text:
Romanian Treasure

The Romanian Treasure (Tezaurul României) is a collection of valuable objects and the gold reserves (~120 tonnes) that the Romanian government sent to Tsarist Russia for safekeeping during World War I, with the aim of being sheltered from the armies of the Central Powers, which had occupied a significant part of Romania and threatened to occupy the entire national territory. After the Romanian Army entered Bessarabia, at the time part of the Russian Empire, in early 1918, the new Soviet government that managed to rule Russia severed all diplomatic relations and confiscated the Romanian Treasure. As of today, only part of the objects and none of the gold reserves have been returned.

After the Great October Revolution and the seizure of power by the Communists under Lenin's leadership, the newly installed Soviet power sequestered the treasure and refused its restitution. It was partially returned, in three separate tranches, in 1935, 1956, and 2008, as a gesture of goodwill from the Soviets and later from the Russians. However, the majority of the treasure remained unrestituted, which makes it a sensitive subject in diplomatic relations between Romania and Russia.

Historical background
In August 1916, Romania made the decision to enter the war alongside the Entente. Although the campaign started favorably with Romanian troops advancing into Transylvania, soon after, German, Austro-Hungarian, and Bulgarian forces took the initiative, occupying Dobruja, Oltenia, and Muntenia in the fall of the same year.

Romania's administration was forced to move the country's capital from Bucharest to Iași and organize resistance against the invaders in Moldavia. Against this backdrop, in November, it was decided to relocate the headquarters of the National Bank of Romania, an occasion during which its treasure was also transported to Iași. The main asset included in the treasure was a quantity of 93.4 tons of gold, consisting of 91 tons of historical gold coins and 2.4 tons of gold ingots. According to the conventions applicable at that time, gold served to guarantee the issuance of Romanian lei. The 91 tons of gold coins belonged to private Romanian banks, existing on the Romanian market at that time, private firms, and individuals, while the 2.4 tons of gold ingots belonged exclusively to the National Bank of Romania. The Russians requested that protocols for handover/receipt not be signed with multiple banks, companies, and individuals in Romania, but only one protocol with the National Bank of Romania, with the BNR collecting all these valuables from each Romanian entity separately.

At that time, the National Bank of Romania was entirely a private bank, with no involvement from the Romanian state. In early December 1916, the defense front had not yet stabilized, and there was serious consideration of evacuating the government across the Prut river into Russia. On December 2, the General Council of the BNR approved in principle the possibility of safeguarding the treasure in Russia, a view that, by December 8, was also supported by the government, voiced by Finance Minister Emil Costinescu, who mentioned, among other things, the precedent set by the Bank of France (which had decided to transfer its treasure to the United States). Costinescu also mentioned the option of transferring the treasure to London but considered the route too dangerous, given the additional threat posed by German submarines. Therefore, the preferred solution was to deposit the treasure together with the treasure of the Tsarist Empire at the Kremlin.

The decision had to be taken by the Romanian Prime Minister Ion I. C. Brătianu. Although the banker Mauriciu Blank advised him to send it to London or to a neutral country, such as Denmark, Brătianu feared the German submarines of the North Sea and chose another ally of Romania in World War I, the Russian Empire, using the argument that "Russia would feel offended if we sent it to England".

On December 12, 1916, the Council of Ministers approved the transfer of the treasure to Russia, after the Russian minister in Iași, General A. Mossoloff, communicated on December 11 that he was authorized to sign the protocol regarding the loading of the BNR treasure onto a special train, adding that the imperial Russian government guaranteed its integrity both during transportation and during its stay in Moscow. The protocol, which provided for the handover of the gold treasure to the delegates of the imperial Russian government, was signed in Iași on December 14/27, 1916.

The treasure destined for Moscow included three main categories of valuables:

1. Documents, manuscripts, ancient coins, paintings, rare books, treasures from monasteries in Moldavia and Muntenia, archives, deposits, collections of many public and private institutions;

2. Public securities and other valuables (such as stocks, bonds, credit titles, pledges to the Mount of Piety, etc.);

3. A quantity of 93.4 tons of gold (91 tons of historical gold coins, belonging to private individuals, companies, and private banks in Romania, and 2.4 tons of gold bars, belonging to the National Bank of Romania); the value of this metallic stock, never returned.

As a side note, during World War II, the valuables of the National Bank of Romania were not transported outside of Romania, but hidden inside a cave near Tismana, Gorj County, and from there, they were safely recovered after the war.

The composition of Romania's Treasure
Objects from the National Museum of Antiquities' Heritage

The list of exhibits owned by the National Museum of Antiquities, which were taken to Moscow in 1916, is as follows:

- Pietroasele Treasure

- Treasure from Turnu Măgurele

- Silver rhyton from Poroina, Mehedinți County

- Four plates with barbarian gold jewelry

- Epitaph from Cozia Monastery (1396)

- Epitaph from Dobrovăț Monastery (1506)

- Epitaph from Slatina Monastery (1556)

- Epitaph from Bistrița Monastery (1601)

- Epitaph from Preda Buzescu, Great Ban of Craiova

- Epitaph from 1683 ( Șerban Vodă Cantacuzino)

- Carpet from Bistrița Monastery (1514)

- Carpet from Bistrița Monastery (16th century)

- Carpet from Bistrița Monastery (16th century)

- Epitaph from Govora Monastery, Radu the Great's era

- Epitaph from Bistrița Monastery, 1521, Barbu, Ban of Craiova

- Epitaph from Dobrovăț Monastery, from Ștefan the Great

- Epitaph from Constantin Brâncoveanu's era

- Epitaph from Șerban Cantacuzino's era (two pieces)

- Rucavițe from Cotroceni (a pair)

- Rucavițe from Constantin Brâncoveanu's era

- Rucavițe from Ștefan the Great's era

- Sfita from Cozia Monastery, tradition says it belonged to Mircea the Elder's mantle

- Silver candlestick from Tismana Monastery (14th century)

- Silver candlesticks from Bistrița Monastery (16th century) (two pieces)

- Silver candlestick from Alexandru Lăpușneanu's era

- Silver candlestick from the 15th/16th century

- Shackle from Bistrița Monastery (16th century)

- Shackle from Tismana Monastery

- Gilded silver ripples from Cotroceni Monastery, two pieces (1675)

- Silver disc from Bistrița Monastery (16th century)

- Large silver taler from Tismana Monastery (> 1512)

- Gilded silver engolpion from Snagov Monastery (1431)

- Gilded silver engolpion of the Craiovești brothers from Tismana Monastery

- Gilded silver engolpion from Bistrița Monastery (1512)

- Gilded silver cauș inlaid with ancient coins from Tismana Monastery (1649)

- Gilded silver cauș inlaid with ancient coins from Tismana Monastery, of the clucer Buzinca (1641)

- Four gilded silver crosses from Șerban Cantacuzino's era

- Large cypress wood cross from Slatina Monastery

- Silver disc from the 16th century

- Slavonic Gospel, manuscript from 1405 from Tismana Monastery

- Slavonic Gospel, manuscript from 1502

- Two Slavonic Gospels, printed

The first transport
Between December 12th and 14th, 1916, at the Iași train station, a total of 1,738 boxes were loaded into 17 train cars, containing stored gold in the form of various ingots and coins (mostly German marks and Austrian crowns), with a total value of 314,580,456.84 Lei in gold. Additionally, two boxes containing Queen Maria's jewels, valued at 7,000,000 Lei in gold, were added. Upon completion of the loading operations, a Protocol was signed in three copies, one for the Russian side, one for the Romanian Ministry of Finance, and one for the National Bank.

The transport departed immediately and arrived in Moscow on December 21st, 1916. Delegated from the National Bank to accompany the transport were director Theodor Capitanovici (who was also tasked with remaining in Moscow and keeping two of the keys to the compartment where the valuables were to be deposited), censor A. Saligny, and central cashier M.Z. Dumitrescu.

Romanian and Russian delegates began inventorying the contents of the boxes on January 9th, 1917, an operation that lasted until February 4th, and on February 16th, a final protocol was drafted on this matter, signed by representatives of the Russian Ministry of Finance and Romanian delegates, along with the Romanian consul in Moscow, P. Guerin. The boxes containing the treasure were sealed, and representatives of the National Bank had the right to inspect the compartment where they were stored at any time, with the restitution of the valuables to be carried out by designated National Bank delegates specially appointed for this purpose.

The second transport
At the beginning of 1917, the Russian Revolution erupted in Petrograd, marking the beginning of the major social movements in Russia that year, culminating in the October Revolution and the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. Although the front in Moldova had been stabilized, Romanian political authorities were still concerned about the possibility of the German armies breaking through the front and the country's ultimate defeat. Evacuating the government to Russia, either to Poltava or Herson in Crimea, where preparations were already underway for the installation of the sovereign family and ministers, was being considered.

On July 18th, 1917, the Council of Ministers decided, at the proposal of Nicolae Titulescu, who was then the Minister of Finance, to relocate the headquarters and assets of the National Bank to Russia. Preparations were made for transporting the assets of the National Bank to Russia, as well as those belonging to the CEC Bank and other public and private institutions. The loading of the train containing the new transport took place between July 23rd and 27th, 1917, and the train departed for Russia in the evening of the same day.

The train had 24 cars, three of which represented the assets of the National Bank, with a declared value of 1,594,836,721.09 Lei, including actual gold valued at 574,523.57 Lei, archives valued at 500,000 Lei, and the rest representing securities, bonds, deposits, and other assets. The CEC Bank's assets occupied 21 cars, comprising 1,661 boxes, estimated to contain around 7.5 billion Lei worth. The most precious objects of the Romanian state were sent, including the archives of the Romanian Academy, many antique valuables, such as 3,500-year-old golden jewels found in Romania, ancient Dacian jewels, the jewels of the voivodes of Wallachia and Moldavia, as well as the jewels of the Romanian royalty, thousands of paintings, as well as precious religious objects owned by Romanian monasteries, such as 14th century icons and old Romanian manuscripts.

