text:
Siege of Knoxville

The siege of Knoxville (November 19 – December 4, 1863) saw Lieutenant General James Longstreet's Confederate forces besiege the Union garrison of Knoxville, Tennessee, led by Major General Ambrose Burnside. When Major General William T. Sherman approached Knoxville with an overwhelming Union force, Longstreet ended the siege on December 4 and withdrew northeast. The siege was part of the Knoxville campaign of the American Civil War.

In August and September 1863, Burnside's Army of Ohio carried out a nearly bloodless invasion of East Tennessee, an area that included a substantial pro-Union population. Burnside's occupying force was thrown on the defensive when Longstreet's corps and Major General Joseph Wheeler's cavalry launched a counter-invasion from the southwest in November. Longstreet missed his chance to smash the Union forces in the field when Burnside conducted a successful fighting withdrawal to Knoxville. When Longstreet hesitated to attack, the Union soldiers built fortifications to make Knoxville's strong natural defenses even more powerful.

Longstreet's forces lacked sufficient strength to completely surround Knoxville. Therefore, Burnside's Union garrison avoided starvation by bringing food into the city from the south bank of the Tennessee River. On November 29, a major Confederate assault was repulsed with heavy losses in the Battle of Fort Sanders. Aside from day-to-day skirmishing, there were two other significant actions, the first on November 18 west of the city and the second on November 25 at Armstrong's Hill on the south bank. After the siege ended, Longstreet's troops lingered in East Tennessee until April 1864, but were unable to capture Knoxville.

Union occupation
Burnside, commanding the Union Army of the Ohio, mounted the Union invasion of East Tennessee in late August 1863, with two infantry divisions and one large cavalry division from XXIII Corps soldiers stationed in Kentucky. Burnside's offensive was mostly unopposed and Federal troops occupied Knoxville on September 1. Many of the people of East Tennessee were pro-Union and welcomed the Union troops. By mid-September, Burnside's troops had seized control over a large part of East Tennessee. When Bragg's Army of Tennessee defeated the Union Army of the Cumberland at the Battle of Chickamauga on September 19–20, 1863 the strategic situation dramatically changed. After his victory, Bragg effectively blockaded the Army of the Cumberland within Chattanooga.

On September 20, two divisions of IX Corps joined Burnside, and on October 3, Brigadier General Orlando B. Willcox with 3,000 six-month Indiana soldiers arrived at Cumberland Gap. The Army of the Ohio's strength returns for October 1863 reported the following troops present for duty: 6,352 officers and enlisted men in IX Corps, 7,912 infantry and artillery and 7,458 cavalry in XXIII Corps, and 4,391 troops in the Left Wing. Brigadier General Robert B. Potter commanded IX Corps, Brigadier General Mahlon D. Manson directed XXIII Corps, Brigadier General James M. Shackelford led the cavalry, and Willcox commanded the Left Wing.

Major General Robert Ransom Jr. with 5,800 Confederate infantry plus two cavalry brigades under Brigadier General William E. "Grumble" Jones and Colonel H. L. Giltner lurked to the northeast. The Confederate department commander Major General Samuel Jones doubted whether his 8,000 troops were strong enough to seriously disrupt the Union occupation. On October 17, Bragg ordered an infantry division under Major General Carter L. Stevenson and two cavalry brigades under Colonels George Gibbs Dibrell and J. J. Morrison to menace the Union area of control. On October 20, Dibrell and Morrison defeated a Union cavalry brigade under Colonel Frank Wolford in the Battle of Philadelphia. After this reverse, Burnside abandoned Loudon and fell back behind the Tennessee and Little Tennessee Rivers.

Subsequently, Burnside massed the 6,000 men from IX Corps and 3,000 soldiers from Brigadier General Julius White's XXIII Corps infantry division in the area near Lenoir's Station. The remaining XXIII Corps infantry division under Brigadier General Milo Smith Hascall defended Knoxville, Brigadier General William P. Sanders' cavalry division observed the area around Maryville, Willcox held Bull's Gap, and two infantry regiments and 300 cavalry garrisoned Cumberland Gap. In addition, two Union cavalry brigades cooperated with Willcox's force. Major General Ulysses S. Grant was anxious whether Burnside could hold Knoxville.

Longstreet's advance
On November 4, Bragg ordered Longstreet to detach his two divisions from the Army of Tennessee and recapture Knoxville. Bragg believed Longstreet botched the Battle of Wauhatchie on October 28, in which the Confederates proved unable to cut the Federals' newly established Cracker Line. Bragg also wished to send away a general whom he found to be troublesome. Longstreet wanted to be reinforced to 20,000 men for the campaign, but Bragg said no and recalled both Stevenson's and Benjamin F. Cheatham's infantry divisions that opposed Burnside. However, Bragg loaned him Major General Joseph Wheeler and most of his army's mounted force. Longstreet tried to obtain accurate maps of East Tennessee but was only able to get inferior ones. The old locomotives proved unable to efficiently shift Longstreet's two divisions north at the same time that Stevenson's and Cheatham's divisions moved south, so the railroad transfer took until November 13 to complete. Longstreet discovered that Stevenson's troops had eaten most of the countryside's food supplies and that his own wagon train was hardly adequate to mount a campaign. Longstreet's command totaled 10,000 infantry, 5,000 cavalry, and 35 guns.

The Confederates built a pontoon bridge at Hough's Ferry on the Tennessee River; this was a short distance west of Loudon. The division of Brigadier General Micah Jenkins was first to cross the pontoon bridge to the north bank on November 14. Major General Lafayette McLaws' division crossed the next day. By the evening of November 15, Burnside's forces were holding Lenoir's Station, confronted by Jenkins' division to the north with McLaws' division farther north. Longstreet hoped to cut off Burnside's troops from Knoxville, but did not have a good understanding of the area. Earlier, Longstreet authorized Wheeler and most of the cavalry to attempt to seize Knoxville from the south. Wheeler defeated Sanders' Union cavalry in several encounters during November 14–15, pressing them back to the outskirts of Knoxville. However, Wheeler was ultimately thwarted when his troopers ran into Knoxville's infantry defenders on the south bank of the Tennessee River. On November 16, Longstreet recalled Wheeler's cavalry to the north bank, but by that time it was too late to use the horsemen to trap Burnside's forces.

On the north bank of the Tennessee were Longstreet's 12,000 Confederates, including one brigade of Wheeler's cavalry. Opposing them were 9,000 Union troops under Burnside. Longstreet's advance on November 14–15 was so rapid that one of White's two Union brigades was left behind at Kingston where it remained until Knoxville was relieved. Burnside began evacuating Lenoir's Station during the night of November 15. Marching on muddy roads caused by a recent heavy rain, the Federals reached Campbell's Station ahead of Longstreet's pursuit. On November 16, Longstreet failed to crush Burnside in the Battle of Campbell's Station. The Federal rearguard made three separate stands that morning before joining Burnside's main force astride the Kingston Pike in the early afternoon. When the Confederates began turning Burnside's left flank, the Federals fell back to a fifth position. Supported by their artillery, the Union infantry conducted a well-executed fighting withdrawal before marching through the night. The first infantry did not reach Knoxville until 4:00 am on November 17.

Sanders' delaying action
Burnside's directed his chief engineer, Captain Orlando Metcalfe Poe to assign each brigade a position in the defense line. As the Union soldiers arrived at Knoxville, Poe gave them their orders. As soon as the soldiers were able, they began building defenses according to Poe's plans. The troops were assisted in the construction by pro-Union volunteers, by drafted Confederate sympathizers who proved to be unenthusiastic, and by Black workers who were "particularly efficient" at the work. Burnside also ordered Sanders to bring his cavalry division to the north bank to oppose Longstreet. Sanders posted four mounted regiments behind Tank Creek (now known as Fourth Creek) to the west of Knoxville. By 9:20 am on November 17, Brigadier General Joseph B. Kershaw's brigade of McLaws' division began pressing against Sanders' defense line. After a skirmish, Sanders withdrew 1 mi east and took up a new position around noon. McLaws sent a regiment to outflank this line from the north, but before it could get into position, Sanders' horsemen pulled back again.

Sanders fell back to a hilltop position behind a small ravine west of Third Creek and 750 yd east of a home belonging to Robert H. Armstrong, known as Bleak House. At this point, the Tennessee River was immediately on Sanders' left flank and a branch of Third Creek protected his right flank. McLaws deployed his division with Kershaw's brigade facing Sanders and Brigadier General Goode Bryan's brigade in the second line. To Kershaw's left on a ridge was Brigadier General Benjamin G. Humphreys' brigade with Colonel Solon Z. Ruff's brigade in second line. McLaws did not attempt to advance farther that day; he waited while Jenkins' division arrived and extended Longstreet's line to McLaws' left. By evening on November 17, Jenkins' division was positioned across the road to Clinton while Colonel John R. Hart's Georgia cavalry brigade was farther east, blocking the road leading to Tazewell.

Sanders posted about 600 Union soldiers with the 45th Ohio Mounted Infantry on his right, 112th Illinois Mounted Infantry in the center, and 8th Michigan Cavalry on the left. The 8th Michigan's men were armed with the Spencer repeating rifle. Two cedar trees marked the center of the line on the otherwise bare hilltop. The Union troops dismounted and every fifth man held the horses of four other men. Along the front line, the Union soldiers built a breastwork of fence rails about 3 ft high and the same width at the base. Colonel Charles D. Pennebaker's Union cavalry brigade of two regiments faced Humphreys' and Ruff's brigades farther north. East of Third Creek, Colonel James W. Reilly's infantry brigade formed a battle line. Burnside requested Sanders to hold his advanced position until noon on November 18. That would give time for soldiers and workers to put Knoxville in a state of defense.

On November 18, Longstreet planned to drive Sanders off his hill and probe Burnside's defenses, but a heavy fog delayed Confederate operations until 10:00 am. Confederate skirmishers then attacked Sanders' line but were driven off. Colonel Edward Porter Alexander unlimbered four Confederate guns near Bleak House and took Sanders' troops under fire, causing losses in the 45th Ohio. At 2:00 pm, Kershaw's skirmishers mounted a second attack, approaching within 25 yd of the Federal line before being driven off. During the fighting, several Confederate snipers took position in an upper story of Bleak House and opened a harassing fire on Sanders' troops. Sanders asked First Lieutenant Samuel Nicoll Benjamin, commander of 2nd U.S. Artillery, Battery E if his 20-pounder Parrott rifles could suppress the sharpshooters. Though the range was extreme at 2,500 yd, a projectile from one of Benjamin's guns burst in the room where the snipers were. Poe remarked, "During the whole war, I saw no prettier shot."

