text:
Al-Hafiz

Abūʾl-Maymūn ʿAbd al-Majīd ibn Muḥammad ibn al-Mustanṣir, better known by his regnal name as al-Ḥāfiẓ li-Dīn Allāh (الحافظ لدين الله), was the eleventh Fatimid caliph, ruling over Egypt from 1132 to his death in 1149, and the 21st imam of Hafizi Isma'ilism.

Al-Hafiz first rose to power as regent after the death of his cousin, al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah, in October 1130. Al-Amir had only left an infant son, al-Tayyib, as a possible successor, so al-Hafiz—as the oldest surviving member of the dynasty—became regent. Al-Tayyib was apparently sidelined and possibly killed by the new regime, which was in turn overthrown within a few days by the army under Kutayfat. The latter imprisoned al-Hafiz, and moved to depose the Fatimids and replace Isma'ilism with a personal regime, possibly based on Twelver Shi'ism, with himself as the Hidden Imam's all-powerful vicegerent. Kutayfat's regime was toppled when he was murdered by Fatimid loyalists in December 1131, and al-Hafiz was freed and restored as regent.

On 23 January 1132, al-Hafiz proclaimed himself as the legitimate Isma'ili imam and caliph. While necessary in view of the lack of another heir, the succession was highly irregular, as the Isma'ili imamate had previously only been passed from father to son, by explicit designation (naṣṣ). Al-Hafiz was largely accepted in the Fatimid-ruled territories, but many Isma'ili followers abroad refused to recognize him and regarded the vanished al-Tayyib as their imam, causing the Hafizi–Tayyibi schism in Musta'li Isma'ilism. Even in Egypt, his legitimacy was repeatedly challenged, and his reign was troubled by constant uprisings and power struggles. Al-Hafiz's reign was mostly quiet on the external front. Despite continuing hostilities with the Kingdom of Jerusalem around Ascalon, both powers were preoccupied elsewhere for the most part. The Fatimid court also maintained contact with the Burids in Syria and King Roger II of Sicily, who at this time began his expansion into the former Fatimid domains of Ifriqiya, and adopted many of the practices of the Fatimid court for his own administration.

As ruler, al-Hafiz tried to rein in his over-mighty viziers with mixed success. He was repeatedly forced to give way to the demands of various military factions, and was ultimately unable to halt the evolution of the vizierate into a de facto sultanate independent of the caliph. Thus al-Hafiz's own son Hasan forced him to name him vizier in 1134, ousting another of the Caliph's sons from the post. Hasan's reign proved tyrannical and he was overthrown by the army in March 1135. The appointment of the Christian Bahram al-Armani to the vizierate after that caused a severe reaction among the Muslim population due to Bahram's pro-Christian policies. This led to another uprising and the appointment of the Sunni Ridwan ibn Walakhshi to the vizierate in 1137. Ridwan not only instituted anti-Christian and anti-Jewish measures, but aimed to overthrow al-Hafiz and replace the Fatimid dynasty with a Sunni regime headed by himself. With the support of the Cairo populace, al-Hafiz thwarted his ambitions and ousted Ridwan in 1139. For the next ten years, the Caliph ruled without a vizier, instead entrusting the administration to a succession of secretaries, with Ibn Masal as leading minister. This period was plagued by uprisings and natural disasters, but al-Hafiz persevered until his death in October 1149. His successors would be reduced to puppets at the hands of powerful viziers, until the end of the Fatimid Caliphate in 1171.

Origin
The future al-Hafiz was born as Abd al-Majid at Ascalon in AH 467 (1074/5 CE) or 468 (1075/6). His father was Abu'l-Qasim Muhammad, a son of the reigning Fatimid caliph, al-Mustansir ((r. 1036 – 1094)). In later life he was also called by the epithet (kunya) of Abu'l-Maymun. His early life, before he was thrust to the forefront of politics, is almost unknown. As an adult, he is reported to have had a strong mind and mild nature, fond of hoarding things, and to be strongly interested in alchemy and astronomy; he is known to have kept several astronomers in his employ.

Regency and imprisonment
On 7 October 1130, Caliph al-Amir bi-Ahkam Allah ((r. 1101 – 1130)) was assassinated. He left only a six-month-old son, Abu'l-Qasim al-Tayyib, to succeed him, with no designated regent or serving vizier, as al-Amir had resumed the personal direction of government affairs, instead of entrusting the administration to a potentially dangerously powerful vizier. Al-Amir's murder put a premature end to his attempts to once again concentrate power in the hands of the caliph instead of over-mighty generals and ministers. Given the fragility of succession, it furthermore endangered the very survival of the Fatimid dynasty.