The train arrived in Moscow on August 3rd, 1917, with the transport being guarded by the Russian side. Representatives of the following institutions supervised the transport from the Romanian side: the National Bank, the CEC Bank, the Credit Bank, Marmorosch Blank Bank, the Commercial Bank, and the Discount Bank. The assets of the National Bank from the second transport were deposited in the Kremlin, where the metal stock and Queen Maria's jewels, brought with the first transport, had also been deposited, while the CEC Bank's treasure was stored at the premises of the Russian Loan and Deposits House.

The confiscation of the treasure
The Russian revolutionaries quickly gained control of the capital sparked by the economic crisis facing Russia during World War I, as well as the provocations of German agents. On March 15th, 1917, Tsar Nicholas II abdicated in favor of his brother Michael, who, however, refused the investiture. Power was then taken over by a provisional government, led until July 20th by Prince Lvov, and thereafter by Kerensky. On April 17th, Vladimir Ilyich Lenin returned from Switzerland, transported in a sealed train car; ultimately, on November 7th, Lenin seized power, forcibly removing the provisional government.

The unrest spread to Moscow as well; the Cossack guard tasked with guarding the Romanian treasure sided with the revolution. To ensure the safety of the Romanian valuables stored at the Kremlin, 20 rural gendarmes dressed in civilian clothes were sent, departing from Iași on November 15th, 1917. However, in the absence of permission from the Bolshevik authorities, they were unable to fulfill their mission. Meanwhile, efforts were being made to transfer the treasure to the United States. However, the Allies could not guarantee the safety of the transport; this was not surprising, given that the treasure would have to traverse the entire Siberian region during a period of great social disorder.

In the meantime, the situation was also becoming complicated in Moldova, where the government had taken refuge. The Russian army on Romanian territory was undergoing Bolshevikization, and its commander, General Shcherbachev, no longer had control over it. Near Iași, at Socola, a genuine Bolshevik headquarters had been established with the objective of removing King Ferdinand I, instituting a Soviet regime in Romania, and assassinating Shcherbachev. An assassination attempt was organized against him on December 21st; failing in its attempt, the Russian commander requested the support of the Romanian army to destroy the Bolshevik center at Socola. After much deliberation, the Council of Ministers approved the request, disarming the Russian soldiers and sending them across the Prut River. However, this action placed Romania in open conflict with the Bolshevik power established in Petrograd, which, in violation of diplomatic rules, arrested Constantin Diamandi, Romania's minister to Petrograd, and held him in detention for three days.

However, the problem caused by the Bolshevikization of the army was not resolved. On March 15th, 1917, the Democratic Republic of Moldova was proclaimed in Bessarabia, but the disintegrating Russian armies made it impossible to establish order. In these circumstances, the Sfatul Țării (National Council) requested the intervention of the Romanian Army, which crossed the Prut River on January 20th, 1918. On January 26th, Russia, through Trotsky, the Commissioner for Foreign Affairs, announced the severance of diplomatic relations with Romania, and General Shcherbachev was declared an outlaw and an enemy of the people. At the same time, Trotsky declared that "the Romanian funds deposited in Moscow are untouchable for the Romanian oligarchy. The Soviet government takes responsibility for keeping these funds and delivering them into the hands of the Romanian people."

Following the severance of diplomatic relations, Romania's interests in Russia continued to be temporarily represented by the French Ambassador to Petrograd, Noulens, and by Eirick Labonne, the French Consul in Moscow. The latter took over the archive of the Romanian Consulate General in Moscow on February 2nd, 1918, from the Romanian consul. On the same occasion, Labonne was handed the protocols for depositing the treasure of the National Bank of Romania and the valuables of the CEC Bank at the Kremlin, as well as the keys to the compartments where the National Bank's valuables were stored. The keys remained in the possession of the French consul until August 1918, when he was arrested and expelled. The keys were then handed over to the consul of Denmark and subsequently to that of Norway. In September 1918, the last representatives of Romania left Moscow, and from that moment on, nothing certain was known about the fate of the treasure.

Partial return of assets from the Treasure
Very little is known about the Treasure after the October Revolution, but it appears that during World War II all the valuables held by the Soviet state (and presumably of the Romanian state) were taken out of Moscow and sent toward the regions which were 'not endangered'. However, it is clear that they were not kept sealed, as the agreement with the Romanian government said, as the chests of the archives which were returned in 1935 had obviously been rummaged through and many objects and documents were missing.

The first partial return in 1935
On the evening of June 16, 1935, at the Obor train station in Bucharest, 17 freight cars arrived, loaded with 1,443 crates, coming from Moscow, upon the order of the USSR government, which decided to return to Romania a large part of the goods that had been stored in the Kremlin. Consuls Nicolau and Popovici supervised the opening of each individual wagon. The crates containing goods were handed over to various representatives of the institutions present at the unloading of the goods. For each unloading and delivery of objects and goods, a handover protocol was drawn up. The documents mentioned the number of crates, their detailed contents, weight, and the serial number from the inventory list that had been drawn up at the time of their loading with the destination Moscow, in December 1916 and/or July - August 1917.

The goods and banking assets (property titles, securities, shares, bonds, credit titles, bank guarantees, pledges, mortgages, etc.) were handed over to Inspector I. Ciolac, the head of the Romanian Government Oversight Commission, with the indication that they were to be transmitted to the Ministry of Finance in Bucharest. All inventories jointly conducted by the Russian and Romanian sides, signed by each authorized representative of the Romanian institutions benefiting from these assets from the Treasury, were handed over to the representatives of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Bucharest. At the request of the Russian side, comparative checks were carried out with the inventory lists issued at the time of the transfer of the goods to Russia, with the current ones from June 1935, containing the goods received by the Romanian side. In the vast majority (1,436 crates), the checks confirmed that the same goods as those listed in the inventory lists at the time of their shipment to Moscow had been handed over. However, 7 crates were found with different goods that were not listed in the initial lists drawn up in 1916. These were handed over to the Romanian Ministry of the Interior, following the same inventory procedure and the drafting of a handover protocol. The entire operation of identification, sorting, and delivery of the 1,443 crates took place between June 19 and June 27, 1935, working effectively from 8:00 to 17:30. The documents made it clear that no crate had the original seal anymore, so it was clear that the crates had been unsealed, and a good part of them was very degraded. The only banknotes returned to the National Bank of Romania were the Romanian ones, totaling 198,000 lei. Several other foreign banknotes were found stacked among the Romanian ones, which were handed over to the Ministry of Finance.

This transport marked the first return in the history of Romania's Treasury in Moscow, consisting of old documents, rare books, plans, maps, archives, deeds, manuscripts, church objects, carpets, rugs, deposits, paintings, pictures, sketches, drawings, art collections, and goods belonging to private individuals or state institutions.

On June 28, 1935, Romanian delegate G. Paraschivescu signed a report of receipt for these goods, specifying that no quantity of gold, jewelry, or other valuable items were handed over.

The second partial return in 1956
After the communist forces took power in 1945 and the presence of the Red Army in Romania, the issue of the treasury was no longer raised by the Romanian authorities and was almost forgotten. Unexpectedly, on June 12, 1956, newspapers reported that the Romanian treasury in Moscow was to be returned. The official statement asserted that "the Soviet people have carefully preserved all these works of art, which represent great historical and artistic value. The USSR government and the Soviet people have always viewed these treasures as an inalienable asset of the Romanian people themselves."

The list of returned goods included the Pietroasele Treasure, 120 paintings signed by Nicolae Grigorescu (out of a total of 1350 paintings, engravings, and drawings), liturgical vessels made of gold and silver, old books and miniatures, jewelry, 156 icons, 418 tapestries, 495 religious cult objects, etc. In total, the exhibition opened in Bucharest in August 1956 with the items received from the USSR included no less than 39,320 pieces, including 33,068 gold coins and 2,465 medals, 1,350 paintings and drawings, and the remaining approximately 2,500 objects were medieval goldsmithing, liturgical embroideries, icons, and ancient fabrics.

The communist literature of the time attributed the return of the treasury to a "spontaneous and friendly" gesture from the USSR and promoted the idea that the entire treasury had been returned, information that could only be more detailed known after the Romanian Revolution from December 1989. However, Romania was dissatisfied because the "bulk" of the Treasury, consisting of 93.4 tons of gold, had never been returned.

The third partial return in 2008
After the fall of communism in Romania and Russia, the President of Romania, Ion Iliescu, sent Ambassador Traian Chebeleu to Moscow in the summer of 1994, with the task of requesting the Kremlin to "find a solution to the issue of Romania's Treasure." The new leadership in the Kremlin received the official letter from the Presidential Administration in Bucharest and responded that "for Russia, the so-called issue of the Romanian Treasure deposited in Moscow no longer exists."

The situation seemed to have no way out, especially since Moscow sent a delegation to Bucharest in the autumn of 1994, which informed President Ion Iliescu that "the issue of the Treasure, at the official, diplomatic, and political level between the two countries, had been definitively resolved by the Protocol signed in Moscow on September 6, 1956, including all its annexes, by academician Mihail Ralea, the official representative of the Government of the People's Republic of Romania on the issue of Romania's Treasure, a protocol which provided for the restitution of historical goods to the Government of the People's Republic of Romania." However, this protocol was only signed by academician Mihail Ralea, not by the other members of the Romanian delegation, namely: Romania's Ambassador to Moscow, Mihail Dalea, the Deputy Minister of Culture, Constantin Prisnea, the Director of the Art Institute of the Academy of the People's Republic of Romania, academician Gheorghe Oprescu, the academician and poet Tudor Arghezi, academician Andrei Oțetea, and the Director of the National Art Galleries, Marin Bunescu. All these Romanian delegates did not agree to sign that protocol; instead, they let only academician Mihail Ralea sign the official protocol and its annexes, while the other members of the Romanian delegation were only present at the official signing of the protocol and its annexes.

The Moscow delegation presented President Ion Iliescu with a solution to solve the problem, by exponentially increasing economic and commercial exchanges between the two countries, offering Romania a package of 32 economic and commercial projects to be carried out through private companies, with project number 32 to be called "the restitution of the component of precious metals to the National Bank of Romania."

