishop suffragan of Fulham (jurisdiction: northern Europe)
 * June 1956 -1961 Bishop of Peterborough
 * 1961–1973 Bishop of London (confirmed 25 September 1961; retired June 1973)
 * 1961–1976 Privy Counsellor
 * 17th October 1961-1973 Dean of Her Majesty's Chapels Royal.
 * 1974–76 Vicar-General in Jerusalem
 * 1975 Chairman of the D'Oyly Carte Opera Trust
 * 8 February 1976: installed Bishop of Bermuda at Hamilton Cathedral

During his tenure as Bishop of London, Stopford formalised the system of assigning districts to the oversight of suffragans, adapted the diocese's organisation to the 1964 creation of Greater London, and initiated the 1970 experimental area scheme.

Legacy
Bishop Stopford's School in Enfield and Bishop Stopford School in Kettering are named after him. A boarding house, Stopford House, at Achimota School in Accra, Ghana, was named in his honour. He was appointed KCVO in 1973, shortly before he retired as Bishop of London

title: Robert Stopford


text:
Lyapunov (crater)

Lyapunov is a lunar impact crater named for Aleksandr Lyapunov that is located along the east-northeastern limb of the Moon, and is viewed from the side by observers on Earth. The eastern rim of this crater just falls into the section of the Moon called the far side, and visibility of this formation is affected by libration.

This crater is attached to the south-southeastern rim of the larger walled plain Rayleigh. It is also attached to the western rim of the much larger walled plain Joliot, a formation that lies entirely on the far side of the Moon. To the south-southwest of Lyapunov is the crater Hubble.

The shape of this crater's rim has been modified due to the large adjacent formations, so that it is somewhat polygonal rather than circular. The rim along the western side is less affected by reshaping, although it too is worn by impact erosion. The ejecta from nearby impacts partly covers the northern and some of the southeastern parts of the interior floor. The former forms a triangular section of rough ground that reaches to the midpoint of the floor. The remainder of the floor is relatively level and marked only by tiny craterlets.

Note that some publications list this crater as "Liapunov".

title: Lyapunov (crater)


text:
Hospitium

Hospitium (, xenia, προξενία) is the ancient Greco-Roman concept of hospitality as a divine right of the guest and a divine duty of the host. Similar or broadly equivalent customs were and are also known in other cultures, though not always by that name. Among the Greeks and Romans, hospitium was of a twofold character: private and public.

Private
In Homeric times, all strangers, without exception, were regarded as being under the protection of Zeus Xenios, the god of strangers and suppliants, and had the right to hospitality. (It is doubtful whether, as is commonly assumed, they were considered as ipso facto enemies; they were rather guests.) Immediately on his arrival, the stranger was clothed and entertained, and no inquiry was made as to his name or antecedents until the duties of hospitality had been fulfilled. When the guest parted from his host he was often presented with gifts (ξένια), and sometimes a die (ἀστράγαλος) was broken between them. Each then took a part, a family connection was established, and the broken die served as a symbol of recognition; thus the members of each family found in the other hosts and protectors in case of need.

Violation by the host of the duties of hospitality was likely to provoke the wrath of the gods; but it does not appear that anything beyond this religious sanction existed to guard the rights of a traveler. Similar customs seem to have existed among the Italian peoples. Amongst the Romans, private hospitality, which had existed from the earliest times, was more accurately and legally defined than amongst the Greeks, the tie between host and guest being almost as strong as that between patron and client. It was of the nature of a contract, entered into by mutual promise, the clasping of hands, and exchange of an agreement in writing (tabula hospitalis) or of a token (tessera or symbolum), and was rendered hereditary by the division of the tessera. The advantages thus obtained by the guest were, the right of hospitality when traveling and, above all, the protection of his host (representing him as his patron) in a court of law. The contract was sacred and inviolable, undertaken in the name of Jupiter Hospitalis, and could only be dissolved by a formal act.

Public
This private connection developed into a custom according to which a state appointed one of the citizens of a foreign state as its representative Proxenos (πρόξενος) to protect any of its citizens travelling or resident in his country. Sometimes an individual came forward voluntarily to perform these duties on behalf of another state etheloproxenos (ἐθελοπρόξενος). The proxenus is generally compared to the modern consul or minister resident. His duties were to afford hospitality to strangers from the state whose proxenus he was, to introduce its ambassadors, to procure them admission to the assembly and seats in the theatre, and in general to look after the commercial and political interests of the state by which he had been appointed to his office.

Many cases occur where such an office was hereditary; thus the family of Callias at Athens were proxeni of the Spartans. We find the office mentioned in a Corcyraean inscription dating probably from the 7th century BC, and it continued to grow more important and frequent throughout Greek history. There is no proof that any direct emolument was ever attached to the office, while the expense and trouble entailed by it must often have been very great. Probably the honors which it brought with it were sufficient recompense. These consisted partly in the general respect and esteem paid to a proxenus, and partly in many more substantial honors conferred by special decree of the state whose representative he was, such as freedom from taxation and public burdens, the right of acquiring property in Attica, admission to the senate and popular assemblies, and perhaps even full citizenship.