At 3:00 pm, the final attack commenced when Captain George V. Moody's Louisiana battery, Madison Light Artillery, opened fire from the ridge to the north. It was soon joined by the 12-pounder Napoleons of Captain Osmond B. Taylor's Virginia Battery near Bleak House which blasted gaps in the rail breastwork. The 2nd South Carolina and 3rd South Carolina Infantry Regiments assaulted the Union right and center while the 15th South Carolina supported by the 8th South Carolina attacked the Union left. After a bitter struggle, the Federals retreated. Colonel James D. Nance of the 3rd South Carolina wrote that, "this was the most desperate encounter in which my command was ever engaged." McLaws reported that his division suffered 140 casualties, while Union losses were 200–300. The 112th Illinois reported suffering 94 casualties. The commander of the 15th South Carolina, Major William M. Gist, was killed. Sanders was fatally wounded, possibly by one of the snipers in Bleak House, and died at 11:00 am on November 19. Sanders had been promoted brigadier general only a month before, on October 18, 1863. Fort Loudon, which was originally built by the Confederates, was renamed Fort Sanders in honor of the slain Union general on November 24.

Knoxville defenses
In 1863, the city of Knoxville was located entirely on the north bank of the Tennessee River. Poe's defenses were laid out on a ridge that was at least 100 ft higher than the surrounding terrain that trended past the north side of the city. The railroad line ran roughly east-west just north of the ridge with the depot directly north of the city. The East Tennessee and Georgia Railroad went west from the depot; the East Tennessee and Virginia Railroad went east. First Creek ran south into the Tennessee on the east side of the city; Second Creek ran south into the river on the west side of Knoxville. Third Creek was farther west, near where Sanders' fight took place.

Brigadier General Edward Ferrero's IX Corps division held the Union defenses on the west side of the city from the river to Fort Sanders and west to Second Creek. Colonel John F. Hartranft's smaller IX Corps division defended the line north of Knoxville between First and Second Creeks. Colonel Marshall W. Chapin's brigade of Brigadier General Julius White's division held the defenses from First Creek to Mabry's Hill. Colonel William A. Hoskins' provisional XXIII Corps brigade and pro-Union Tennessee volunteers defended the line from Mabry's Hill to the river east of the city. Hascall's division was disposed with Colonel Daniel Cameron's brigade defending the south side of the Tennessee River and Colonel James W. Reilly's brigade forming Burnside's reserve. Brigadier General James M. Shackelford also assigned cavalry units to assist Cameron's infantry south of the river. These included Colonel Frank Wolford's brigade which remained on the south bank throughout the siege.

On November 19, Longstreet moved his troops to oppose the Union defenses of Knoxville. Technically, Longstreet's operation was not a siege because the Confederates were unable to completely surround the city. When the IX Corps arrived from Kentucky, it brought 2,000 hogs and 600 cattle. Another 800 hogs reached the city before the city was cut off. During the siege, the pro-Union farmers of the French Broad River valley east of Knoxville provided the garrison with 10,000 bushels of corn, 6,000 bushels of wheat, 1,500 hogs, 1,000 cattle, and additional foodstuffs. This was in addition to what Union foragers gathered south of the Tennessee River. Longstreet did not have enough troops to interrupt these supplies, but he also mistakenly believed a faulty map that placed the French Broad River in the wrong place. Pro-Confederate civilians pointed out the error, but the general apparently doubted their loyalty to the Southern cause.

Except for Fort Sanders, all the Union forts surrounding Knoxville received their official names on December 11, 1863, after the end of the siege. All the forts were named after Union officers killed during the campaign. On the north side of the river, Battery Noble was defended by two 3-inch Ordnance rifles from Captain Jacob Roemer's Battery L, 2nd New York Artillery. Fort Byington was located on College Hill, while Battery Zoellner was east of Fort Sanders and Battery Galpin even farther east. Fort Comstock was on Summit Hill overlooking the depot and was armed by four 10-pounder Parrott rifles from Lieutenant Erskine Gittings' 3rd U.S. Artillery, Batteries L and M. Farther east were Battery Wiltsie and Battery Billingsley; the latter had three 3-inch rifles from Captain John von Sehlen's 15th Indiana Battery. Fort Huntington Smith was a major fortification sited on Temperance Hill and it included several 3.8-inch James rifles from Captain Joseph A. Sims' 24th Indiana Battery and Captain Edward C. Henshaw's Illinois Battery. Farther east, Battery Clifton Lee and Battery Stearman were each armed with two 6-pounder guns from Henshaw's Battery.

Completing the north side defenses, Fort Hill on Mabry's Hill included six 12-pounder Napoleons from Captain Joseph C. Shields' 19th Ohio Battery and two 3-inch rifles from Captain Hubbard T. Thomas' 26th (Wilder) Indiana Battery. Battery Fearns was sited on Flint Hill east of Knoxville and was armed with two 12-pounder howitzers. South of the river, Fort Stanley was a major earthwork. Farther west was Fort Dickerson, and to the southwest of Dickerson was Fort Higley. During the siege, the soldiers of Cameron's brigade extended trenches east from Fort Stanley to include Sevierville Heights.

Fort Sanders was constructed as a bastioned earthwork, with its northern and southern sides 125 yd long, its western side 95 yd long, and its eastern side open. Its ditch was 12 ft wide and 6 to 8 ft deep. The fort was armed with four 20-pounder Parrott rifles from Benjamin's battery, six 12-pounder Napoleons from Captain William W. Buckley's Battery D, 1st Rhode Island Artillery, and two 3-inch rifles from Roemer's battery. The infantry garrison consisted of 120 men from the 79th New York Infantry, 75 men from the 29th Massachusetts Infantry, 80 men from the 20th Michigan Infantry, and 60 men from the 2nd Michigan Infantry. In addition, 40 men from the 2nd Michigan manned a firing step in front of the northwest bastion; when pressed, they were intended to retreat from this position and enter the fort at the southeast corner. More than twice as many men as the garrison were probably able to deliver fire on any attackers of Fort Sanders. Counting the artillery crews, there were about 440 men manning the fort.

Kingston
Longstreet was anxious about the line of communication between his forces and Bragg's army near Chattanooga. He believed that the Union garrison of Kingston might pose a threat. Colonel H. B. Lyon and 320 Confederate cavalrymen erroneously reported that there were only two Union cavalry regiments in Kingston. Based on Lyon's report, Longstreet authorized Wheeler to take most of his two divisions to Kingston and wipe out its garrison. Leaving behind five cavalry regiments to screen the sector from Jenkins' left flank to the river east of Knoxville, Wheeler began his march on the morning of November 23. Wheeler's horsemen arrived near Kingston early on November 24, worn out from the march and lack of food. They were opposed by Colonel Robert K. Byrd's forces which included Colonel Samuel R. Mott's Federal infantry brigade (White's division), four regiments strong, plus the 1st Tennessee Mounted Infantry and Captain Andrew M. Wood's Elgin Illinois Battery. In the Battle of Kingston, Wheeler's cavalry was unable to dislodge the strongly-posted Union garrison and withdrew at noon. Wheeler returned to Bragg's army and left Brigadier General William T. Martin in command of his cavalry corps. Martin and the cavalry soon rejoined Longstreet's forces.

On the night of November 23, Jenkins advanced his skirmish line to the railroad north of Knoxville. This action prompted the Union soldiers to set fire to the buildings near the railroad depot, where a quantity of old ammunition was stored. The resulting pyrotechnical display entertained the inhabitants of Knoxville. On the morning of November 24, Hartranft ordered his troops to push back the Confederates, which was successfully done at the cost of 22 Union casualties. At the same time, Ferrero ordered a sortie by the 2nd Michigan Infantry Regiment against a position from which Confederates were firing at Fort Sanders. The position was briefly taken, but the 2nd Michigan suffered heavy losses and was compelled to retreat.

Armstrong Hill
From early in the siege, the Confederates tried to find the most vulnerable point in Knoxville's defenses. Alexander believed that Fort Sanders was the weak spot and arranged his artillery to take the fort under crossfire. Meanwhile, Longstreet hoped to conduct operations on the south bank and on November 20 sent Bryan's brigade across the Tennessee River to Cherokee Heights. On November 22, Longstreet contemplated making an assault on Fort Sanders, but called it off. Instead, he sent the four 10-pounder Parrott rifles of William W. Parker's Virginia Battery across to Cherokee Heights. This would allow Fort Sanders to be shelled from the south, but only at the extreme range of 2,300 yd. On November 24, Longstreet replaced Bryan's brigade with the brigades of Brigadier Generals Evander M. Law and Jerome B. Robertson, both from Jenkins' division. Bragg also decided to send infantry reinforcements and his chief engineer, Brigadier General Danville Leadbetter to Knoxville, so Longstreet decided to put off any immediate plans to attack Fort Sanders.

Armstrong Hill was a wooded height that stood 400 ft above the Tennessee River. It was east of Cherokee Heights and west of the hill where Fort Higley would soon be built. On November 25, Longstreet ordered Law to use both brigades to make a reconnaissance-in-force. Opposing Law's and Robertson's Confederates were, from right to left, five companies of the 24th Kentucky, eight companies of the 65th Illinois, and seven companies of the 103rd Ohio Infantry Regiments. The 103rd Ohio had just moved into position, was taken by surprise, and driven back. However, it quickly rallied, drove off Law's skirmishers, and regained the top of the hill. After holding the hilltop for 90 minutes, Cameron decided to launch his own advance.

The 24th Kentucky and 65th Illinois advanced across the valley and gained a foothold in the woods at the base of Cherokee Heights, but the 103rd Ohio was held up by a log cabin that the Confederates used as a strongpoint. With help from the other two regiments, the Ohioans finally captured the log house. Later in the day, Wolford's cavalry joined the Union forces. The 24th Kentucky advanced partly up Cherokee Heights but was recalled by Cameron and all three infantry units re-established their original picket lines and withdrew to Armstrong Hill. Law reported 85 casualties and Robertson reported 31 casualties. Union losses were about 50 casualties. The outcome was remarkable because the Confederates were veterans, while Cameron's troops had limited combat experience. On November 27, Cameron's men were put to work building Fort Higley and entrenching the Sevierville Heights.

Fort Sanders
The Confederates planned to wreck the vital pontoon bridge that connected Knoxville with the south bank, but nothing came of this effort. Nevertheless, Poe stretched a cable across the river upstream to block any attempt to break the bridge. Meanwhile, the Federals continued to improve their defensive fortifications. Old telegraph wire was found and run between tree stumps in a narrow belt in front of Fort Sanders. The 2,625-strong division of Brigadier General Bushrod Johnson reached Longstreet on November 26–27. Johnson brought two brigades under Brigadier General Archibald Gracie III and Colonel John S. Fulton, but no artillery. Meanwhile, Leadbetter wanted to attack Mabry's Hill, but a reconnaissance on November 27 discovered that its Union defenses were far too strong to give any hope of success. Later that day, Longstreet watched through his binoculars as a Union soldier walked from Fort Sanders to his sentry post. It seemed to him that the ditch was only waist deep. What Longstreet could not have known was that the sentry used a plank to cross the deep ditch. Yet it convinced Longstreet that the ditch around the fort was insignificant.