Iliescu was delighted with the Russians' offer and handed over the problem for resolution to his special advisor, Ioan Talpeș. However, Talpeș remained skeptical about Moscow's offer and requested, as a proof of good faith, that the Russian side hand over to Romania a set of 12 gold coins originating from the first shipment of the Treasure to Moscow, from the first train and the first crate, according to the existing inventory list in the archives.

The Russian side complied and immediately sent a delegate to Bucharest in December 1994 with the 12 gold coins requested by Ioan Talpeș, but no Romanian authority wanted to accept them thereafter. It was only on March 6, 2008, with donation act no. 1,272 issued by the Ministry of Culture, registered as donation no. 867/06.03.2008, that these 12 historical gold coins, editions from France and Belgium between 1854 and 1909, with a total weight of 77.09 grams, were finally handed over. The Head of the Numismatic and Historical Treasure Department at the National Museum of Romanian History, Ernest Oberländer Târnoveanu, signed the acceptance document and certified that "all the presented coins are authentic."

Interwar Period
The issue of the Romanian treasure was raised for the first time internationally by Romania at the Paris Peace Conference during the session of the Reparations Commission, held on April 8, 1919. Romania requested that Germany and other defeated powers be obliged to return to Romania the sum of 322,154,980 gold lei, representing the value of the metallic (gold) stock deposited in Russia, to which was added the sum of 7,000,000 representing the value of Queen Maria's jewelry, as well as the value of the entire deposit made by Romania in Moscow, namely the sum of 7.5 billion lei. Two reasons were invoked for this request: firstly, it was said that the decision to transfer the treasure to Russia was motivated by German military pressure and that the existing situation in Russia was also attributable to Germany.

The Treaty of Versailles, concluded in June 1919, did not mention this issue, but held Germany and its associates responsible for all losses caused to the allied governments. The amount of reparations was to be determined by a Reparations Commission, which, although notified by Romania, rejected its claims for compensation. However, Russia's obligation to return the treasure was confirmed by the resolution of the Genoa Economic and Financial Conference (1922).

Efforts were made thereafter to resolve the treasure issue, but this was not successful. In 1936, in the context of a slight warming of relations between Romania and the USSR, some Romanian archives of minor significance relative to the entire ensemble of goods deposited in Moscow were returned. On the same occasion, however, the mortal remains of Dimitrie Cantemir were also repatriated.

Communist Period
Given the fraternal relations between the communist governments of Romania and the Soviet Union, potentially litigious issues between the two countries were carefully avoided by the Romanian side. One of them was the issue of the full restitution of the treasure, during the communist period, relatively few real efforts were made to discuss the problem with the Soviet side. One of the attempts - probably the most important one - took place in 1965 when Nicolae Ceaușescu made his first visit to the USSR as the General Secretary of the Romanian Communist Party. However, the Soviet reaction was brutal; according to Leonid Brezhnev's statement, the then leader of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, the problem was "50 years old", "related to the relations between tsarist Russia and royal Romania" and that the gold had been transported in 1918 to Perm, Omsk, Saratov, and Kazan for safekeeping, with information missing from this point. Furthermore, Brezhnev invoked the fact that royal Romania also had debts to Russia amounting to $300,000,000, which would correspond to 274 tons of gold, and the reparations of $300,000,000 that Romania was obliged to pay after World War II were lower than the damages suffered by the USSR. It was concluded that the issue was actually a political one rather than a financial one, so the issue should be considered closed. After this episode, the issue was no longer discussed with the Soviet government.

Current Period
On July 4, 2003, the Treaty on Friendly Relations and Cooperation between Romania and the Russian Federation was concluded. The Russian side refused to settle the treasure issue through the treaty; instead, presidents Ion Iliescu and Vladimir Putin decided to establish a commission of Romanian and Russian historians to study the matter. The commission met for the first time from October 19 to 21, 2004, in Bucharest, with its co-chairs being Professor Ioan Scurtu and Academician Alexandr Oganovich Ciubarian. Nevertheless, the work of the commission has not progressed much to date. The commission met five times through 2019; some progress was made in returning smaller archive materials and minor assets, but the artistic pieces, the gold, and other valuables are still in Russia. As of 2023, the estimated value of the Romanian Treasure (without taking into account its historical significance) is close to €15 billion.

title: Romanian Treasure


text:
Richard Hildreth

Richard Hildreth (June 28, 1807 – July 11, 1865), was an American journalist, author and historian. He is best known for writing his six-volume History of the United States of America covering 1497–1821 and published 1840-1853. Historians consider it a highly accurate political history of the early Republic, but with a strong bias in favor of the Federalist Party and the abolition of slavery.

Early life
Hildreth was born at Deerfield, Massachusetts. He was the son of Hosea Hildreth (1782–1835), who was a teacher of mathematics and later a Congregational minister. His mother was Sarah McLeod, who had married Hosea in 1806.

Hosea Hildreth was appointed professor of mathematics and natural philosophy at Phillips Exeter Academy in 1811, and young Richard began attending Phillips in 1816, staying for seven years thereafter. In 1826, he graduated from Harvard College. After studying law at Newburyport, he was admitted to the bar at Boston in 1830.

Career
In 1832, Hildreth he became joint founder and editor of a daily newspaper, the Boston Atlas. In 1834, he wrote a popular anti-slavery novel The Slave: or Memoir of Archy Moore (1836; enlarged edition, 1852, The White Slave).

In 1837 he wrote for the Atlas a series of articles vigorously opposing the annexation of Texas. In the same year he published Banks, Banking, and Paper Currencies, a work which helped to promote the growth of the free banking system in America. In 1838 he resumed his editorial duties on the Atlas, but in 1840 removed, on account of his health, to British Guiana, where he lived for three years and was editor of two weekly newspapers in succession at Georgetown. He published in this year (1840) a volume in opposition to slavery, Despotism in America (2nd ed., 1854).

In 1849 he published the first three volumes of his History of the United States, two more volumes of which were published in 1851 and the sixth and last in 1852. The first three volumes of this history, his most important work, deal with the period 1492–1789, and the second three with the period 1789–1821. The history is notable for its painstaking accuracy and candor, as they are based on very careful analysis of the primary sources. The later volumes favor the Federalists. In dealing with the Jeffersonians, Hildreth calls them both "Republicans" and "Democrats" on the same page, but never "Democratic Republicans."

Hildreth's Japan as It Was and Is (1855) was at the time a valuable digest of the information contained in other works on that country (new ed., 1906). He also wrote a campaign biography of William Henry Harrison (1839); Theory of Morals (1844); and Theory of Politics (1853), as well as Lives of Atrocious Judges (1856), compiled from Lord Campbell's two works.

Between 1857 and 1860 Hildreth worked for the New York Tribune and during the same period he wrote several anti-slavery tracts for the fledgling Republican party under various pseudonyms. Poor health forced him to retire from his writing career in 1860. As a meed Massachusetts Governor Nathaniel Prentiss Banks and Senator Charles Sumner successfully lobbied for Hildreth's appointment as the United States consul at Trieste in 1861. In 1865 he resigned from that position and moved to Florence, where he died on July 11, 1865. He is buried near Theodore Parker in the English Cemetery, Florence

Selected works
In an overview of writings by and about Hildreth, OCLC/WorldCat lists roughly 270 works in 870+ publications in 11 languages and 12,800+ library holdings.
 * This list is not finished; you can help Wikipedia by adding to it.

 * Archy Moore, the white slave; or, Memoirs of a fugitive, 1836
 * The history of banks; to which is added a demonstration of the advantages and necessity of free competition in the business of banking, 1837
 * Banks, banking, and paper currencies; In three parts. I. History of banking and paper money. II. Argument for open competition in banking. III. Apology for One-Dollar notes. 1840
 * Theory of morals an inquiry concerning the law of moral distinctions and the variations and contradictions of ethical codes, 1844
 * Theory of politics; an inquiry into the foundations of governments and the causes and progress of political revolutions. 1853
 * Despotism in America: an inquiry into the nature, results, and legal basis of the slave-holding system in the United States, 1854

The History of the United States of America, in six volumes

 * Japan as it was and is, 1855

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

title: Richard Hildreth


text:
Fiacha Cennfinnán

In Irish mythology Fiacha Cennfinnán (modern spelling: Fiacha Ceannfhionnán meaning "Fiacha [of the] little white head"), son of Starn, son of Rudraige, of the Fir Bolg, became High King of Ireland when he overthrew his great-uncle Sengann.

He ruled for five years, until he was overthrown by Rinnal, son of Genann.

The Milesian king Fíachu Findoilches is sometimes known by the same name.

title: Fiacha Cennfinnán


text:
Abnormal return

In finance, an abnormal return is the difference between the actual return of a security and the expected return. Abnormal returns are sometimes triggered by "events." Events can include mergers, dividend announcements, company earning announcements, interest rate increases, lawsuits, etc. all of which can contribute to an abnormal return. Events in finance can typically be classified as information or occurrences that have not already been priced by the market.

Stock market
In stock market trading, abnormal returns are the differences between a single stock or portfolio's performance and the expected return over a set period of time. Usually a broad index, such as the S&P 500 or a national index like the Nikkei 225, is used as a benchmark to determine the expected return. For example, if a stock increased by 5% because of some news that affected the stock price, but the average market only increased by 3% and the stock has a beta of 1, then the abnormal return was 2% (5% - 3% = 2%). If the market average performs better (after adjusting for beta) than the individual stock, then the abnormal return will be negative.

 * $$\textrm{Abnormal}\ \textrm{Return} = \textrm{Actual}\ \textrm{Return} - \textrm{Expected} \ \textrm{Return}$$

Calculation
The calculation formula for the abnormal returns is as follows:

$$AR_{it}=R_{it}-E(R_{it})$$

where:

ARit - abnormal return for firm i on day t

Rit - actual return for firm i on day t

E(Rit) – expected return for firm i on day t

A common practice is to standardise the abnormal returns with the use of the following formula:

$$SAR_{it}=AR_{it}/SD_{it}$$

where:

SARit - standardised abnormal returns

SDit – standard deviation of the abnormal returns

The SDit is calculated with the use of the following formula:

$$SD_{it}=[S_i^2*(1+\frac{1}{T}*\frac{(R_{mt}-R_m)^2}{\textstyle \sum_{t=1}^T \displaystyle(R_{mt}-R_m)^2})]^{0,5}$$

where:

Si2 – the residual variance for firm i,

Rmt – the return on the stock market index on day t,

Rm – the average return from the market portfolio in the estimation period,

T – the numbers of days in the estimation period.