At this time, Abd al-Majid was the oldest surviving male of the dynasty. What happened next appears to have effectively been a coup: two of al-Amir's favourites, Hizar al-Mulk Hazarmard (or Jawarmard) and Barghash, who had influence over the army, allied themselves with Abd al-Majid, to control the government. Abd al-Majid was to become regent, while Hazarmard (winning out over Barghash) would become vizier, and the Armenian Abu'l-Fath Yanis the commander-in-chief and chamberlain to the regent. Hazarmard evidently hoped to establish himself as a quasi-sultan in the style of the all-powerful Armenian vizier Badr al-Jamali and his son al-Afdal Shahanshah while Abd al-Majid may have supported him with the aim of gaining the throne for himself.

As de facto head of state, Abd al-Majid used the title of walī ʿahd al-muslimīn. Previously this was the formal title of the Fatimids' designated successor, but in this context is to be understood as regent. It is unclear, however, in whose name this regency was exercised. Most sources report that even the existence of al-Amir's infant son was concealed, and al-Tayyib disappears completely from the record after that. How the existence of a child whose birth had been accompanied by public celebrations and proclamations, was so effectively concealed is unknown. Modern scholars speculate that al-Tayyib may have died in infancy, possibly even before his father; but at least one contemporary anonymous Syrian source maintains that he was murdered on Abd al-Majid's orders. Instead of al-Tayyib, the new regime maintained that al-Amir had left a pregnant concubine, and that the caliph, having dreamed of his impending death, had declared this unborn child to be a son and his designated (naṣṣ) successor, thus effectively bypassing al-Tayyib. What came of this pregnancy is likewise unclear, as different sources report that the concubine either bore a daughter or that the foetus could not be found, or that al-Hafiz killed the baby soon after.

Whatever the ambitions and intentions of the leaders of the new regime were, they were cut short within a fortnight of al-Amir's death. At the ceremony of the new vizier's investiture, the army, assembled at the Bayn al-Qasrayn square between the caliphal palaces, rose in revolt and demanded the appointment of Kutayfat, the only surviving son of al-Afdal Shahanshah, as vizier. The palace was invaded, Hazarmard was executed and his severed head carried through the streets of Cairo, and on 21 October, Kutayfat was invested as vizier with the titles of his father and grandfather. Formally, Abd al-Majid retained his position of regent, and coins and decrees were issued jointly in his name and that of Kutayfat. In reality, Abd al-Majid was held a prisoner in one of the palace treasuries, guarded by the military commander (and future vizier) Ridwan ibn Walakhshi. Soon, however—possibly after the expected birth of a male heir did not occur—Kutayfat proclaimed the dynasty deposed, and abandoned Isma'ilism as the state religion. He instead proclaimed himself as the vicegerent of a shadowy 'Expected One' (al-Muntaẓar) and 'Rightly-Guided' (al-Mahdī) imam, who was given no name other than the kunya Abu'l-Qasim. The medieval sources explain this as a turn to Twelver Shi'ism, where expectation of the Hidden Imam is a core tenet. The historian Heinz Halm points out that this is nowhere explicitly attested in Kutayfat's own proclamations. Rather, Kutayfat's claim was a convenient political device which not only sidestepped the Fatimid claims to the imamate, but allowed him to rule, in the words of the historian Samuel Miklos Stern, "as a dictator responsible to no one either in theory or practice". Halm also considers that it was Kutayfat who at this point eliminated al-Tayyib.

Rise to the throne and the Hafizi–Tayyibi schism
The Fatimid elites refused to accept these changes. Members of al-Amir's bodyguard assassinated Kutayfat in a counter-coup on 8 December 1131 and released Abd al-Majid from his prison. This restoration of the dynasty was thereafter commemorated annually, up until the end of the Fatimid Caliphate, as the 'Feast of Victory' (ʿĪd al-Naṣr).