Longstreet wanted to assault Fort Sanders at dawn on November 28, but the operation was rescheduled until 2:00 pm when a rainstorm struck the area. Then, McLaws convinced Longstreet to postpone the attack until the morning of November 29 so that his skirmish line could be advanced close to the fort. Meanwhile, the cavalry brigades of "Grumble" Jones and Giltner from Ransom's division arrived near Knoxville. These troops were sent to the north when it was discovered that Willcox's Union forces were advancing from Cumberland Gap. Rumors began circulating that Grant defeated Bragg near Chattanooga, but this made Longstreet more determined to attack. McLaws' assault on Fort Sanders was made in two side-by-side columns. The left column was made up of Ruff's brigade, while the right column was composed of units from both Humphreys' and Bryan's brigades. Gracie's and Fulton's brigades were positioned so that they could form a second wave of attack. At the same time, Brigadier General George T. Anderson's brigade from Jenkins' division was ordered to attack the Union trenches east of Fort Sanders. If the assault captured the fort, Law was supposed to attack the south bank defenses.

At 10:00 pm, McLaws advanced his skirmish lines to within 80 to 120 yd of Fort Sanders. The operation was successful, but it alerted the Federals that the fort was about to be assaulted. McLaws' two assault columns of about 2,400 men formed about 250 yd to the northwest of the fort. The infantry assault began at 6:20 am after a 20 minute artillery bombardment. The front ranks were knocked over when they reached the wire entanglement, but got up again and surged forward. When the Confederates reached the ditch, it was a rude surprise. The Union parapet loomed 18 ft above the bottom of the deep ditch. To reach the parapet, the attackers had to climb a slippery clay slope of about 70° while braving intense fire. During the attack, Union officers ordered their soldiers into the fort to assist the garrison. Benjamin lit the fuses of his battery's artillery shells and threw them into the ditch among the crowded Confederates. Union infantry also poured flanking fire into the ditch from the east. Anderson's attack was bungled; it was made in the wrong direction and sustained only 37 casualties.

The assault failed and cost the Confederates 129 killed, 458 wounded, and 226 missing, for a total of 813 casualties. Historian Earl J. Hess stated that Union casualties were only about 20 men inside the fort and 30 men outside. According to Jacob Dolson Cox, there were 43 Union casualties. Ruff was killed and so was his successor, Colonel Henry P. Thomas of the 16th Georgia Infantry. Colonel Kennon McElroy of the 13th Mississippi Infantry was also killed. Colonel Edward Ball of the 53rd Georgia Infantry, Lieutenant Colonel John Fiser of the 17th Mississippi Infantry, and Major Joseph Hamilton of Phillip's Georgia Legion were wounded. Perhaps 30 minutes after the assault failed, Longstreet received official news that Grant badly defeated Bragg at the Battle of Missionary Ridge on November 25, 1863. Burnside allowed a truce so that the Confederates could recover their dead and wounded. Some defenders belonging to the IX Corps regarded the battle as revenge for the Federal defeat at the Battle of Fredericksburg.

Relief
After the debacle at Fort Sanders, Longstreet decided to besiege Burnside for as long as possible. He believed this would force Grant to relieve Knoxville and hopefully divert some Union forces away from Bragg's beaten army. When the Union forces chasing Bragg's army were repulsed at the Battle of Ringgold Gap on November 27, Grant called off the pursuit. He assigned Major General William Tecumseh Sherman to command a large force designed to relieve Knoxville. Sherman was given command of Major General Gordon Granger's IV Corps, Major General Oliver Otis Howard's XI Corps, Major General Francis Preston Blair Jr.'s XV Corps, Brigadier General Jefferson C. Davis's division of XIV Corps, and Colonel Eli Long's cavalry brigade. Sherman soon started his troops marching toward Knoxville and they reached Charleston, Tennessee, on the Hiwassee River on November 30. Because the situation was considered urgent, Sherman's force marched without its artillery and wagon trains. Granger's corps included the divisions of Major General Philip Sheridan and Brigadier General Thomas J. Wood. Howard's corps consisted of the divisions of Major General Carl Schurz and Brigadier General Adolph von Steinwehr. Blair's corps comprised the divisions of Brigadier Generals Morgan Lewis Smith and Hugh Boyle Ewing. Sherman's infantry numbered approximately 30,000 men.

Grant arranged for a message announcing Sherman's approach to fall into Confederate hands. A second copy was sent via Byrd at Kingston and got through to Burnside. While Sherman's main column, consisting of Blair, Howard, and Davis crossed the Hiwassee at Charleston, Granger's troops crossed at Kincannon's Ford to the west. Since the railroad bridge at Charleston was wrecked and the Confederates destroyed all the rolling stock between there and Knoxville, Sherman's army was compelled to live off the country. On December 3, Howard reached Loudon to find the railroad bridge wrecked. Sherman shifted Granger's corps from his left to his right wing. Granger, Blair, and Davis crossed the swollen Little Tennessee River at Morganton via an improvised bridge, while Howard crossed at Davis' Ford to the west on a bridge built from wagons captured at Loudon. Long's cavalry brigade rode ahead and reached Knoxville before dawn on December 4.

Meanwhile, Willcox moved south and repulsed an attack by Martin's cavalry at the Battle of Walker's Ford on December 2. Though it was a Union tactical victory, Willcox's force was too weak to advance any farther. While Sherman's 30,000 advanced on the east bank of the Tennessee River, Brigadier General James G. Spears and three Tennessee Union regiments at Sale Creek advanced on the west bank. On December 3, Spears reached Kingston where he incorporated Byrd's and Mott's troops into his command. The Federals bumped into a Confederate cavalry brigade which soon retreated and joined Longstreet's command. Spears' brigade occupied Loudon while Mott's brigade continued moving toward Knoxville, reaching there on December 9.

After acquiring the message announcing Sherman's approach, Longstreet determined to retreat northeast toward Virginia. The mountainous route to join Bragg's army near Dalton, Georgia was regarded too difficult to travel. Longstreet refused Wheeler's request to return his cavalry corps to Bragg's army; he needed Martin's cavalry to form a rearguard. Law's and Robertson's brigades were moved to the north bank on December 3. That day, the Confederate wagon train started moving away from the city. On the evening of December 4, Longstreet's troops began to march away from Knoxville. Moody's battery of 24-pounder howitzers was the last artillery in action. It was a difficult march; it rained, and then the temperature dropped below freezing, cutting the feet of soldiers without shoes. By December 9, Longstreet's troops reached Rogersville. The Confederates left behind men who were too wounded or sick to march, and numbers of stragglers were also captured.

Aftermath
By the evening of December 5, Howard's troops reached Louisville (Tennessee), while the soldiers of Granger, Blair, and Davis arrived at Maryville. After receiving news that Longstreet's forces retreated, Sherman ordered only Granger's IV Corps to continue marching to Knoxville. Sherman, Granger, and Howard reached Knoxville on December 6 where they were treated to dinner at Burnside's headquarters. Sherman was annoyed because he had been led to believe that the garrison was starving. Satisfied that Knoxville was safely in Union hands, Sherman ordered Howard's XI Corps, Blair's XV Corps, and Davis' division to immediately march back to Chattanooga, which they reached December 16–18. Since the Federal forces remaining in East Tennessee needed cavalry reinforcements, Brigadier General Washington Lafayette Elliott's 2,500 cavalry and six guns were ordered to march from Alexandria, Tennessee. Elliott's force reached Kingston on December 11, bringing a wagon train with fresh clothing for Burnside's troops, who were still wearing their tattered summer uniforms.

Granger's divisions stayed in Knoxville to reinforce Burnside's forces; the IV Corps rejoined the Army of the Cumberland for the Atlanta campaign in spring 1864. The XXIII Corps also served in that campaign. Beginning on March 17–23, 1864, the IX Corps was transferred to Annapolis, Maryland, in the Eastern Theater and heavily reinforced. On December 7, Burnside organized a pursuit using soldiers from the IX and XXIII Corps led by Major General John Parke; this effort reached Rutledge and Bean's Station before halting. Major General John G. Foster replaced Burnside as commander of the Army of the Ohio on December 11, but he was injured by falling off his horse and relieved on February 9, 1864.

The Knoxville siege cost the Federals 92 killed, 394 wounded, and 207 missing, for a total of 693 casualties. See table below. The Confederates counted 198 killed, 850 wounded, and 248 missing, for a total of 1,296 casualties. McLaws' division lost 782, while Jenkins' division lost 514 men. The Confederate cavalry never made a casualty report. Longstreet still hoped to defeat the Union forces in the field and then compel them to abandon Knoxville. Finding that most of Sherman's troops had left the area, he planned to envelop Shackelford's cavalry at Bean's Station. The result was the indecisive Battle of Bean's Station on December 14.

Longstreet mounted more forays into the Union-held areas of East Tennessee. On December 29, 1863, the Battle of Mossy Creek was a cavalry fight. On January 17, 1864, the Battle of Dandridge resulted in the Federals pulling back toward Knoxville. Longstreet's forces advanced as far as Strawberry Plains by early February, but finally withdrew to winter quarters at Russellville. Longstreet's corps was recalled to fight in the Eastern Theater on April 11. Throughout the campaign, both sides suffered from lack of supplies. The Federals in East Tennessee were at the end of a long railroad supply line extending from Nashville south to Chattanooga and then northeast to Knoxville. However, the worst of Knoxville's supply problems were resolved by March 1. One Confederate veteran of the campaign recalled that, "all the boys used to say that all East Tennessee lacked of being hell was a roof over it".

Union losses
Click show to display table.

Confederate losses
Click show to display table.

title: Siege of Knoxville


text:
Rowena Morrill

Rowena A. Morrill (September 14, 1944 – February 11, 2021), also credited as Rowena and Rowina Morril, was an American artist known for her science-fiction and fantasy illustration, and is credited as one of the first female artists to impact paperback cover illustration. Her notable artist monographs included The Fantastic Art of Rowena, Imagine (in France), Imagination (in Germany), and The Art of Rowena and her work has also been included in a variety of anthologies including Tomorrow and Beyond and Infinite Worlds.

Career
Morrill was born September 14, 1944. From a family of musicians, Rowena initially studied music. She broke off those studies when as a teenager she married a soldier. At an Army wives' club she began classes in drawing.

Morrill received a BA from the University of Delaware in 1971 and then studied at the Tyler School of Arts in Philadelphia. After dropping out of the Tyler program, she worked for an advertising agency in New York City. She showed her portfolio to Charles Volpe at Ace Books, and was commissioned by Volpe to illustrate a romance cover. Morrill's first design for a horror novel was Jane Parkhurst's Isobel (1977).

Morrill continued to work in horror, producing cover art for H. P. Lovecraft collections before turning her attention to science fiction and fantasy. To create these illustrations, Morrill used oil on illustration board, coating the image with a high-gloss glaze and thin coats of paint.