Cumulative abnormal return
Cumulative abnormal return, or CAR, is the sum of all abnormal returns. Cumulative Abnormal Returns are usually calculated over small windows, often only days. This is because evidence has shown that compounding daily abnormal returns can create bias in the results.

title: Abnormal return


text:
Hermagoras of Temnos

Hermagoras of Temnos (Ἑρμαγόρας Τήμνου, fl. 1st century BC) was an Ancient Greek rhetorician of the Rhodian school and teacher of rhetoric in Rome, where the Suda states he died at an advanced age.

He appears to have tried to excel as an orator (or rather declaimer) as well as a teacher of rhetoric. But it is especially as a teacher of rhetoric that he is known to us. The members of his school, among whom numbered the jurist Titus Accius, called themselves Hermagorei. Hermagoras's chief opponent was Posidonius of Rhodes, who is said to have contended with him in argument in the presence of Pompey.

He devoted particular attention to what is called inventio, and made a peculiar division of the parts of an oration, which differed from that adopted by other rhetoricians. Cicero opposes his system, but Quintilian defends it, though in some parts the latter censures what Cicero approves of. But in his eagerness to systematize the parts of an oration, he was said to have entirely lost sight of the practical point of view from which oratory must be regarded.

He appears to have been the author of several works which are lost: the Suda mentions (graeca sunt, non leguntur) Ρητορικαί, Περὶ ἐξεργασίας, Περὶ φράσεως, Περὶ σχημάτων, and Περὶ πρέποντος, although perhaps some or all of these should be attributed to his younger namesake, Hermagoras Carion, the pupil of Theodorus of Gadara.

Hermagoras' method of dividing a topic into its "seven circumstances" (who, what, when, where, why, in what way, by what means), which he may have borrowed from Aristotle, provided the roots of the "5 W's" used widely in journalism, education, and police investigation to ensure thoroughness in the coverage of a particular incident or subject matter.

title: Hermagoras of Temnos


text:
FX-55

FX-55 may refer to:

 * A type of AMD Athlon 64 microprocessor
 * An 'eco-friendly' monochrome photographic developer

title: FX-55


text:
Rinnal

In Irish mythology, Rinnal (Rindal, Rionnal, Rinnan) son of Genann of the Fir Bolg became High King of Ireland when he overthrew Fiacha Cennfinnán. He is said to have been the first king in Ireland to use spearheads (cf. Old Irish rind, rinn, (spear-)point).

He ruled for five or six years (depending on the source) before being overthrown by his cousin Fodbgen, son of Sengann.

title: Rinnal


text:
High Street Records

High Street Records was a subsidiary label of Windham Hill Records from about 1990 to 1997. Notable acts who recorded for the label include John Gorka, Pierce Pettis, Patty Larkin, The Subdudes, Downy Mildew, and Dots Will Echo. Several singer-songwriters associated with High Street appeared on the 1989 Windham Hill compilation, Legacy: A Collection of New Folk Music and the 1992 follow-up on High Street, Legacy II: A Collection of Singer-songwriters.

title: High Street Records


text:
Talk:Mystery Spot

Untitled
I changed some npov problems.

Siamang (talk) 05:53, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Wisconsin Dells has a similar attraction, but I don't remember enough about to be a source for information.

This is not the only one. This page either needs expanding or moved to a more specific title. Rmhermen 15:55, Feb 5, 2005 (UTC)

 * This is Wikipedia, so if you know of the others, have at it! :-) I'd suggest moving this page to a more specific name ("Mystery Spot (Santa Cruz)" seems like the typical Wiki way) and creating a "Mystery Spot" disambiguation page.

 * Atlant 22:41, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

User:67.162.250.186 wrote on the article page:

''I have been a visitor to this place and while it is possible that it could be a extremely well conceived trick, I can't find an explanation for the physical effects that I felt while there. A lot of people feel light-headed as if about to faint, although in a mild form.''

 * I would suggest that you are experiencing a blood-pressure shift resulting from a sense of the "uncanny." The body is unable to fully integrate contradicting external stimuli and this results in an increase in blood-pressure and perhaps a release of adrenaline. I think this is great! It's like a mild but sustained hallucination. I get this whenever I go to the desert. Jackbox1971 02:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

I've moved that comment here. And I'll suggest that autosuggestion and observer bias can be surprisingly powerful forces. Rest assured that there's nothing supernatural or even wierdly gravitic going on in Santa Cruz, even at the Mystery Spot.

Atlant 23:32, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, then how do you explain the fact that GPS' and Magnetic Compass' don't work correctly in the area of the Mystery Spot? I've visited twice, by the way, and I've taken my own compass, level, and a golf ball to run my own personal tests. I can believe the disorientation I felt was due in part to the slanted building messing with my mind, but visual anomalies cannot mess with a compass! 132.8.8.45 (talk) 17:50, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Briellecfarmer, FriskMadeline, Morstadm.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

on versus in
Today, I changed the article to read in the Upper Peninsula and Atlant changed it back so it reads on the Upper Peninsula. I am not angry, I just think he is wrong. I think this is just the way people talk about the Upper Peninsula. A comparable analogy would be the South Beach article, where it talks says "a renaissance began in South Beach." Technically, the renaissance happened on the beach, but since it's a region as well as a geographical feature, you can say you are in that region. Perhaps this is a linguistic/dialect thing, but it sounds wrong to say on the Upper Peninsula. A compromise would be to rephrase the whole sentence to eliminate the need for the in/on discussion. MPS 22:17, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't feel strongly about this. Why don't we wait to see if anyone else checks in on this, and if no one else does, then revert my change if you still feel like it. Rephrasing the sentence sounds fine also.

 * Atlant 22:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * FWIW, Google gives 67,800 results for "in the upper peninsula" and only 3,640 results for "on the upper peninsula". —Caesura(t) 19:05, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Spoiler warning
Is a spoiler warning really neccisary here? --192.203.136.254 16:05, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * No, "spoiler" warnings are never necessary at this site. Encyclopedias don't utilize "spoiler" warnings.  People should assume that if they read an encyclopedia article about something, they're going to find out about that topic. KevinOKeeffe (talk) 12:39, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Well, that depends. Most of the fun of Mystery Spot is in playing along with the gag, so it would be a shame for people to have the mystery ruined inadvertently. Also, I think the inclusion of the warning is a bit of a joke; the description of any real mystery story should obviously include a spoiler warning!

 * Atlant 16:36, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm not so sure the article namespace is the place for jokes. At the very least, I think we should reword the spoiler for this page (i.e., replace the template with an HTML message specifically for this page). "Plot and/or ending details" doesn't make sense in this context. Any suggestions for a better way to phrase the spoiler warning? —Caesura(t) 19:03, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm wondering why the article says Spoiler warning: Demystification follows. Demystification follows[hide]

The Mystery Spot is a gravity hill type of optical illusion. The phenomena that visitors to the attraction may experience result from the effects of forced perspective, optical adaptation, and certain optical illusions in combination with the steep gradient of the site. That is, the situation inside a Mystery Spot is arranged in some way so that the visitors don't feel that the site's gradient is actually steep (the site is actually tilted, that is), despite the fact that it is. Some of the effects are identical to those in an Ames Room.

As visitors travel through the site, they habituate to this gradient. The effects of this adaptation are then exploited, especially within closed structures, so that visitors may feel as though gravity does not operate as it should in the Mystery Spot. Spoilers end here. and there is nothing under the spoiler.

This should be mentioned (article also lists other spots across the US, which could be consolidated under a larger subject). http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070205/ap_on_fe_st/wonder_spot

 * The spoiler warning isn't appropriate here. This is an encyclopedia, people will expect to see an explanation of the "mystery" here. This article is part of the "Gravity hills" category, which itself is part of the "Optical illusions" category, which makes it obvious to anyone this is an optical illusion before they've even read the article. 172.207.24.36 16:25, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree, the gravity hill article has no spoiler warning, and it's not very encyclopedic to have one here - I'm going to remove it. A heading with "Explanation" should be obvious enough that the explanation is going to follow. Croxley 18:50, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Personal account and different explanation
It needs to be fixed up or removed it is extremely POV and violates WP:NPOV.  Rgoodermote Not an admin  02:21, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

GPS
Can anyone explain, why GPS-devices are/seems to be distorted? --MrBurns (talk) 16:34, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think they actually are.

Siamang (talk) 18:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Perhaps they employ a sort of jamming signal? KevinOKeeffe (talk) 12:46, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Gravity hills
Choppershox, your reference might be better placed on the gravity hill page. Cactus Wren (talk) 09:03, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Trees
I know this is an illusion, but what I can't figure out is how they got the redwood trees in the middle of the mystery spot to corkscrew or all the surrounding redwoods to bend and lean toward the center. I find that very unusual.

I think it is very odd that nobody can really tells us how old the trees are! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2604:6000:9B03:5300:C1F1:EF1:5441:15E9 (talk) 01:54, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

Bad Sentance in Illusion explanation
"For a detailed explanation of the "'Mystery Spot Illusion'", see Shimamura and Prinzmetal (1999)." ?? No link, no cite, and also, the point of wiki articles is a detailed explanation is it not? Why would we go elsewhere? Also, how many regular people like me know what the heck Shimamura and Prinzmetal is? I don't know what this is about so if someone does I think it could fixing. Thanks Eddie mars (talk) 15:52, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

BIG SCAM
First, I want to confirm that there are no “puzzling variations of gravity, perspective, and height” as the Mystery Spot (MS) claims. All of the constructions at MS were built for one purpose: illusion. The tilted cabin and fence were built in the background to heighten the illusory effects. The slanted road leading up to the hill and tilted cabin floor add to this effect by making it difficult for visitors to move about the area.