Public hospitium seems also to have existed among the Italian races; but the circumstances of their history prevented it from becoming so important as in Greece. Cases, however, occur of the establishment of public hospitality between two cities (Rome and Caere, Livy v. 50), and of towns entering into a position of clientship to some distinguished Roman, who then became patronus of such a town. Foreigners were frequently granted the right of public hospitality by the senate down to the end of the republic. The public hospes had a right to entertainment at the public expense, admission to sacrifices and games, the right of buying and selling on his own account, and of bringing an action at law without the intervention of a Roman patron.

A full bibliography of the subject will be found in the article in Daremberg and Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquités, to which may be added Rudolf von Jhering. Die Gastfreundschaft im Altertum (1887); see also Smith's Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (3rd ed., 1890).

Medieval hospitia
In the Middle Ages, the term was extended, across Europe, to refer to the building or complex of buildings attached to a monastery, where pilgrims and other lesser guests could find hospitality or hospitium, including dormitory-based accommodation.

title: Hospitium


text: User talk:81.157.11.54

title: User talk:81.157.11.54


text:
River Neath

River Neath (Afon Nedd) is a river in south Wales running south west from the point at which its headwaters arising in the Brecon Beacons National Park converge to its mouth at Baglan Bay below Briton Ferry on the east side of Swansea Bay.

Upper tributaries
The rivers Nedd Fechan, Mellte and Hepste rise in south Powys on the southern slopes of Fforest Fawr. This headwater area is formed from Old Red Sandstone. Each then crosses a band of Carboniferous Limestone before traversing country formed by interlayered sandstones and shales traditionally referred to as the Millstone Grit. Within the limestone belt, short sections of each river flow underground, though that of the Hepste also flows at the surface during periods of particularly wet weather.

The steep descent of these rivers towards the Vale of Neath, and also of the Afon Pyrddin and Afon Sychryd, tributaries of the Nedd Fechan and Afon Mellte respectively, involves the development of a number of waterfalls over resistant bands of sandstone within the Millstone Grit. This is the core of an area which has come to be known as Waterfall Country (Bro'r Sgydau).

Main river
The Mellte and the Nedd Fechan converge at Pontneddfechan, from which point the combined waters are known as the River Neath. It flows past Glynneath and on through the Vale of Neath, a long straight valley excavated along the Neath Disturbance by a glacier into Coal Measures rocks during a series of ice ages. Downstream of Pontneddfechan the river has few significant tributaries; the largest is the River Dulais which has its source north of Seven Sisters. As the Dulais nears the Neath it descends the Aberdulais Falls, a popular tourist attraction owned and managed by the National Trust and the site of an old tinworks. Close by the river flows past the once grand estate of Ynysygerwn. A smaller tributary, the River Clydach, flows southward through the village of Bryncoch to join the Neath at Neath Abbey. Other tributaries include the Melincwrt Brook and the Clydach Brook.

The River Neath provides water to two canals, the Neath Canal and the Tennant Canal. At Aberdulais basin, both canals meet, the Tennant Canal crossing the River Neath by means of an aqueduct. Also crossing the river here is the Vale of Neath Railway line and the A465 road. As it approaches the town of Neath the river passes the ancient church of Saint Illtud at Llantwit. Further on it loops around the former workhouse at Llety Nedd and skirts Penydre. Here it passes close to the Norman castle, visited by King Henry II, King John and King Edward I.

As it meanders around the town of Neath it passes the remains of the Roman fort Nidum at Cwrt Herbert and the Cistercian monastic foundation of Neath Abbey. Its monks used their access to the river to challenge the trading rights of the burgesses of the town of Neath.

The estuary of the River Neath extends from Neath town down past Briton Ferry to the sea next to Jersey Marine Beach. The estuary is partly industrialised with a ship breaking yard, a large local authority waste disposal site and wharves at Melincryddan, Briton Ferry and Neath Abbey. Where it remains undisturbed, there are areas of salt marsh stretching from Neath to Baglan Bay and Crymlyn Burrows which are of great ecological value.

Etymology
The modern English name ultimately derives from "Nedd" the original Welsh name for the river. In common with most hydronymy in Western Europe, the name is known to be Celtic or Pre-Celtic, however its etymology remains uncertain. A meaning of shining or brilliant has been suggested, as has a link to the older Indo-European root *-nedi, simply meaning 'river'.

The name probably shares its etymology with the town of Stratton in Cornwall (originally named Strat-Neth) and the River Nidd in Northern England. This river is now known as the River Strat (by back formation from Stratton).

title: River Neath