Morrill created a number covers for books by such authors as Anne McCaffrey, Philip K. Dick, Isaac Asimov, Samuel R. Delany, Theodore Sturgeon, Piers Anthony and Madeleine L'Engle. As well, her paintings have appeared on hundreds of calendars, portfolios and in magazines such as Playboy, Heavy Metal, Omni, Art Scene International, and Print Magazine.

She was nominated for the Hugo Award four times in the Best Artist category. In 1983, her book The Fantastic Art of Rowena was nominated for the Hugo Award for Best Nonfiction Book, and the Locus Award for Nonfiction/Reference. In 1984, she received the British Fantasy Award. She was named Artist Guest of Honor for Chicon 7, the 70th World Science Fiction Convention, held in 2012. She was named Guest of Honor at the 2017 World Fantasy Convention held in San Antonio, TX. She received a World Fantasy Life Achievement Award at the 2020 convention.

Following the fall of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, art which appeared to be Morrill's original paintings King Dragon and Shadows Out of Hell were discovered hanging in one of his houses. According to Morrill, they were copies, as she had sold the originals to a Japanese collector.

Morrill died in February 2021, at the age of 76, after a long illness.

The posthumous Paintings and Drawings of Rowena by Kim DeMulder was financed via a Kickstarter campaign, and has been nominated for a Locus Award for Best Illustrated and Art Book for 2023.

Plagiarism of Morrill's work
In 2003, a Flash animation slideshow titled "Family Art Corner" was released anonymously, alleging that a woman named Jan "Tamar" McRae had plagiarized the work of many artists, including Morrill, for reproduction in proselytization tracts printed by the Children of God cult. After the slideshow was released, both McRae and Karen Zerby, leader of the Children of God, acknowledged that McRae had copied the work of others, and McRae admitted wrongdoing.

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

title: Rowena Morrill


text:
Talk:Rowena Morrill

Biography assessment rating comment
WikiProject Biography Assessment

The article may be improved by following the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. -- Yamara 19:43, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Discussion
This is the intial entry for Rowena Morrill. It is taken from the biography on her web-site Wjbean 14:19, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
 * Well it seems the content had only been copied and pasted from the Rowena's Bio page. Did the artist give her approval ? Either way the article lacks a Sources section. --Goa103 22:04, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

one of the first female... etc.
Not to begrudge Rowena any credit, but the trail-blazing female sci fi / fantasy cover artist (with whose work Rowena's shares many similarities) was Margaret Brundage. Yeah, they said "one of" so technically it's OK, but it's weak sauce. 2A01:CB0C:CD:D800:D402:C7D:C36F:E0B4 (talk) 11:31, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rowena Morrill


text:
De Havilland Goblin

The de Havilland Goblin, originally designated as the Halford H-1, is an early turbojet engine designed by Frank Halford and built by de Havilland. The Goblin was the second British jet engine to fly, after Whittle's Power Jets W.1, and the first to pass a type test and receive a type certificate issued for an aircraft propulsion turbine.

Although it was conceived in 1941 it remained unchanged in basic form for 13 years by which time it had evolved to the Mk. 35 export version.

The Goblin was the primary engine of the de Havilland Vampire, and was to have been the engine for the F-80 Shooting Star (as the Allis-Chalmers J36) before that design switched engines due to production delays at Allis-Chalmers. The Goblin also powered the Saab 21R fighter, Fiat G.80 trainer and the de Havilland DH 108 "Swallow" experimental aircraft. The Goblin was later scaled up as the larger de Havilland Ghost, with the model numbers continuing from the last marks of the Goblin.

Design and development

Design of the engine was carried out by Frank Halford at his London consulting firm starting in April 1941. It was based on the overall design pattern pioneered by Frank Whittle, using a centrifugal compressor providing compressed air to sixteen individual combustion chambers, from which the exhaust powered a single-stage axial turbine.

Compared to Whittle designs, the H-1 was cleaned up in that it used a single-sided compressor with the inlet at the front, and a straight-through layout with the combustion chambers exhausting straight onto the turbine. Whittle's designs such as the Power Jets W.2 used a reverse-flow layout that piped the hot air back to the middle of the engine, in order to "fold" it and reduce its length. The straight-through design simplified the engine, at the expense of being slightly longer and requiring a longer power shaft between the turbine and compressor. Although it eliminated the Whittle-style "folding", the Goblin was still a compact design.

The H-1 first ran on 13 April 1942 and quickly matured to produce its full design thrust within two months. It first flew on 5 March 1943 in the Gloster Meteor, and on 26 September in the de Havilland Vampire. It was around this time that de Havilland purchased Halford's company and set him up as the chairman of the de Havilland Engine Company, with the engine name changing from H-1 to "Goblin", while the new H-2 design became the "Ghost" – de Havilland jet and rocket engines were all named after spectral apparitions.

In July 1943, one of the two H-1s then available (actually the spare engine intended as a backup for the one installed in the Vampire prototype) was sent to the United States, where it was selected to become the primary engine of the Lockheed P-80 Shooting Star. This engine was fitted to the prototype P-80, which first flew on 9 January 1944. The engine was later accidentally destroyed in ground testing, and was replaced by the only remaining H-1 from the prototype Vampire. Allis-Chalmers was selected to produce the engine in the US as the J36, but ran into lengthy delays. Instead, the Allison J33, developed by General Electric as the I-40 (their greatly improved 4000 lbf version of the J31, itself based on Whittle's W.1), was selected for the production P-80A.

Variants

 * H.1/Goblin I
 * Developed about 2,300 lbf (10.2 kN) thrust (nominal thrust for prototype) and 2,700 lbf (12.0 kN) for production models.

 * Goblin II (DGn.2)
 * 3,100 lbf (13.8 kN)

 * Goblin 3 (DGn.3)
 * 3,350 lbf (14.9 kN)

 * Goblin 35
 * 3,500 lbf (15.6 kN)

 * Goblin 4 (DGn.4)
 * 3,750 lbf (16.7 kN)

 * Allis-Chalmers J36
 * Licence production in the United States by Allis-Chalmers.

 * Svenska Flygmotor RM1:Goblin II production in Sweden
 * Svenska Flygmotor RM1A:Goblin III production in Sweden

Aircraft applications

 * Curtiss XF15C-1
 * de Havilland DH 108 Swallow
 * de Havilland Vampire
 * Fiat G.80
 * Gloster Meteor
 * Lockheed XP-80 Shooting Star
 * Saab 21R

Alternative applications

 * Bluebird K4

Engines on display
Goblin engines are preserved and on display at several museums including:
 * Brooklands Museum
 * South Yorkshire Aircraft Museum
 * Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum
 * de Havilland Aircraft Museum
 * Midland Air Museum
 * Royal Air Force Museum Cosford
 * Shuttleworth Collection
 * Vintage Flying Museum
 * Queensland Air Museum, Caloundra, Australia
 * A part-sectioned engine is on display at Historical Aircraft Restoration Society at Albion Park, New South Wales, Australia
 * Technical University of Madrid
 * University of Hertfordshire - College Lane Campus

Survivors
As of June 2011, two Goblin-powered de Havilland Vampires remain airworthy on the British register.

As of December 2014, three Goblin-powered de Havilland Vampires remain airworthy in North America. N115DH is owned by the World Heritage Air Museum., C-FJRH is operated under the Jet Aircraft Museum in Ontario, Canada. and N593RH is owned by Vampire Aviation LLC.

As of November 2015, three Goblin-powered de Havilland Vampires remain airworthy in South Africa. Serial number 276 and 277 are in the SA Air Force Museum and the third is at Wonderboom Airport.

title: De Havilland Goblin


text: Category:Education in Derbyshire

title: Category:Education in Derbyshire


text:
Talk:Mitsubishi Lancer

Series III Seventh Gen. Coupe (Australia)
I just bought a June 2001 Lancer Coupe and contrary to the details here, it certainly has a 1.8L engine (model 4G93). According to the papers this is the original factory engine that came with the car so I've updated the details on this page assuming that they were wrong. The only other possibility is that the car is in fact a Series IV meaning that the page needs to be updated to show that Series IV came out in 2001 and not 2002. Does anyone know how I can find out what series my Lancer is so I can resolve this with 100% certainty? --220.233.20.172 09:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC) Me

Re: v6
The Mitsubishi Lancer never came out with a V6 variant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.26.122.218 (talk • contribs) 15:20, April 21, 2005

 * Yes, the Lancer did come out with a v6 variant, but only in selected markets. I would be surprised to see a v6 Lancer that wasn't directly imported from Japan.
 * 1994 Lancer MX V6 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.127.217 (talk • contribs) 01:18, April 30, 2006

Yes there are incorrect referance, most 1992-2000 Mitsubishi Lancer GSR , had a 6A10 (1.6)or 6A11 (1.8) V6 option. And not a 4G93 turbo. The 4G93T was a variant on the Evolution GSR models in 1991-1992 Kongkit (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)KongkitKongkit (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Weirdness in Europe
This article mentions how the Lancer wasn't sold in some parts of Europe around the late 90's until the new model was released, due to similarities with the Dutch-built -

Ralliart
IIRC, when the Mirage was replaced by the Lancer in 2002, in the US, there was a ralliart edition available. The article says that was introduced in 2004. My lancer is a 2003 and I know there was a ralliart edition then.

Re: Ralliart
To the poster above, the Ralliart trim package for the Lancer was not available until 2004. It's possible you're confusing it with the OZ-Rally package, which has been available since one year after the car's release. The OZ-Rally package is an appearance only package, including ground effects, 15" OZ-Rally branded wheels, and the same spoiler on the RA. The drivetrain and suspension are the same however.

Why cleanup?
Anyone know why this is tagged for cleanup? Bok269 01:07, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Donno, but it looks like its been done (PAuLw1985 08:04, 10 December 2006 (UTC))

Driving Experience
Lancers became quite different cars over time. From being 'A four-wheeled bomb' it evolved into a gentle 'Family-car'

I owned a first-generation Lancer from 1975 till 1981. The car was incredible fun to drive - but nearly killed me on several occasions. It had quite a reputation too !

True: In the hands of an expert it performed magnificently and won many international rally's. But driven by an ordinary driver (Like me) who liked the experience of it's power it was straightout dangerous.

Actually the Japanese had meant the car to have both looks and feel of British sports-cars of the late '60's (Like the M.G. B or Triumph Spitfire) Only: It performed even better but had worse road-sticking capabillities! With an extremely agile engine (Double-bodied carburettor) of over 85 BHP and the car 'grossing' at only 830 Kg it had impressive acceleration and respectable top-speed. But it didn't need wings to take it in the air!

It was unbelievably 'Light to drive' too, responding vigorously to the slightest touch of pedals or wheel. (Though steering was purely mechanical, not assisted). But a small bump in the road or somewhat careless 'touching' of the brakes could send it carreering into any direction.