When I came to MS about 15 years ago, I sensed something fishy, but at that time but I had no tools to prove anything. Time went by and MS was pushed to the back of my mind, but I always knew that there something was not right about it. On Tue 8/09/11, my wife asked me to take the family (7 people) to visit MS. I had not planned to bring any tools to prove my theory, but as we approached Santa Cruz, I realized that my new Nikon D7000 camera came equipped with a leveler. At MS, using the same old trick, the guide also had a leveler with him. Close to the entrance, the guide showed us that the compass had changed the directions. Since I did not have a compass, I will not discuss this part of the visit. The guide asked the group to go up the hill. In front of the slanted cabin, he placed a three-foot wooden bar horizontally at the window. About one foot hung outside the window, the other end of the bar laid on the bench inside the cabin. He put the leveler on the wooden bar; he even carefully flipped the leveler a couple times to make sure the wooden bar was level. Then he placed a pool table cue ball on the wooden bar. The cue ball rolled from the cabin and out of the window. The guide poured a bottle of water on the wooden bar and the water ran in the same direction as the ball. He asked the visitors if they had anything they wanted to roll. My wife gave him a lipstick. He put it on the bar and the lipstick rolled the same direction as the other objects. As all of the objects rolled in one direction on a perfectly level bar, everybody stared in wide-eyed shock and wonder. I, however, was in doubt. After the tour, my wife and I walked back to the area where the guide demonstrated with the wooden bar. Nobody was there. I positioned the wooden bar the same way the guide had. I then placed my camera on top to check the level and discovered it was off about 10 degrees. I pulled the bar out about two feet and hung it outside the window. The camera showed that it was level at this position. I put the lipstick on the bar and there was no movement. This time, I was in shock. Thanks, Nikon. Thanks for the new technology. How has this scam lasted over 70 years? How many children believe in this scam? How much money has this business collected the last 70 years? This place is destroying the innocence of our children. At home, I told my children the truth about this place and they could not understand why people would scam the public like that. I had no answer. Do you? Where are the scientists and professionals? How would you explain if somebody asks you about MS? Where about the city of Santa Cruz? Where are the new papers TV stations? This spot has no mystery. The only mystery here is how this ruse has survived over 70 years. A few other things that made me suspicious: Only cash or debit for admission but there are NO TICKET. Visitors received receipts, which were later collected by the guide. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hchcnguyen (talk • contribs) 06:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

> I think you're missing the point. Kids have believed in the Easter Bunny and Santa Clause for years as well. Its just a fun story. The part about the scientists and professionals not knowing what causes it is just a statement from the brochure, not to be interpreted as fact.--99.0.0.53 (talk) 04:27, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Fix for ad like tone
I think we just need to remove "However, despite thousands of visitors, university professors, and television crews, there have been no conclusive results as to the true cause of the effects.". This is just some fun text from the brochure. Its not objective fact.--99.0.0.53 (talk) 04:29, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

Good source
The Blackwell Handbook of Sensation and Perception edited by E. Bruce Goldstein "and the internal room. This is the phenomenon of the alteration of perceived eye height (Matin & Li, 1992). We also notice that a freely rolling ball appears to move uphill, as does spilt water, appearing to defy gravity. Several of these examples have become well-known tourist attractions. The Mystery Spot in California’s Santa Cruz Mountains is a particularly good example (Murphy, 1986). Here and in more controlled laboratory situations, it is evident that we have a visually based module (with shallow outputs) which tells us about the direction of the upright. These “mandatory” mechanisms cannot be shut down and continue to give us false information even though we arc aware of the circumstances giving rise to the illusion. Under these circumstances, the perceptual module is so strong and ubiquitous that it cannot be ignored. Observers, including the proprietors of such establishments, not familiar with these phenomena of visual perception, explain the rather disparate array of phenomena as due to a “mysterious physical force” yet to be explained by physicists. For example, my tour guide in the Santa Cruz mountains assured us that the place was visited by America’s top rocket scientists, Werner von Braun and Albert Einstein, and that neither could explain it."

And which names the owner and dates it to 1941. Dougweller (talk) 15:22, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Article tone
This page has a really annoying gee whiz we sure dunno what causes the strange phenomena at the mystery spot durp durp tone to it. This is an encyclopedia, not a brochure for a tourist trap. There are no mysterious phenomena. I came here to read how these illusions are designed and what scientific principles they are based on and instead I get credulous wide eyed wonderment from the bumpkins of the internet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.32.24.140 (talk) 01:53, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

 * I've removed a bit. There are two good paragraphs explaining this. Doug Weller  talk 10:56, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mystery Spot


text: User talk:68.84.171.66

title: User talk:68.84.171.66


text:
Element Lad

Element Lad (Jan Arrah) is a superhero appearing in media published by DC Comics, primarily as a member of the Legion of Super-Heroes in the 30th and 31st centuries. A native of the planet Trom, he has the power to transmute chemical elements.

Publication history
Element Lad first appeared in Adventure Comics #307, and was created by Edmond Hamilton and John Forte.

Pre-Zero Hour
Element Lad, whose real name is Jan Arrah, first appears in Adventure Comics (vol. 1) #307 (1963). In this first story, he is briefly known as "Mystery Lad" as the Legionnaires do not initially know his powers. Jan is the last survivor of Trom, as he was in space at the time that the space pirate Roxxas massacred the Trommites for refusing to transmute valuable elements for him.

With the aid of the Legion, Roxxas is brought to justice and Jan joins the Legion, using the codename Element Lad. He is a member of the Legion for many years, serving terms as leader and deputy leader. He is eventually linked romantically to Shvaughn Erin, the Science Police's Legion liaison, who herself first appeared in Superboy and the Legion of Super-Heroes #241 (July 1978).

"Five Years Later"
In November 1989, the Legion continuity jumps ahead five years. During this "Five Year Gap" following the Magic Wars, Earth had fallen under the covert control of the Dominators, and had withdrawn from the United Planets. In a storyline written by Tom and Mary Bierbaum, it is revealed in Legion of Super-Heroes (vol. 4) #31 (July 1992) that Shvaughn had been born as a male named Sean, and had taken a drug called ProFem to change genders and thereby secure Element Lad's love. With ProFem no longer available in the tough economical times, Shvaughn reverts to Sean. Jan is unfazed, and continues their romantic relationship.

At the same time, the Dominators' highly classified "Batch SW6" escapes captivity. Originally, Batch SW6 appears to be a group of teenage Legionnaire clones, created from samples apparently taken just prior to Ferro Lad's death at the hands of the Sun-Eater. Later, they are revealed to be time-paradox duplicates. After Earth is destroyed in a disaster reminiscent of the destruction of Krypton over a millennium earlier, a few dozen surviving cities and their inhabitants reconstitute their world as New Earth. The SW6 Legionnaires remain, and their version of Element Lad assumes the code name Alchemist.

Post-Zero Hour
After Legion of Super-Heroes (vol. 4) #61 (September 1994), DC Comics rebooted the Legion continuity as part of the Zero Hour company-wide crossover storyline. In post-Zero Hour continuity, Jan is still the last survivor of Trom, however the Trommites had been killed by the heat vision of Daxamite White Triangle terrorists who had decimated Trom from space. After a brief period of the traumatized Jan being brainwashed into becoming the villainous Starfinger, this version of Element Lad serves with the Legion for some time. Jan's previous history with Shvaughn Erin is erased in this continuity.

After an encounter with the sorcerer Mordru, Jan's powers change so that he can transmute himself into elements as well; he is subsequently often seen in metal or crystal forms, exploring the nature of his physical self.

In the Legion Lost limited series (2000–2001) it is shown that the events from "Widening Rifts" had caused Element Lad to become lost in deep space for billions of years, whereby his perspective changes to a point of arguable insanity and he becomes the extremely powerful villain Progenitor. He is eventually killed during this story by Live Wire (Garth Ranzz, the Legionnaire formerly known before Zero Hour as Lightning Lad), who sacrifices his own life in the process, but Garth later reappears in another form. Kid Quantum had taken the few crystals left from the destruction of the Progenitor and had left them on Shanghalla, the heroes' resting place. It turns out that Garth's essence had survived in the crystals; Jan's body had regrown, but housing Garth's consciousness. The reincarnated Garth is able to use both the Element Lad and Lightning Lad powers in his new crystalline body, although his relationship with other Legionnaires (including former love Saturn Girl) is strained due to his outward resemblance to the Progenitor. Before this plot is resolved, the Legion's continuity was rebooted a third time in 2004.

In the Final Crisis: Legion of 3 Worlds miniseries (2008–2009), the post-Zero Hour Legion is brought to the pre-crisis Legion's timeline, to help battle Superboy Prime and the Legion of Super-Villains. During this time, the Pre-Crisis Brainiac 5 uses a specially charged lightning rod to increase the transmutation ability of Element Lad's body, allowing Garth to mutate the body itself into a match for his own.

"Threeboot"
In the Waid/Kitson 'reimagining' Element Lad is the lone survivor of a lost planet. This most recent version has to touch things to transmute them, and anything he transmutes reverts to its original chemical composition in a matter of minutes; both are limitations he never had before (all previous versions of Element Lad have been able to transmute matter permanently and to do so from great distances).

He finds physical fights barbaric and has romantic feelings toward Triplicate Girl.

This Element Lad and the corresponding Legion also appear in Final Crisis: Legion of 3 Worlds. He turns the ground around Superboy-Prime into Kryptonite, causing him great pain. Superboy-Prime retaliates by throwing a Kryptonite rock through Element Lad's body, killing him.

Post-Infinite Crisis
The events of the Infinite Crisis miniseries have apparently restored a close analogue of the pre-Crisis on Infinite Earths Legion to continuity, as seen in "The Lightning Saga" story arc in Justice League of America and Justice Society of America, and in the "Superman and the Legion of Super-Heroes" story arc in Action Comics. This version of Element Lad is among a group of Legionnaires listed as missing.