NOW: Should I ad something along these lines in the main article or is this beyond the scope of an encyclopedia?

PLEASE COMMENT 81.246.147.165 20:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

lancer glxi
how long does this engine runs, anybody know's?i have 1.6l lancer 1994...and i dont have big problems yet... could anyone tell me more about this engine : 1.6l fuel, ECI-Multi, 1994.. any experience?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 213.94.236.66 (talk) 15:08, 10 February 2007 (UTC).

I (And members of my family) had many Mitsubishi-cars going through our hands; Some 'Clocked' over 300.000 Km. Never had engine problems (Except once: see hereafter) You just can't bust those things.

When I was in the military (Drafted) in '82 I used to drive my Celest 1600 from Epinal France (Where I was in service) to Grimbergen (Near Brusseld, Belgium)Airfield (Where my Heart was), a distance of 450 km PEDAL TO THE MAT ALL THE WAY (Yes, I was wild then); Twice a week. All that happened was that the last 50 Km. or so the red oil-pressure warning light came on; A friend, mechanic, told me that this was normal after a few hours of top-speed (180 Km/h) driving; So I never cared about that. Had to discard the car many years later (With 300.000 KM on the clock)when, due to excessive rust, it didn't pass the M.O.T. any more. My father though once had to discard a 'Galant' 1600 when the 'Bourrages' (French word)leaked engine-oil. Since the car had served him from '82 till '97 he didn't deem it worthy of repair any more. I do not know the English word for 'bourrage' but it's a kind of (leather) gasket that's placed where the cranckshaft leaves the engine.

Conclusion: Don't worry about Mitsubishi engines: They just never wear out! 81.246.128.31 18:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Changes
Hi guys, I've fixed the generations to put it into line with the information contained on the Lancer history site from Mitsubishi. Most reviews/sources I read refer to the current generation Lancer (2000-07) as the eighth, so I believe that this is correct and in line with the Lancer history site. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geekygeek07 (talk • contribs) 03:39, 18 April 2007 (UTC).

Second Generation
The Mitsubishi Lancer SL is the box-type car well known in the Philippines since the 1980's. There are some models in the Philippines such as the 1800 engine GSR using the same box-type body model SL with 4 wheel disc brakes. The Lancer model SL is a rear wheel drive with 4 speed manual transmission.

User:Awatanabe

Any chance this is the same model as the Lancer EX? Without more info, I'm inclined to believe we're thinking about the same model. --Neil Santos 14:32, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Fourth generation
I have a 1983 Lancer with a 1.4 engine (at least, that's what it says on the paperwork). Also, the picture in the fourth generation infobox doesn't look like my car; mine looks like a four-door second generation Mirage.

Also, on this page http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2388434 the owner says his 1983 Lancer is an FR, not an FF as stated in the infobox. I'm getting confused. :P

I'll see what I can dig up and correct the mistakes, if any. (Neil 07:03, 25 May 2007 (UTC))

Got it. Mine's an EX. :P Neil 20:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Electric
I've found references to an electric version in Japan called the Libero EV. As yet i don't know much about it, but if someone digs deeper they might figure out howto integrate it into this wiki article. - Roidroid 14:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, was able to dig enough to find out where to slip it in. - Roidroid 15:12, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Second Generation Picture
The picture under the title is not a Second Generation Lancer, its a Celeste which has a mention earlier in the article under the first Generation title. I would change but have no idea how to 203.152.121.2 08:10, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Ninth Generation
I've just tidied up some of the spelling and grammar in this section - more could be done, but I'm not a real car expert, and don't want to make a big mess.

I actually came on to see if there were pictures of the newly released 'Australian' Lancer, because I can't get onto the official site (funny, that ;) ). I'm about 90% sure it was officially released today (11 Oct 07) at the Australian International Motor Show in Sydney. Can someone verify this? CrackedChelle 07:15, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I just think the 9th generation needs to be fixed up completely being more descriptive rather than a selling point. Especially with the quoted prices, that's typically not used in articles. Instead it should show what the common ground for all models are and then state the differences country to country. Possibly with all the release dates into one section on it's own if it's even necessary. Hydroshock 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Lancer ex in the Philippines
Article states that Lancer EX in the Philippines had 1.8l engine and 1.6l turbo engine. Mitsubishi didn't release the 1.8liter and 1.6l turbo engine in the Philippines. The top spec engine was the 1.6l Saturn engine with silent shafts in the GSR and GT both with 5 speed transmission. The GSR had 4 wheel disc brakes and GT had additional Front airdam and Rear spoiler.

The lower spec SL was equipped with a 1.4l 4g33 engine with no silent shafts and was equipped with a 4 speed transmission and had disk brakes for the front and drum for the rear.

I have several pictures of old brochures if proof is needed.

This may be digressing but, we acquired a Lancer EX turbo front and rear suspension and differential and they are markedly different (larger) from the standard Philippine spec Lancer EX GT suspension (different suspension arms, differential roll bars etc.)

The rear disc brakes on the GSR and GT were unventilated vs the ventilated rear disc brakes for the Japan spec lancer ex turbo.

Lancer Generations
This article is wrong about naming the Lancer's generation. From the 1st to the 6th is correct but at the 7th is wrong, the 7th here is the 8th edition. So it goes for the 8th generation here, in terms of edition, it should be considered as the Lancer 10th Generation, because there was a Evo IX car but the road family sedan I haven't seen anywhere or published.

So the correct order for the images should be (starting from the 7th generation):

- Missing the true 7th generation - Lancer 8th generation (in here as the 7th) - Lancer 9th generation (only know about the Evo IX) - Lancer 10th generation (in here as the 8th, because the previoulsy antecipated names for the Evo version of this car was Evo X and known in his official website when it was still a prototype, as the Prototype X. The numbering will be dropped down and the Evo edition will be called only Mitsubishi Lancer Evo)

About the irish lad doubt, your correct, Lancer was sold in Europe since from the 3rd or 4th generation at least (It's the older generations I've seen in my country, Portugal) and was sold at the same time as the Mitsubishi Carisma. Carisma never was a replacement model for Lancer, although the Lancers here have the small engine option, the GLX version, I suppose it is a 1.3 4-cylinder engine.

Carisma and Lancer are two separate models. Carisma I think it's more a family sedan and Lancer is more business man sedan at that time, now it does the both as a family car sedan and station wagon and business man car. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.103.98.138 (talk) 13:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

generations
You say that you kept your sources in line with the official history, yet that page stops at year 2000 and the copyright date is for 2001. You're at least missing one generation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.16.246.108 (talk) 12:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Lancer in the Philippines
It states in your article that the 5th generation Lancer GLXi that was sold in the Philippines had a 1.6L Cyclone ECI-MULTI "DOHC" engine. I did my research and that particular engine (internal code "4g92") only has "SOHC" so i'm a bit confused. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.55.165.83 (talk) 06:12, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Edit warring over Edmunds.com review of Ralliart
I've had a look at both reviews cited, and I have to say that both reviews seem to lay the blame for the model's performance on the tyres. The first review (as added by JCDenton) says "the first thing you must do is put your narrow, heavy 18-by-7-inch GTS wheels and 215/45R18 Yokohama Advan A10 summer tires on eBay so you can offset the cost of buying a new set of rolling stock all around." The second review (cited by Mitzinriyadh) says "Handling Comments: the car's limits are determined by low-grip tires." and "Braking Comments: Unimpressive stopping distances (likely due to unimpressive tires)."

The version by JCDenton strongly implies that the fault of the handling is somehow due to the AWD configuration. I suspect this is the reason Mitzinriyadh (and anon IP 58.182.75.24) have been reverting or adding material, and I tend to agree with their perspective. I'm going to go with Mitzinriyadh's version, which cites both reviews. Hopefully this'll be the end of the edit war. If it isn't... well, I note that both participants in today's back-and-forth can be blocked for violating WP:3RR. Hopefully it won't come to that. Regards, --DeLarge (talk) 23:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I encourage you to carefully read Edmund's review of the Lancer GTS and of the Lancer Ralliart . The Lancer GTS had 215/45R18 all-season tires. The Lancer Ralliart had 215/45R18 summer tires. If anything, the Ralliart had better tires than the GTS, so that cannot explain the discrepancy. Yes, the Lancer Evo X has better tires than either, but the article compares the GTS and the Ralliart, so that doesn't matter. I mentioned AWD and FWD because it's shocking that a FWD car handles better than a similar AWD car. Clearly Mitsubishi screwed up somewhere.

 * I won't make any further reverts, but I'll request a third opinion. JCDenton2052 (talk) 23:36, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I think further opinions would be useful (although I personally felt that I was the third opinion, or even the fourth). Posting Third opinion here, or posting to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles might be your best bet for a quick response. --DeLarge (talk) 23:48, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

 * Did you read the reviews yet? You haven't shown from where you get your claim that the Ralliart has worse tires than the GTS. JCDenton2052 (talk) 23:51, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I read the reviews before I made any edits to the article; I quoted both cited pages in my first post above. The only claim I made was that our paragraph implied the Ralliart's AWD drivetrain was the cause of its performance in the test, while the review was pointing the finger at the tyres. We were therefore not representing the cited source accurately. I'm sure you'd object (as would I) to something like "the turbocharged Ralliart model underperforms the naturally-aspirated GTS", because that'd imply the engine's induction had something to do with it. Why it's the tyres is not something the review analyses, and it'd be original research for me or anyone else to fill in the blanks.