Element Lad appears in Adventure Comics (vol. 2) #1, where it is revealed he is one of the Legionnaires stationed in the 21st century. He poses as Mr. Janson, the chemistry teacher at Smallville High School. As revealed in Adventure Comics (vol. 2) #8, Element Lad is part of a secret team sent by the late R. J. Brande to the 21st century to save the future in the Last Stand of New Krypton storyline.

In the "Watchmen" sequel "Doomsday Clock", Element Lad is among the Legion of Super-Heroes members that appear in the present after Doctor Manhattan undid the experiment that erased the Legion of Super-Heroes and the Justice Society of America.

Powers and abilities
Element Lad is able to transmute objects by touch and change one chemical element into any other, for instance, lead to gold or iron to aluminium. He can transmute an element even if it is part of a compound and can change solid objects into gaseous ones. Like all Trommites, Element Lad could sense the elemental composition of any substance, and could change one element into another by creating or breaking electron bonds. He also possesses extensive knowledge of chemistry and how to use his abilities effectively.

Equipment
As a member of the Legion of Super-Heroes, Element Lad is provided a Legion Flight Ring, which allows him to fly and protects him from the vacuum of space and other dangerous environments.

In other media

 * Element Lad makes non-speaking cameo appearances in Legion of Super Heroes.
 * Element Lad appears in Adventures in the DC Universe #10.
 * Element Lad appears in the one-shot comic Batman '66 Meets the Legion of Super-Heroes.

title: Element Lad


text: User talk:81.203.232.35

title: User talk:81.203.232.35


text:
Fodbgen

In Irish mythology Fodbgen or Odbgen (modern spelling: Foidhbhgen - "the despoiler") son of Sengann of the Fir Bolg became High King of Ireland when he overthrew his cousin Rinnal son of Genann. It is said that before his time there were no knots (Old Irish odb) in trees.

He ruled for four years until he was overthrown by Eochaid mac Eirc, Rinnal's grandson.

title: Fodbgen


text:
Helvetic Confessions

The Helvetic Confessions are two documents expressing the common belief of Calvinist churches, especially in Switzerland.

First Helvetic Confession
The First Helvetic Confession (Confessio Helvetica prior), known also as the Second Confession of Basel, was drawn up in Basel in 1536 by Heinrich Bullinger and Leo Jud of Zürich, Kaspar Megander of Bern, Oswald Myconius and Simon Grynaeus of Basel, Martin Bucer and Wolfgang Capito of Strasbourg, with other representatives from Schaffhausen, St Gall, Mühlhausen and Biel. The first draft was written in Latin and the Zürich delegates objected to its Lutheran phraseology. However, Leo Jud's German translation was accepted by all, and after Myconius and Grynaeus had modified the Latin form, both versions were agreed to and adopted on February 26, 1536. It was an attempted Reformed-Lutheran symbol of unity and brought by Bucer and Capito to Martin Luther, who ultimately rejected it.

Chapters of the First Helvetic Confession:

Second Helvetic Confession
The Second Helvetic Confession (Latin: Confessio Helvetica posterior) was written by Bullinger in 1562 and revised in 1564 as a private exercise. It came to the notice of Elector Palatine Frederick III, who had it translated into German and published. It was attractive to some Reformed leaders as a corrective to what they saw as the overly Lutheran statements of the Strasbourg Consensus. An attempt was made in early 1566 to have all the churches of Switzerland sign the Second Helvetic Confession as a common statement of faith. It gained a favorable hold on the Swiss churches, who had found the First Confession too short and too Lutheran. However, "the Basel clergy refused to sign the confession, stating that although they found no fault with it, they preferred to stand by their own Basel Confession of 1534".

Chapters of the Second Helvetic Confession:

Reception
The Second Helvetic Confession was adopted by the Reformed Church not only throughout Switzerland but in Scotland (1566), Hungary (1567), France (1571), and Poland (1578). Along with the Thirty-nine Articles, the Westminster Confession of Faith, the Scots Confession and the Heidelberg Catechism is one the most generally recognized confessions of the Reformed Church. The Second Helvetic Confession was also included in the United Presbyterian Church in the U.S.A.'s Book of Confessions, in 1967, and remains in the Book of Confessions adopted by the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.).

Marian views
Mary is mentioned several times in the Second Helvetic Confession, which expounds Bullinger's mariology. Chapter Three quotes the angel's message to the Virgin Mary, " – the Holy Spirit will come over you " – as an indication of the existence of the Holy Spirit and the Trinity. The Latin text described Mary as diva, indicating her rank as a person, who dedicated herself to God. In Chapter Nine, the Virgin birth of Jesus is said to be conceived by the Holy Spirit and born without the participation of any man. The Second Helvetic Confession accepted the "Ever Virgin" notion from John Calvin, which spread throughout much of Europe with the approbation of this document in the above-mentioned countries. Bullinger's 1539 polemical treatise against idolatry expressed his belief that Mary's "sacrosanctum corpus" ("sacrosanct body") had been assumed into heaven by angels: Hac causa credimus et Deiparae virginis Mariae purissimum thalamum et spiritus sancti templum, hoc est, sacrosanctum corpus ejus deportatum esse ab angelis in coelum.

For this reason we believe that the Virgin Mary, Begetter of God, the most pure bed and temple of the Holy Spirit, that is, her most holy body, was carried to heaven by angels.

Literature

 * Louis Thomas, La Confession helvétique (Geneva, 1853);
 * Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, i. 390–420, iii. 234–306;
 * Julius Müller, Die Bekenntnisschriften der reformierten Kirche (Leipzig, 1903).

title: Helvetic Confessions


text:
Archive of Folk Culture

The Archive of Folk Culture (originally named The Archive of American Folk Song) was established in 1928 as the first national collection of American folk music in the United States of America. It was initially part of the Music Division of the Library of Congress and now resides in the American Folklife Center.

The Archive of American Folk Song 1928–1946
The Music Division's director Carl Engel announced in April 1928 that the Library of Congress would appoint the folk song collector Robert Winslow Gordon as the archive's first director and explained the archive's scope as “a national collection of folk song … to ensure their preservation and to recognize the value of the folk heritage.” In the Library of Congress’ annual report for 1928 Engel argued the country's diverse contributors to its folk music made it richer than any other country's and he believed the scattered, unrecorded folk heritage was threatened by popular music and technological advances such as the radio and phonograph. In 1926 Gordon approached Engel and proposed a folk music collecting project that would allow Gordon to continue the collecting and research he began in San Francisco and Oakland, California in the early 1900s. Working with Librarian of Congress Herbert Putnam, Engel raised private funds to support the first post of Chair of American Folk Music. From its very beginning, the Archive was not a passive receptacle. Rather Gordon, with Engel's blessing, went into communities, actively solicited and collected folk music and brought them to the Archive.

Gordon spent his first year in the post in Darien, Georgia collecting materials such as song sheets and reels for the archive. Although Engel, Putnam and Gordon agreed that folk music was an important addition to the Library's music collections, they did not agree on the methods. Gordon expected autonomy as an independent researcher but his absence from the Library of Congress did not meet Engel or Putman's expectations. Engel and Putman frequently wrote to Gordon enquiring about his location and requesting updates about collecting activities and in order to improve relations with the Library's management, Gordon relocated to Washington, D.C. in 1929. He used his time in Washington, D.C. to experiment with phonographs and recording formats like wax cylinders and after borrowing an Amplifon disc recorder, he re-entered the field in 1932 and travelled around Virginia, West Virginia and Kentucky. However, the Great Depression decimated the country's economy and private donations that fund the post ran out in 1932 and Gordon left the Library of Congress.

Shortly after Gordon's departure, John Avery Lomax visited the Archive to consult its collections for American Ballads and Folk Songs, an extensive folk music anthology he co-authored with his son Alan Lomax and was financed by the Macmillan publishing company. Lomax had a project and backing but he needed recording equipment to capture folk music during his fieldwork. He made a deal with Engel; in exchange for borrowing a phonograph from the Library of Congress and providing recording blanks Lomax would deposit his materials into the Archive of American Folk Song. After finishing his anthology, Lomax received a grant in 1933 from the American Council of Learned Societies and undertook his first recording trip under the Library's auspices to collect new material to expand the Archive's collections. In 1934 Lomax was appointed the Honorary Consultant and Curator of the Archive of American Folk Song and with help from his wife Ruby Terrill Lomax, daughter Shirley Lomax, son John Jr. Lomax and son Alan Lomax, he travelled all over the United States but they extensively toured Southern states including Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Alabama, Florida, South Carolina, Georgia and Virginia and notably recorded performances by Huddie "Lead Belly" Ledbetter while the musician was incarcerated in a Louisiana state penitentiary. Lomax's understanding of folk culture was such that he viewed artefacts as survivors of times past. They were items that needed to be collected and protected before modern society could damage or erase them. He also believed that artefacts obtained from remote locations were purer, untainted and thus genuine expression of that culture. Although Lomax Sr. worked with the Library of Congress for over a decade and kept the title of Honorary Curator until his death, he was never an employee and was expected to support himself and his work through grants and payment for lecturing.

In 1936 Alan Lomax became the Archive's first official employee. He was given the title of Assistant in Charge and paid an annual salary of $620. Throughout his term, Alan toured the United States as well as Haiti and The Bahamas to record music and interviews and to take photographs. Making use of the Library of Congress' Coolidge Auditorium in 1938, Lomax Jr recorded the biography of jazz pianist, bandleader and composer Jelly Roll Morton. His collecting activities often enlisted the help of other folk musicians, collectors and enthusiasts including Woody Guthrie with whom he wrote and co-hosted American Folk Songs, a 26-week survey included as part of The American School of the Air radio series broadcast in 1939 by the American network CBS. In 1940 Alan, Librarian of Congress Archibald MacLeish and Music Division Chief Harold Spivacke secured a grant from the Carnegie Corporation of New York to install a Recording Laboratory within the Music Division. Describing the Recording Laboratory's purpose, MacLeish said it would "disseminate copies of the field recordings of the Archive of American Folk Song" and make some of the Archive's recordings available to the nation. The Recording Laboratory began producing recordings in 1941 and they included editorial contributions by Alan Lomax, Benjamin A. Botkin, Duncan Emrich, Frances Densmore, Willard Rhodes, Archie Green, and Charles Seeger. These recordings were commercially released and included notable series Folk Music of the United States and Folk Music of America. Alan also enabled local folk researchers by setting up an exchange whereby the Library of Congress would lend them equipment and they would deposit their recordings in the Archive. This mutually beneficial arrangement allowed collectors such as Vance Randolph, Charles Lafayette Todd, Robert Sonkin, Eloise Hubbard Linscott, Zora Neale Hurston, Herbert Halpert, Helen Creighton, William N. Fenton, Melville Herskovits, Helen Hartness Flanders and others to undertake projects while enriching the Archive's collection. While the Archive of Folk Song started out as a repository for American folk music, Alan helped expand its scope to include not only material from outside the United States but also folklore, verbal arts and oral histories.