I'd be amenable to editing the last sentence to read "According to Edmunds.com the Ralliart model underperformed the GTS in certain tests.[10][11]" (bold text for compromise wording added retrospectively). That way we're no longer indulging in any OR about the cause of the test results; we're merely reproducing them. --DeLarge (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

 * The review says that the Ralliart has worse tires than the Evo, not worse tires than the GTS. It is original research to claim that the GTS has better tires that the Ralliart. JCDenton2052 (talk) 00:38, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't recall anyone saying the GTS has "better tires than the Ralliart". The problem was that our article implicitly attributed problem specifically to the drivetrain, something not supported by the review. Now, I've suggested the compromise wording above (which I've now put in bold text), which cuts out all speculation, I've also solicited opinions at WP:CARS. --DeLarge (talk) 08:30, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I did not implicitly or explicitly attribute the problem to the drivetrain. User:Mitzinriyadh did argue that the GTS had better tires than the Ralliart. I suggest this compromise: According to Edmunds.com the Ralliart model underperformed the GTS in certain tests, including on the skid pad, on the slalom, and in braking distance. However, the Ralliart outperformed the GTS in other tests, including 0-60 and the 1/4 mile.  JCDenton2052 (talk) 14:20, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

More detailed than I'd care for, but it addresses the issue so I'll add it. --DeLarge (talk) 07:56, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Third opinion: I just saw that there's an open request for a 3O here. Has it been resolved, or do you still need one? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:07, 24 July 2008 (UTC)

Mileage
Hi,

I bought a 2005 lancer recently and my concern is with mileage, is there anything can be done to get decent milage since I travel about 40-50Km a day and I find it difficult to manage with almost 5 liters of fuel/day, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.0.1 (talk) 12:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Related
How are the Dodge Caliber, Jeep Compass, Mitsubishi Outlander and the Jeep Patriot related to this car? Those vehicles are crossover SUVs, this is a family car. --neolandes (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

These vehicles all use the same platform Mitsubishi GS platform and to some extent the same Global Engine Manufacturing Alliance engines. In Europe they all use the same VW sourced Diesel Engine. Pilskadden (talk) 18:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)

==What is the latest Lancer called in Hong Kong? If "Lancer EX" then it's worth a mention, while "Lancer 2.0" sounds more like just the name of the engine.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 02:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Merge Mitsubishi Lancer 1600 GSR
I have proposed merging the contents from Mitsubishi Lancer 1600 GSR onto this page. Or maybe there should just be a stub left here on the main Lancer page for the 1st generation Lancer, with a new more expansive page for the Mitsubishi Lancer/Celeste A70/A140? Any opinions?  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃  (talk) 17:56, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

 * Go for it, please. Also, I believe the Lancer Fiore information should be moved to Mitsubishi Mirage. It has been shoved in this article quite awkwardly to the point where we now have nine generations when there are really only eight. OSX (talk • contributions) 14:16, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Merged 1600 GSR. I also disambiguated the LA/LB/LC Lancer history, moving the Liftback/Hatchback stuff into the Celeste section. The Lancer Fiore is an awkward fit precisely because it was an awkward car... should it be considered generation 2B? Most of the stuff there would definitely fit best on the Mirage page.

 * Question: Is the first gen stuff enough for its own page? It seems rather long to me.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 18:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 * The first generation section is too long now with the GSR information; make a separate Mitsubishi Lancer (A70) article for it. I would move the Lancer Fiore information to the Mirage article and create a subsection for the Fiore under the "Lancer EX" section of the Lancer page. This would contain a brief paragraph or two and a hatnote redirecting readers to the Mirage article.

 * You made a mistake with the Australian model series (LA sedan did not continue when the Celeste versions were introduced. I am not 100 percent sure if the Australian models were called "Valiant Lancer" for the entire run or just part of it (1981 Mitsubishi versions excluded the "Valiant" name). Also, many sources for the Chrysler versions exclude the "Valiant" part as well (reinforced by the lack of "Valiant" badging on the vehicles themselves).
 * LA: 2- and 4-door sedan (1974–1977).
 * LB: 3-door liftback and 4-door sedan (1977–1979).
 * LC: 3-door liftback (1979–1981). Rebranded "Mitsubishi Lancer" in 1981. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:56, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Yeah, the "Valiant" part should be minimized or removed. I am aware of the LB sedan and tried to clarify that but apparently I left in a fragment of an old edit. I would even divide the Aussie Lancer lineup as follows to make things even clearer:
 * LA Sedan: Lancer (1974-1977) 2- and 4-door sedan.
 * LB Sedan: Lancer (1977-1979) 4-door sedan.
 * LB Hatch: Celeste (1977–1979) 3-door liftback.
 * LC Hatch: Celeste (1979–1981) (3-door liftback).

 * As for all the headers, I used a limited table of contents, so the crazy TOC is only visible when editing the First Generation article separately.
 * By the way, wikipedia needs a picture of a Mazda Persona. Keep your eyes peeled! Best,  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Question: would a better title be Mitsubishi Lancer (A70)? The Celeste is still a Lancer ("Lancer Celeste") so why is it necessary to include "Celeste" in the title? Articles tend to use the original/most common name and make use of the "aka" infobox field for the versions sold under different names. See: Article titles. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:13, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

 * I guess that I saw the Celeste as enough of a separate car to be at least deserving of mention in the title - in spite of sharing chassis codes it wasn't really considered the "same" car as the sedan anywhere outside of Oz. I also didn't want those who were looking for the Celeste to get redirected to a seemingly Lancer-only page and then get confused. I had been considering making a separate Mitsubishi Lancer Celeste page, maybe that would have been the best? I think I just left them combined because that's the way they were. Anyhow, since this page will mainly come up as a link from the main Lancer page or other redirects I hope the name isn't all that important.

 * If we were following naming order, then there should probably be a separate Mitsubishi Lancer Celeste page with a subsection for Plymouth Arrow - as it is, because of a certain amount of Americentrism, we have a huge article on a badge-engineering job (Plymouth Arrow) and only a subsection on another page for the actual car it was based on... kinda weird. I fully support such a move (which would leave us with a Mitsubishi Lancer A70 page, I think sans parenthesis is best?) and a Mitsubishi Lancer Celeste page which would include the Plymouth Arrow bits. But I'm not looking forward to battling the Plymouth fans.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

 * I have merged the Plymouth Arrow information to the A70 article (for now). How different is the Celeste from the sedan? Is it just a different body style and slightly revised front-end styling, or does it go further? The fact that both cars share the same model code suggests the former, but I can't really make a valid comment as I do not understand how Mitsubishi modes codes are assigned.

 * Parentheses in titles is the de facto standard, first started with articles disambiguated by generation (i.e. Ford Taurus (first generation), not "First generation Ford Taurus" or "Ford Taurus first generation"). As the car was called "Mitsubishi Lancer" and not "Mitsubishi Lancer A70", the "A70" part could cause confusion when readers interpret this as part of the actual name. "A70" is merely added to disambiguate this article from other Lancer pages. OSX (talk • contributions) 02:57, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Fine with the parentheses, I was just thinking out loud. As for the Celeste, the entire body and most of the interior was different, and it carried a more or less different name in nearly all markets. It also followed a different path of development, with different dates, upgrades, engines. For an equivalent example see the Mitsubishi Galant GTO and first generation Colt Galant - they, too, share a chassis number (A50-series), underpinnings, and part of a name: and are considered worthy of separate articles. In all other texts available to me (Car Graphic, Auto Katalog, l'Automobile) the Lancer and Celeste are also treated as separate creatures. I feel that there are enough differences (and, importantly, enough material) to make these into two separate articles. Another analogous situation: Opel Ascona B and Opel Manta B (both were even labelled Vauxhall Cavaliers in the UK for a while). Good work adding the Plymouth Arrow business, I haven't checked if you removed all the duplicate material yet but there should be a lot of pruning to be done.

 * And then it will be time to make a Mitsubishi Lancer EX page... Best best,  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 04:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Alright then, Mitsubishi Lancer (A70) and Mitsubishi Lancer Celeste (is this what it was called in Japan?).

 * With regards to the EX, I see a problem emerging: once sub-articles are created for each generation, the naming will be very schizophrenic. First generation models will be A70, EX (no parentheses) will denote generation two, with CY or CZ denoting the current release. Toyotas tend to follow a much "neater" standard, i.e. XV10, XV20, XV30, XV40 for the last four generations of Camry sold in international markets. So, unless a uniform format exists, maybe it would be better to title the articles "Mitsubishi Lancer (first generation)", et cetera. Just a thought anyway. OSX (talk • contributions) 09:11, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

 * While Mitsubishi does not make it easy, I think that in this case being correct will be nice. I think that these subpages will mainly be accessed through the main article in any case (making the title less important), and as long as the proper links are provided in the articles I think things will be fine. And also, counting generations isn't always so clear cut (viz the Lancer Fiore, aka "fourth generation")... Yep, those page names are nice.  ⊂ Mr.choppers ⊃   (talk) 13:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Below is the "Australian Mitsubishi disambiguation chart" as requested at Talk:Mitsubishi Colt.

If we are to maintain the model code format, to achieve some level of consistency, I propose the following:
 * First generation: "Mitsubishi Lancer (A70)"
 * Second generation: "Mitsubishi Lancer (A170)" (rather than "Mitsubishi Lancer EX"). Lancer Fiore (A150) information to be merged into Mitsubishi Mirage.
 * Third generation: "Mitsubishi Lancer (C10)"

By the time you get to the fifth generation (CA/CB/CC/CD/CE) series (and all future models), it becomes much more complicated. Do we title the article: "Mitsubishi Lancer (CA/CB/CC/CD/CE)" or simplify it to "Mitsubishi Lancer (CA)"? Hence it becomes easier to go by generation.

As is shown in the above disambiguation chart, "CA" can refer to two models: the fourth generation "C50 (C60/70/80)" in Australia and also the fifth generation "CA/CB/CC/CD/CE" in other markets. Sixth generation cars were called "CE" in Australia, but in Japan "CE" refers to a variant of the fifth generation. Likewise for the current eighth generation CY/CZ series, called "CJ" in Australia ("CJ" also refers to one variant of the Japanese sixth generation model).

While I understand (and appreciate) your concern to maintain accuracy, but at what expense? Is there any point in having an article structure that is only understood by you and me? The overlap that exists regarding model codes in Japan and Australia will mean an awkward and excessive use of hatnotes making for an unmanageable mess. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Excellent chart! With the inclusion of the first gen Lancer and Celestes, I think this should really be used somewhere for everyone's benefit, instead of languishing at the bottom of this very long discussion.

 * And yes, (while it irks me to give you Aussies special treatment) I reckon that from the fourth generation on any separate articles would be best named by their generations. And I agree on treating the A150 Lancer Fiore as a minor sidetrack, dealt with on the Mitsubishi Mirage page. The third/C10 was actually marketed as Lancer Fiore in Japan, but I'm happy to ignore that since it was just plain "Lancer" in all export markets that I know of. I am very happy that the Australian Mitsubishi importers chose to use letter codes already in use for other cars... couldn't they have at least stuck to the L series? I guess the occasional hatnote will still be necessary here and there.

 * My only question is: Why Lancer (A170) rather than Lancer EX? I'm fine either way, just want to know your reasoning.  ⊂| Mr.choppers |⊃   (talk) 18:12, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Mirage merge?
Why on earth have the 1988-2000 cars been put in the Mirage section? I know they're related, but so is the Ford Escort and Orion, for example! This is stupid and should be undone in my opinion. Lukeno94 (talk) 08:38, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

 * It's more than related—its a rebadge. It is silly to have two articles mentioning the same car. In Japan (home market) and North America the Mirage name was the main model. In Europe and other regions, Mitsubishi utilised the "Lancer" name for what was called Mirage back in Japan. In Japan, the first and second generation Mirage sedans were badged "Lancer Fiore" (in addition to the Mirage sedan) due to the presence of the 1979 to 1987 model under the name "Lancer". After this, only the five-door liftback (1987 to 1991) was unique to the Lancer badge in Japan—the sedans also sold under this name were retailed as both Mirage and Lancer. I just cannot see the point of having repeating articles considering the immense level of blurring that has occurred with the Mirage, Colt, and Lancer over this period. OSX (talk • contributions) 09:35, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Perhaps, but now the Mirage article looks incredibly bloated and far too big. It was much better as it was before, as the Mirage sedan was almost always badged as a Lancer. And I reiterate my point - the Ford Escort and Orion articles, for example, are separated, so why shouldn't this be? Lukeno94 (talk) 09:57, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Mirage is less bloated than the Lancer page was; it is within acceptable article size parameters. Both articles are much neater now than prior to the merge as I spent considerable time fixing up many of the issues. It is not efficient to have separate articles because different names were used on different cars in a convoluted naming situation. This isn't just a case where coupes were only badged under one name—but one where the Mirage coupe (Japanese name) was both Mirage and Lancer for export. So we had two articles about the same coupe. The same applies for most other variants of the Mirage/Lancer line—three-door hatchbacks were almost always Mirage but on for at least one occasions the name Lancer was used as well. The Lancer sedan was badged Mirage in the USA and as both Mirage and Lancer in Japan.