Benjamin A. Botkin replaced Alan Lomax as Head of the Archive in 1942 but he was already working since 1939 in association with the Library of Congress as an editor with the Works Progress Administration Federal Writers' Project. Botkin's experience with the FWP as well as his academic accomplishments as a teacher at University of Oklahoma helped shape his perspective on folklore and guided his three-year term as Head at the Archive. Botkin not only championed oral histories' contributions to folk culture but he also helped shift their values from object to function. Alan Lomax certainly collected oral histories as part of his fieldwork and they were thus not new additions to the Archive's collections. However, Botkin's perspective on their contributions to folk culture was different. On the one hand, Lomax viewed oral histories as a natural by-product of the narrative work he and his colleagues carried out as part of the WPA projects. Their functions beyond those projects were never considered. On the other hand, Botkin took on what was dubbed a functionalist perspective that examined folk culture from the bottom-up rather than through academic, literary hierarchies of previous Heads like Gordon and Lomax Sr. He also developed and advocated a concept he called folk-say, which acts as a more general and more inclusive term than folklore. Folk-say included oral, written, so-called real and so-called imagined stories as well as captured the idea that folklore was an evolving form of culture and not a static relic. His perspective on folk culture reflected the shifting attitudes felt by the Library of Congress and the public in the lead up to WW2.

Folklore Section 1946–1976
In October 1945 Duncan Emrich, who had worked as the Military Historian in then General Dwight D. Eisenhower's administration, replaced Botkin. When Luther Evans, who took up his position as the 10th Librarian of Congress only four months prior to Emrich, asked all department heads to undertake collection surveys and submit reports, Emrich produced one that was arguably more timely, more accurate and offered more astute recommendations than any previous Archive Head before him. This accomplishment was partly due to Emrich's military meticulousness and inspired by a grand, international vision for the Library of Congress and The Archive, one that reflected the United States' new position in the world post-WW2, and was shared by Evans. As well as his report to Evans, Emrich produced several more memorandums about strategies for the Archive and he boldly suggested a further 5 additions to the Folk Music of the Americas Series and even suggested that 3 of those albums could be made available by February 1946, only two months from their proposal. However, at that point, Emrich and Rae Korson were the Archive's only permanent staff and thus responsible for all its activities including answering reference requests. Within Emrich's first six months as Head of the Archive, he proposed many programs and projects that were both substantial and ambitious: an expanded staff that included a musicologist, domestic field projects that would increase the Archive's collections to cover 12 states not previously surveyed, foreign field recording projects. On 22 August 1946 Evans created the Folklore Section, which absorbed the Archive of American Folk Song, within the Music Division and this name change reflected the Archive's transitioning place within the Library of Congress, its scope and its activities. Emrich worked tirelessly with special interest societies, organisations and higher education institutions to expand the Folklore Section's relationships but by 1950 neither he nor Korson had managed to secure budgets for more staff or acquisitions. From 1950 Emrich refocused the Archive's gaze to make the most of the materials already collected by the Archive. "It is possible to say, in 1950, that the pioneering phase of field collecting and the establishment of Archives has come to a close and that in the future emphasis should be directed to coordinated efforts, to elimination of duplication, and to strong encouragement for scholars and others to use -- in fairly exhaustive studies -- the materials already gathered." By 1952 Emrich was frustrated by the shortage of staff and the number of requests from folklore collectors to use the recording equipment he had to turn down due to improper funding.

Collections
The Archive of Folk Culture encompasses 2,700 collections that contains 150,000 sound recordings and over 3 million items. Some of those collections have been digitised and are now available through the America Folklife Center's online projects and presentations but most remain only accessible by visiting the Folklife Reading Room in person. Two notable collections held by the Archive are the Lomax Family Collection and the Alan Lomax Collection. The former consists of materials collected and generated by the entire Lomax family including John, Alan and others. The latter specifically covers the activities of Alan Lomax. The Alan Lomax collection was acquired by the Library of Congress in March 2004 through an agreement between the Library, the Association for Cultural Equity and an anonymous donor. Other collections in the Archive of Folk Culture include: California Gold: Northern California Folk Music from the Thirties; the Montana Folklife Survey Collection; Voices from the Days of Slavery: Former Slaves Tell Their Stories; as well as Woody Guthrie and the Archive of American Folk Song, Correspondence 1940–1950.

The American Folklife Preservation Act (Public Law 94-201)
The American Folklife Preservation Act or Public Law 94-201 is the American legislative statute that created the American Folklife Center within the Library of Congress and determined its purpose, organisation and obligations to the American people. With the creation of the American Folklife Center, The Archive of Folk Song, formally part of the Music Division, had its custodianship transferred to the American Folklife Center and its name changed to the Archive of Folk Culture.

S. 1591
It was first introduced as to the Senate as bill S. 1591 on 20 March 1969 by Senator Ralph Yarborough, a Democrat from Texas. When Yarborough introduced the bill, he acknowledged the country's varied cultural heritages and explained that American folk culture is the product of the "many people, many institutions, many lands and customs [that] have combined to make up the distinctive character," a layering Yarborough likened not to the "refinement of taste, but [to] the total way of life of a people." His notion of folk culture was broad, inclusive and representative of the many communities and cultures contained in the United States. Yet Yarborough explained it was under threat and needed federal support for survival because it is transmitted "orally or by imitation from one generation to another, often without benefit of formal instruction or of written sources." Action was required in order to stem or stop the so-called damaging effects of technology and popular culture. Alan Lomax even supported Yarborough's view on popular influences and spoke to the Senate in order to bolster the case. The bill proposed the Smithsonian Institution was the best home for the Archive and its future activities because it had hosted the Festival of American Folklife but although the Smithsonian was in favour of the general premise of the bill, it did not want to take on the responsibility. Despite its support in the Senate, bill S. 1591 did not pass in the House and was removed from consideration.

H.R. 17382
On 15 October 1974 Representative Lucien Nedzi introduced a comparable bill - H.R. 17382 - to the House. This time, the bill, known as the American Folklife Preservation Act, proposed an American Folklife Center at the Library of Congress that would be supervised by a board of trustees and be "authorized to enter into contracts, make grants and loans, and award scholarships to individuals and groups for activities including research, scholarship, training, exhibitions, performances and workshops." Nedzi, speaking 5 years after the first bill was introduced, used a similar justification for the center's necessity. He again raised the fragility of folk traditions in the face of mass media, cultural assets turned "victims of the pressures to conformity brought on by urbanization and technology." Nedzi was met by resistance and fellow Representative H.R. Gross was a vocal opponent of the bill. Gross most frequently cited budgetary constraints as the reason why he didn't support the bill. He questioned the necessity of funding yet another cultural organisation in light of that year's National Endowment for the Arts and Humanities $64,025,000 in government appropriations. However, Gross' concerns were not limited to finances. He took the opportunity to question the place of folk culture in national cultural organisations and asked why the National Endowment for the Arts, which was tasked with supporting humanities research, was "so little interested in this form of culture, if it may be called culture." Gross was giving voice to one side of a growing national conversation about American identity, one that had strong sentiment on each side, and he even went as far as to suggest that folklife might be anti-American: "I am reminded of a statement by former President Theodore Roosevelt who said: there is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities." Unlike its predecessor, H.R. 17382 did not even pass in the House and was scrapped before it even made it to the Senate.

H.R. 6673
Representative Frank Thompson, under the guidance of Nedzi, took up the cause for a third time and on 5 May 1975 introduced bill H.R. 6673 - substantially similar to H.R. 17382 - to the House. Once it had passed there, James Abourezk introduced it to the Senate. Seven years after first efforts to establish a federally supported folklife preservation and research center, H.R. 6673 was approved in both the House and the Senate. However, this version of the Act was met with some reservations from President Gerald Ford once it was passed to him for ratification. Accordingly, Assistant Attorney General Antonin Scalia delivered a report ruling on two potential constitutional concerns. The first was in regards to the separation of powers. Article 1 and Article 2 of the United States Constitution respectively delegate legislative powers to congress and executive powers to the president. Scalia was concerned the Act conflated these two roles because it proposed the Librarian of Congress - a congressional appointee - should carry out duties reserved for members of the Executive branch. The second concern was about the manner in which the center's trustees were to be appointed. After outlining the details of why these two points call into question some aspects of the Act's constitutionality, Scalia concludes that "it is our view that the provisions of this legislation are contrary to the strict provisions of the Constitution. It must be acknowledged, however, that in the area of cultural and educational affairs, the separation of powers may not have been strictly observed... Nonetheless, in light of the historical practice, we think the President can responsibly sign the present legislation with the expression of his serious reservation concerning the constitutional propriety of placing such functions outside the Executive Branch.'"

Nonetheless, on 2 January 1976, the first working day of the United States Bicentennial, President Ford signed the American Folklife Preservation Act and H.R.6673 became P.L. 94-201.