 * The Ford example is not a precedent; I could ask the same question: the Mirage and Lancer articles, for example, are combined, so why shouldn't the Ford Escort and Orion be? I wouldn't exactly call those Ford pages the darling of Wikipedia's automotive coverage so their suitability as some sort of paradigm should not be perpetuated. OSX (talk • contributions) 12:54, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I'd be happy to merge the Orion and Escort (and Belmont and Astra...) but don't particularly feel like having the argument. As a Mitsubishi fan, and as someone who always thinks of these cars as Colt/Lancer first (grew up in Europe), it was a bit hard for me to accept the merger at first but I am totally behind it now - it also allows me to make this a much better source of information, editing was rather daunting before with info spread over so many articles.  Mr.choppers |   ✎  17:35, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I wasn't using the Orion/Escort as a precedent; merely a comparison. If the Mirage/Lancer must be merged in this way, then there are a lot of other articles that need to be merged as well (Escort/Orion, Belmont/Astra, maybe even Renault 3/4, for example). Just wondering - did you consult anyone before you made this change? Lukeno94 (talk) 08:10, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

 * I believe those pages (although I'm not familiar with the Renaults, so I won't comment) should also be merged. However, things can only get done step-by-step. The Lancer page was tagged for a couple of weeks linking to a discussion taking place at Talk:Mitsubishi Colt. Only Mr.choppers responded there. OSX (talk • contributions) 14:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Lancer in compact class
The fifth generation Lancer is the first Lancer and the only Mirage-based Lancer to compete in the compact car segment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 140.0.66.24 (talk) 05:39, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Second Generation - Japan
Hi, was the Mitsubishi Lancer launched in Japan in 1978 (see link) or 1979 (as according to the article)? ---North wiki (talk) 18:32, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mitsubishi Lancer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929032929/http://www.allnewlancer.ca/EN/LancerPreLaunch.pdf to http://www.allnewlancer.ca/EN/LancerPreLaunch.pdf
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com.ve/Productos/Actuales/Lancer/Lancer-GLX-1-6-M-T-%28GNV%29.aspx
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.autonet.com.tw/cgi-bin/view.cgi?%2Fnews%2F2007%2F8%2Fa7081266.ti%20a2%20a3%20a4%20a5%20b1%20%2Fnews%2F2007%2F8%2Fa7081266%20b3%20d6%20c1%20c2%20c3%20e1%20e2%20e3%20e5%20f1

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:31, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mitsubishi Lancer. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120614094326/http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0109.pdf to http://www.mitsubishi-motors.com/corporate/ir/share/pdf/e/fact0109.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101012164947/http://www.autoweb.com.au/cms/A_55681/title_CH-Lancer-Prices-Released/newsarticle.html to http://www.autoweb.com.au/cms/A_55681/title_CH-Lancer-Prices-Released/newsarticle.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:53, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mitsubishi Lancer


text:
Jay Sean

Kamaljit Singh Jhooti (born 26 March 1981), better known by the stage name Jay Sean, is a British singer and songwriter. He debuted in the UK's Asian Underground scene as a member of the Rishi Rich Project with "Dance with You", which reached No. 12 on the UK Singles Chart in 2003. This led to him being signed to Virgin Records and having two UK top 10 hits as a solo artist in 2004: "Eyes on You" at No. 6 and "Stolen" at No. 4. They were included in his critically acclaimed debut album Me Against Myself which, though only moderately successful in the UK, sold more than two million copies across Asia and remains his most successful album to date. Alongside the Rishi Rich Project, Sean was a pioneer of Bhangra-R&B fusion, which his debut album helped popularize among the worldwide South Asian diaspora.

He eventually left Virgin in 2006 and founded his own independent label, Jayded Records. After a gap of nearly four years, he returned in 2008 with "Ride It", which reached No. 11 in the UK and topped the charts in several Eastern European countries, including Romania where it was one of the best-selling singles of the year. It was followed by hits such as "Maybe", which reached No. 7 on the Japan Hot 100, and "Tonight". They were included in his second album, My Own Way, which became his most successful album on the UK Albums Chart, reaching No. 6, and topped the UK R&B Chart. At around this time, he began increasingly incorporating electropop sounds into his R&B music.

From 2009 up to 2014, he was signed to Cash Money Records. In 2009, his American debut single "Down" (featuring Lil Wayne) topped the Billboard Hot 100, making him the first solo artist of South Asian origin and first UK urban act to top the Hot 100. It was the seventh-best selling song of 2009, having sold more than three million copies in the United States that year,  eventually reaching six million sales in the United States, making him the most successful British/European male urban artist in US chart history at the time. As of 2011, it is the fifth best selling song by a British artist in the digital era. Its success was matched with his followed-up hit, "Do You Remember" (featuring Lil Jon and Sean Paul), which has sold more than a million copies in the US, and entered the top ten on the Hot 100, making him the first male act since Chingy in 2003 to "simultaneously appear in the Hot 100 top 10 with his first two charting singles." They were included in his American-debut album All or Nothing, which debuted at No. 37 on the US Billboard 200 and reached No. 11 on the Japan Oricon Albums Chart. Sean has also been a featured artist on several hits including "What Happened to Us" by Australian singer Jessica Mauboy, which charted within the top 20 on the ARIA singles chart and certified platinum by the Australian Recording Industry Association. Sean was ranked No. 35 in Billboard ' s Hot 100 Artists of 2009.

Early life and career beginnings
Jay Sean was born Kamaljit Singh Jhooti on 26 March 1981 in Hounslow, West London into an Indian Punjabi Sikh family to parents Sharan Singh Jhooti and Bindi Kaur Jhooti. He was raised in Southall, West London and displayed musical talent at an early age. At age 11, he and his cousin Pritpal Rupra formed a hip hop duo named "Compulsive Disorder". His stage name at the time was MC "Nicky J", with the "J" being derived from the first letter of his last name "Jhooti". He eventually came to be known by the nickname "Jay" among his friends.

He was a student at Latymer Upper School and left the school in 1997. He finished his GCSEs as a "straight-A student" and then completed his A Levels with an A grade in Biology and B grades in Mathematics and Chemistry. He later enrolled in Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry at Queen Mary University of London, to study Medicine before he dropped out in 2003 to pursue a singing career. For his music career, he chose the stage name Jay Sean; "Jay" being his nickname, while "Sean" is derived from "Shaan"—a nickname he was called at home by his grandmother—which means "shining star" or "pride" in the Punjabi language.

2003–2006: Me Against Myself with Relentless Records
After Sean's track "One Minute" fell into the hands of producer Rishi Rich, the Rishi Rich Project was formed (consisting of Rich, Sean and Juggy D) in 2003. Their first taste of UK chart success was the Asian underground song, "Dance with You (Nachna Tere Naal)", which became a Top 20 hit, peaking at #12. This led to Sean signing a £1m deal with Virgin Records, under their label Relentless Records. His second single, "Eyes on You", was his first solo effort and became a Top 10 hit, peaking at #6. His third single, "Stolen", peaked at #4, with Bollywood actress Bipasha Basu making an appearance in the video. His debut album, Me Against Myself, was released in 2004 and received much critical praise and acclaim. Sean was referred to as an "Asian sensation" and was praised for his experimental, creative fusion of contemporary R&B, British hip hop and Indian music. The title track in particular was considered innovative, featuring two alter egos of himself, one an R&B singer and the other a rapper, clashing in a rap battle.

Despite initially failing to reach the top 20 on the UK Albums Chart (where it peaked at #29), the album gradually managed to sell 100,000 copies in the UK and went on to become a substantial hit in India, selling over two million copies there. He made a brief appearance in the 2005 Bollywood film Kyaa Kool Hai Hum, providing the song "Dil Mera (My Heart)" to the soundtrack, based on "One Night" from his own debut album. Beyond India, the album sold over 300,000 copies across other parts of the world, including Europe, the Middle East, Southeast Asia, and Hong Kong. His performance of tracks from Me Against Myself on MTV Asia (alongside the Rishi Rich Project) had a television audience as large as 165 million viewers. It helped establish Sean as a major recognised artist across Asia and among the worldwide Desi diaspora, and remains his most successful album to date. With his debut album, Sean was influential in popularising Indian-R&B fusion sounds in Asian underground and Indian pop music. He recorded a 16 track album which was scrapped because Virgin felt the market had changed to where it was all about Pop music. In February 2006, after several delays of his second album, he left Virgin Records.

2007–2009: My Own Way and All or Nothing
After parting ways with Virgin Records, Sean continued to work on his second album, which was initially named after the title track "Deal With It", but the song ended up being given to Corbin Bleu. Sean's background vocals remain on Bleu's version of the track. The song "Deal With It" earned Sean a BMI Songwriter Award and later inspired the 2009 single "Juliette" by South Korean band Shinee.

Sean returned in late 2007 with the new single "Ride It", which was the first single from his second album My Own Way. It was to be the first album released as a joint-venture between his own label Jayded and 2Point9 Records. The video for "Ride It", released in early 2008, featured Sean with a new style after being out of the limelight for nearly three and a half years. My Own Way debuted at No. 6 in the official UK Albums Chart and generated two more UK top 20 singles, "Ride It" and "Maybe". On the back of this Sean received two MOBO Award nominations, for Best UK Male (alongside Dizzee Rascal, Taio Cruz, Wiley and Sway) and Best R'n'B/Soul (alongside Usher, Estelle, Ne-Yo and Chris Brown). "Ride It" was successful in Eastern Europe, especially in Russia, Turkey and Romania, where it became one of the three best-selling singles of the year. The song was remixed by Kosovan DJ Regard in 2019 and became a viral hit on the TikTok app. "Maybe" was his most successful single in Japan, where it reached No. 7 on the Japan Hot 100 Singles. A Mandarin Chinese cover version of "Maybe" by Coco Lee has been released in China. Sean sang a Hindi version of the album My Own Way for release in India. The album sold more than 350,000 copies across the world.