Heads of the Archive

 * Robert W. Gordon (1928–32)
 * John A. Lomax (1933–42)
 * Alan Lomax (1937–42)
 * Benjamin A. Botkin (1942–45)
 * Duncan Emrich (1945–55)
 * Rae Korson (1956–69)
 * Alan Jabbour (1969–74)
 * Joseph C. Hickerson (1974 – 88)
 * Alan Jabbour (1988 – 99, as director of the American Folklife Center)
 * Peggy Bulger (1999 – 2002, as director of the American Folklife Center)
 * Michael Taft (2002 – 2012)
 * Nicole Saylor (2012 – )

title: Archive of Folk Culture


text:
Aspidogastrea

The Aspidogastrea (Ancient Greek: ἀσπίς aspis “shield”, γαστήρ gaster “stomach/pouch”) is a small group of flukes comprising about 80 species. It is a subclass of the trematoda, and sister group to the Digenea. Species range in length from approximately one millimeter to several centimeters. They are parasites of freshwater and marine molluscs and vertebrates (cartilaginous and bony fishes and turtles). Maturation may occur in the mollusc or vertebrate host. None of the species has any economic importance, but the group is of very great interest to biologists because it has several characters which appear to be archaic.

Shared characteristics
Shared characteristics of the group are a large ventral disc with a large number of small alveoli ("suckerlets") or a row of suckers and a tegument with short protrusions, so-called "microtubercles". Aspidogastreans are an understudied class of parasitic flatworms that possess unique anterior attachment structures and are found exclusively in freshwater and marine environments, infecting a variety of hosts including fish, amphibians, and reptiles.

Larval physiology
Larvae of some species have ciliated patches. Those of Multicotyle purvisi have four patches on the anterior side of the posterior sucker and six at the posterior side, those of Cotylogaster occidentalis have an anterior ring of eight and a posterior ring of six, while larvae of Aspidogaster conchicola, Lobatostoma manteri, Rugogaster hydrolagi lack cilia altogether. Larvae of some species hatch from eggs, others do not.

Excretory system
Like most platyhelminthes, aspidogastreans use flame cells as an excretory mechanism. The two excretory bladders are located dorsally, on the anterior side of the posterior sucker, connected to ducts, and three flame cell "bulbs" on each side of the body; the ducts contain cilia to aid the flow of excreta.

Nervous system
Aspidogastreans have a nervous system of extraordinary complexity, greater than that of related free-living forms, and a great number of sensory receptors of many different types. The nervous system is of great complexity, consisting of a great number of longitudinal nerves (connectives) connected by circular commissures. The brain (cerebral commissure) is located dorsally, in the anterior part of the body, the eyes dorsally attached to it. A nerve from the main connective enters the pharynx and also supplies the intestine. Posteriorly, the main connective enters the sucker.

Sensory receptors are scattered over the ventral and dorsal surface, the largest numbers occurring on the ventral surface, at the anterior end and on the posterior sucker. Electron-microscopic studies revealed 13 types of receptors.

Life cycles
Their life cycle is much simpler than that of digenean trematodes, including a mollusc and a facultative or compulsory vertebrate host. There are no multiplicative larval stages in the mollusc host, as known from all digeneans.

Host specificity of most aspidogastreans is very low, i.e., a single species of aspidogastrean can infect a wide range of host species, whereas a typical digenean trematode is restricted to few species (at least of molluscs). For example, Aspidogaster conchicola infects many species of freshwater bivalves belonging to several families, as well as freshwater snails, many species of freshwater fishes of several families, and freshwater tortoises.

Life cycles have been elucidated for a number of species. Lobatostoma manteri is an example of a species which has obligate vertebrate hosts. Adult worms live in the small intestine of the snubnosed dart, Trachinotus blochi (Teleostei, Carangidae), on the Great Barrier Reef. They produce large numbers of eggs which are shed in the faeces. If eaten by various prosobranch snails, larvae hatch in the stomach, and—depending on the species of snail—stay there or migrate to the digestive gland where they grow up to the preadult stage which has all the characteristics of the adult including a testis and ovary.

Evolutionary relationships
Digenean trematodes have been cultured in various, complex, media. However, their parasitic stages die soon in water. Aspidogastreans may survive for many days or even weeks outside a host in simple physiological saline solution). For example, adult A. conchicola survived in water for a fortnight, and in a mixture of water and saline solution for up to five weeks. L. manteri extracted from fish could be kept alive for up to 13 days in dilute sea water in which they laid eggs containing larvae infective to snails. This has led to the suggestions that aspidogastreans are archaic trematodes, not yet well adapted to specific hosts, which have given rise to the more "advanced" digenean trematodes, and that the complex life cycles of digenean trematodes have evolved from the simple ones of aspidogastreans.

Synapomorphies of the trematodes are presence of a Laurer's Canal, a posterior sucker (transformed to an adhesive disc in the Aspidogastrea), and life cycles involving molluscs and vertebrates. DNA studies have consistently supported this sister group relationship. The question of whether vertebrates or molluscs are the original hosts of the trematodes, has not been resolved.

This view is supported by the evolutionary relationships of the hosts which these two subclasses utilise. The hosts of aspidogastreans include chondrichthyan fishes (sharks, rays and chimaeras), a group that is 450 million years old, whereas the digeneans, are known from teleost fishes (210 million years old) as well as from various "higher" vertebrates; very few species have invaded chondrichthyans secondarily.

Families within the Aspidogastrea
Rohde (2001) distinguish four families of Aspidogastrea:
 * The Rugogastridae include a single genus, Rugogaster, with two species from the rectal glands of holocephalan fishes. It is characterised by a single row of rugae (transverse thickenings of the body surface), numerous testes, and two caeca. Species of all other families have a single caecum and either one or two testes.
 * The Stichocotylidae include the single species Stichocotyle nephropis from the intestine of elasmobranchs. It has a single ventral row of well separated suckers.
 * The Multicalycidae include the single genus Multicalyx from the intestine of holocephalans and elasmobranchs. It is characterised by a single ventral row of alveoli.
 * The Aspidogastridae includes species infecting molluscs, teleosts and turtles. The ventral adhesive disc bears either three or four rows of alveoli. Rohde distinguishes three subfamilies of Aspidogastridae, the Rohdellinae, Cotylaspidinae and Aspidogastrinae.

Gibson further recognized two orders, the Aspidogastrida with the single family Aspidogastridae, and the Stichocotylida including the Stichocotylidae, Multicalycidae and Rugogastridae. However, similarities between species of these two orders are so great that distinction at the level of orders does not seem justified.

title: Aspidogastrea


text: Category:Neo-Aramaic languages

title: Category:Neo-Aramaic languages


text:
Talk:Pool

DAB pages and images
Is it really approporiate to have an image an a disambiguation page? --Commander Keane 16:02, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I think it could help decide which article you want. But the image in this article in particular isn't very helpful. I think it should be removed. Pink-isnt-well

 * Consensus has been against it for years. —  SMcCandlish  [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 07:28, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Massive update
I just went through all 600+ search matches for articles with "pool" in their names, and expanded this DAB page to include (what I think of as) the relevant ones. Probably needs some more sets of eyeballs on it to make sure that it is done suitably. Personally, I think most of the "See also" section could be safely pruned, though I don't think the entries hurt, either. I would definitely keep the entire "Resource management" section, as anyone coming her looking for that sense of "pool[ing]" will probably be responding to something specific they encountered, like use of the term in reference to banking, or insurance, or whatever, in particular, and finding nothing but the generic article on the concept as a whole may not help them in any way. —  SMcCandlish  [talk] [cont] ‹(-¿-)› 08:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Pooling layers
I have added a new Computer Science possible disambiguation. I am not sure whether the very terse description is informative enough (although it probably will be for those most directly interested). Just flagging this in case a more experienced editor wants to take a look. SchipholAirport (talk) 12:01, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

"Pools (song)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pools_(song)&redirect=no Pools (song)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pool


text:
Cawthra family

The Cawthra family of Toronto was famous for its business, social and cultural contributions to the city. It is one of the oldest families in Toronto, and many descendants of the family's founder, Joseph Cawthra, continue to play significant roles in Toronto society.

History
Joseph Cawthra migrated to Canada from Yorkshire in 1803. In 1809, he acquired a large parcel of land along the Ontario lakeshore and the Credit River, near the present-day Port Credit. The narrow dirt road that cut through his property is now the Cawthra Road in Mississauga. Sometime later, the Cawthra family moved to the Town of York, where William Cawthra acquired several properties. One such property on Lot 19 Concession 3 on Yonge Street would later become Mount Pleasant Cemetery, Toronto.

Notable members

 * Joseph Cawthra - the family's founder in Canada
 * William Cawthra - expanded on his inheritance and contributed to the political and civic growth of Toronto; son of Joseph Cawthra
 * John Cawthra - soldier in the War of 1812 and first MP for Simcoe County; son of Joseph Cawthra
 * Mabel Cawthra Adamson (1871–1943) - painter and decorator; wife of Agar Adamson daughter of John Cawthra
 * Agar Rodney Adamson (1901–1954) - mining engineer and Progressive Conservative MP for York West (1940–1954); son of Mabel Cawthra Adamson and Agar Adamson
 * Anthony Patrick Cawthra Adamson (1906–2002) - historian, architect and author; son of Mabel Cawthra Adamson and Agar Adamson
 * Latham Cawthra Burns (1930–2015) - honorary chairman of BMO Nesbitt Burns; son of Latham Burns Sr. (c. 1906–1936) and grandson of Herbert D. Burns (chairman of the Bank of Nova Scotia)
 * Cawthra Burns - Toronto socialite and equestrienne; daughter of Latham Cawthra Burns

title: Cawthra family


text:
File:Waiting.jpeg

Fair use in Waiting (Thursday album)
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
 * 1) It's a low resolution copy of a CD/album cover.
 * 2) It doesn't limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the CD/album in any way, in fact, it may encourage sales.
 * 3) Because of the low resolution, copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the album artwork on another CD.
 * 4) The image is itself a subject of discussion in the article or used in the infobox thereof.
 * 5) The image on the cover is significant because it was made by a famous artist.

Source

 * 1) Derived from a digital capture (scan/photo) of the album/CD cover (creator of this digital version is irrelevant as the copyright in all equivalent images is still held by the same party). Copyright held by the record company or the artist. Claimed as fair use regardless.

title: File:Waiting.jpeg