Touch Magazine in the UK described him as "the UK's answer to Ne-Yo," while The Independent called him "...an urban legend in the making." In August 2008, Sean co-hosted London radio station Choice FM's Breakfast show a week in which he only performed previously unheard tracks, including a song whose title was left to the listeners to decide. The unknown track was later confirmed to be called "Tonight" and is included in My Own Way: Deluxe Edition. Sean was confirmed for the third series of Celebrity Scissorhands in October 2008 but he withdrew before the show was aired for unclear reasons.

On 15 October 2008 during the MOBO Awards, Sean announced that he had signed with the American hip-hop oriented record label Cash Money Records distributed via Universal Republic Records making him the first male British Asian singer to sign with an American label. His American-debut single was "Down" featuring American rapper and label mate Lil Wayne. It topped the Billboard Hot 100, replacing The Black Eyed Peas. This made him the first British artist to top the Hot 100 since Freddie Mercury of Queen in 1980, and the first solo artist of Asian descent to do so. "Down" has sold more than six million copies in the United States, and three million digital copies in the US, making the song the best-selling single by a British/European male artist in North America since Elton John's "Candle in the Wind" in 1997. In addition, "Down" has received a large airplay of two billion listener impressions on radio worldwide. As of November 2011, "Down" has sold 4.1 million copies in the US, which is currently the fifth best-selling song by a British artist in the digital era. In November 2009, Sean's next single from his album, "Do You Remember", was released and featured Jamaican dancehall superstar Sean Paul plus US Southern crunk rapper Lil Jon. It entered the Hot 100 top ten on the week of 9 January 2009, breaking "a three-week streak of no titles moving into the top 10" since December 2009. Like its predecessor, it has sold more than a million copies in the United States.

At the 2009 UK Asian Music Awards (AMA), Sean won three awards, including "Best Male", "Best Urban Act" and "Best Album", the latter for his second album, My Own Way. He met with Rishi Rich, Juggy D and H-Dhami during the ceremony. After the award, he was in America for the first time since signing with Cash Money, he announced through an interview with MTV IGGY that he was recording five new songs for his album, then titled My Own Way (U.S. edition), one of which was his American-debut single with Lil Wayne, later titled "Down". Sean discussed a collaboration with Akon at the 2009 Grammy Awards, in addition to recording a song with Nadine Coyle and told viewers that the album will be released in third quarter of 2009. The album title was later changed to All or Nothing, and featured brand new songs and some of the songs from My Own Way. Despite success with two singles from the album, the album itself only debuted at No. 37 on the US Billboard 200. It was his lowest-charting entry on the UK Albums Chart, debuting there at #62. Despite this, it has become his highest-charting album in Japan, reaching No. 11 on the Oricon Albums Chart.

Sean was featured on a song called "Written on Her" alongside Birdman for the CEO's project, released on 23 June 2009 on iTunes. Sean has featured on Skepta's single "Lush" released on 10 June 2009 on iTunes. On 2 February 2010, Kevin Rudolf's single "I Made It (Cash Money Heroes)", featured Sean alongside Birdman and Lil Wayne, was released. In early December 2009, it was confirmed that he has collaborated with Justin Timberlake and Esmée Denters on a song, "Love Dealer". There have been talks of collaborations with other American artists such as Ashley Tisdale, Taylor Swift, Nicole Scherzinger, Rihanna, Usher, and Jay-Z & Beyoncé.

Sean was in early September 2009 nominated for the 30 Under 30 award. At the 2009 UK Urban Music Awards, he won the Best Collaboration award for "Down" alongside Lil Wayne. In early December 2009, he was ranked No. 35 in Billboard ' s Hot 100 Artists of the year. On 11 December 2009, he became the first South Asian origin artist since Freddie Mercury to perform at Madison Square Garden, as part of the Jingle Ball concert, alongside beatboxer MC Zani. Sean's performance "had the entire crowd – parents and children, teens and twenty-somethings – dancing."

2010–2013: Neon and The Mistress
Sean began working on his fourth album and second with Cash Money Records, Freeze Time in July 2010. At the time, he stated that he had completed roughly 75 percent of the album and that guests included Lil Wayne, Pitbull, Nicki Minaj and Mary J. Blige. Three singles, "2012 (It Ain't the End)", "Hit The Lights" and "Like This, Like That" were released in support of the album. Sean also co-headlined with Joe Jonas on the Joe Jonas & Jay Sean Tour with JoJo as the opening act. Sean released a mixtape titled The Mistress in September 2011, spawning a single and a music video for "Where Do We Go".

Freeze Time was scrapped due to legal issues in 2011 and Sean began working on a new, be more R&B influenced album altogether. The first official single from the album was announced to be "I'm All Yours", which features American and Latin artist Pitbull. Officially released in May 2012, the song peaked at a disappointing #85 on the Billboard Hot 100. The song's best performance was in Australia where it peaked at 13 and was certified as Gold. The second single of the album "So High", produced by DJ Afrojack, was released in October 2012. Later in the same month, both singles were included in an EP, titled So High, with "Sex 101" featuring Cash Money rapper Tyga (originally included in The Mistress) and an exclusive bonus track "Patience".

In February 2013, Sean announced he would be changing the title of the album from Worth It all to Neon, and his long delayed fourth studio album was released in July 2013. Both of the album singles, "Where You Are" and "Mars" featuring American rapper Rick Ross, failed to break into the Billboard Hot 100.

2014–present: The Mistress II: The Room Service and Collaborations with DJs
In January 2014, Sean released the lead song "Take That Off" from his second mixtape The Mistress II. Alongside releasing the first single in October 2014, "Tears in the Ocean" which received acclaimed reviews from audiences, Sean left Cash Money Records, citing that he wanted to go in a different direction artistically. On 14 November 2014, music website Djbooth premiered the second single "All I Want". The Mistress II was released on 18 November with a video for "All I Want" premiered hours later. A video for the third single "Jameson" was released on 23 December, and it was announced that an EP of The Mistress II featuring the original and acoustic remixed versions of each of the third singles from the mixtape would be released on 26 December.

In 2015, Sean reunited with fellow UK artists Rishi Rich and Juggy D, restart the Rishi Rich project, together, they released the single: "Freak".

On 5 February 2016, Sean released his first 'official' single since his departure from Cash Money Records, title Make My Love Go, the single featuring Sean Paul who also featured in Sean's 2010 single Do You Remember, the single marked Sean's first appearance on charts since the 2012 single I'm All Yours. Sean also collaborated with various well-known DJs: DJ Antoine, Hardwell, DJ Prostyle, Alex Gaudino, as well as artists Christian Rich, Stafford Brothers and Seeb. The single "Thinking About You" with Hardwell received favourable and positive reviews from critics and audiences.

In 2017, Sean released the singles "Do You Love Me" and "What You Want" featuring Davido. He followed these in 2018 with the singles "Emergency" and "Say Something".

In February 2018, Sean check for the final draft for The Mistress III.

Towards the end of 2018, Sean released four songs: "Need To Know", "Now Or Later", "Say Something" and "Why Why How Why".

In 2020, Sean collaborated with Indian pop singer Guru Randhawa and released the single "Surma Surma". Also, along with Rishi Rich, Sean released a single "Nakhre", also titled as "Eyes on You 2" which reached No.1 on BBC Asian Chart.

He began 3AM Entertainment to help promote the next generation of South Asian artists.

Community work
Sean has worked with BBC Blast doing Q&A's on tour events in an effort to "give something back". He has supported the Aga Khan Foundation (AKF) in the charity event Partnership Walk and Run by performing in Regent's Park in 2004 and 2009. During this time, he also visited different UK schools to inspire and encourage schoolchildren to get involved in music; at one school, he met a young Zayn Malik and encouraged him to sing on stage for the first time.

In 2009, Sean performed in Justin Timberlake's charity concert to raise funds for the Shriners Hospital for Children, alongside artists such as MC Zani, Taylor Swift and Alicia Keys. It became one of the highest-earning charity events of the year, raising more than $9 million.

In 2012, Sean became a part of Child Hunger Ends Here campaign along with artists Owl City and Jewel. For this purpose he recorded a song named "Here's Hope" which was available from the Child Hunger Ends Here website. He also appeared in a PETA ad campaign, encouraging potential pet owners to adopt from shelters rather than buy from stores.

Personal life
Sean married singer Thara in August 2009. Their daughter, Ayva Loveen Kaur Jhooti, was born on 13 December 2013. They had a son named Aaryan on 15 August 2018.

Discography

 * Me Against Myself (2004)
 * My Own Way (2008)
 * All or Nothing (2009)
 * Neon (2013)

Awards and nominations

 * 30 Under 30
 * 2009: Nominated (Won)

 * UK Asian Music Awards (AMAs)
 * 2005
 * Best Album (Me Against Myself) (Won)
 * Best Urban Act (Won)
 * Best Video ("Stolen") (Won)
 * 2007
 * DesiHits Artist of the Year Award (Won)
 * 2008
 * Best Urban Act (Won)
 * Best Video ("Ride It") (Won)
 * 2009
 * Best Male Act (Won)
 * Best Album (My Own Way) (Won)
 * Best Urban Act (Won)
 * 2010
 * Best Male Act (Won)
 * Best Urban Act (Won)
 * Best Video ("Down") (Won)
 * Best Album (All or Nothing) (Won)
 * 2011
 * Best Male Act (Won)
 * Best Urban Act (Nominated)
 * Best Video - ft. Nicki Minaj – "2012 (It Ain't the End)" (Won)

 * Brit Asia TV Music Awards
 * 2010
 * Best UK Urban Act (Won)
 * Best Single ("Down") (Won)
 * Best Male (Nominated)
 * Best Album (All or Nothing) (Nominated)

 * UK BMI Awards
 * 2008: BMI Songwriter Awards ("Deal With It") (Won)

 * Channel U Best of British Awards
 * 2008: Best Video ("Ride It") (Won)

 * MOBO Awards
 * 2008
 * Best UK Male (Nominated)
 * Best R'n'B/Soul (Nominated)

 * MTV Russia Music Awards
 * 2008: Best International Artist (Won)

 * Rogers Filmi South Asian Film Festival
 * 2009: Music Video Award ("Down") (Won)

 * UK Urban Music Awards
 * 2009: Best Collaboration ("Down", featuring Lil Wayne) (Won)

Concert tours
Headlining
 * Joe Jonas & Jay Sean Tour (2011)
 * Asia Tour (2018)

Filmography

 * Kyaa Kool Hai Hum (2005), himself
 * Sesame Street (2011), 1 episode

title: Jay Sean


text:
File:Rezillos - Can't Stand The Rezillos album cover.jpg

Summary
The Rezillos - Can't Stand The Rezillos. Original UK LP album cover

Licensing
Original UK release album cover - album covers are fair use. Picture scanned by me Ian Dunster from original UK LP album.