Given his lack of legitimation, as he was not in the line of succession to al-Amir, Abd al-Majid initially continued ruling as a regent. The first coins of his reign were struck with him still bearing the title of walī ʿahd al-muslimīn. Whether Abd al-Majid had had designs on the caliphate or not, the lack of a direct heir meant that the continuation of the Fatimid dynasty and the Isma'ili imamate required that he succeed as imam and caliph, since according to Isma'ili doctrine, "God does not leave the Moslem Community without an Imam to lead them on the right path". This was done in a decree (sijill) on 23 January 1132, whereby Abd al-Majid assumed the title al-Ḥāfiz li-Dīn Allāh ('Keeper of God's Religion'). For the first time in the Fatimid dynasty, power was not passed from father to son, creating a radical departure from established practice that had to be addressed and justified. Thus the sijill proclaimed al-Hafiz's right to the imamate, likening it to the sun, which had been briefly eclipsed by al-Amir's death and Kutayfat's usurpation, but had now reappeared in accordance with the divine purpose. No reference to any son of al-Amir was made. Al-Hafiz claimed that he had—secretly—received the designation (naṣṣ) as successor by al-Amir, and that Caliph al-Mustansir had foreseen this event, and had called al-Hafiz's father as walī ʿahd al-muslimīn. Earlier examples of breaks in the direct succession of the imamate, chiefly the designation by Muhammad of his son-in-law Ali ibn Abi Talib, were brought up to buttress his claim.

Al-Hafiz's highly irregular accession and claims to the imamate were largely accepted by the Isma'ili faithful in the Fatimid domains in Egypt, Nubia, and the Levant, but rebuffed by some communities. Most notably, this was the case in the only other major Isma'ili realm, Yemen, where the hitherto staunchly pro-Fatimid Sulayhid dynasty broke up. The Sulayhid queen, Arwa, upheld the rights of al-Tayyib, whose birth had been announced to her in a letter by al-Amir, while the regional dynasties of the Hamdanids and the Zurayids recognized al-Hafiz's claims.

The issue was not merely political, but, given the pivotal role of the imam in the Isma'ili faith, also intensely religious. In the words of Stern, "on it depended the continuity of institutional religion as well as the personal salvation of the believer". A similar succession dispute in 1094/5 had already led to the disastrous Musta'li–Nizari schism: after the death of al-Mustansir, al-Afdal Shahanshah had raised al-Musta'li Billah to the caliphate instead of his older brother, Nizar, leading to a brief civil war and Nizar's execution. While al-Musta'li had been recognized by the Fatimid establishment and the Isma'ili communities dependent on it in Syria and Yemen, the Iranian Isma'ilis had largely adopted Nizar's claims to the imamate and broken off their relations with the Fatimids. The Nizaris remained implacably opposed to the Musta'li regime in Cairo, and their agents (the 'Assassins') were blamed for the murder of al-Afdal in 1121, and of al-Amir. Al-Hafiz's accession in turn produced a major schism in the Musta'li branch of Isma'ilism, between the adherents of the imamate of al-Tayyib (the 'Tayyibis') pitted against supporters of al-Hafiz and his successors (the 'Hafizis'). As Stern emphasizes, in both cases the issue was "not so much the person of the claimant that weighed with his followers; they were not moved by any superior merits of Nizar as a ruler (this is, of course, obvious in the case of the infant al-Tayyib)—it was the divine right personified in the legitimate heir that counted".

Thus, by 1132 the once unified Isma'ili movement had split into three branches: the Hafizi, which now became the official doctrine of the Fatimid realm, the Tayyibi, which mostly survived in the mountains of Yemen, and the Nizari. Apart from Yemen, Tayyibi supporters existed in Egypt as well as in the Levant, but they were apparently heavily persecuted by the Fatimids. The Hafizi branch, inextricably bound to the Fatimid regime, survived in Egypt until the fall of the Fatimid Caliphate in 1171, but it disappeared quickly after, unlike its two rivals, which survive to the present day. The last holdout of Hafizi Isma'ilism was Yemen, where significant communities survived into the 13th century.

Reign
The accession of al-Hafiz signalled the restoration of the Fatimid dynasty and the figure of the caliph, but the preceding events had shaken the regime's foundations. The new caliph enjoyed little authority over the army, and al-Hafiz's reign was marred by chronic instability, having to fend off rebellions and challenges to his legitimacy from ambitious warlords, and even from within his own family. To bolster his legitimacy, al-Hafiz resorted, among other things, to converting the Shi'a festival of Ghadir Khumm into a festival celebrating the Fatimids. Despite his weak position, al-Hafiz succeeded in remaining on the throne for almost two decades.

Al-Hafiz continued the practice of appointing viziers to run the government in his name, but the power concentrated into the office's hands since the days of Badr al-Jamali made it a danger even to the caliph, and al-Hafiz paid particular attention to his viziers' activities. Indeed, for the last decade of his reign, he did not appoint any viziers, but instead relied on high-ranking clerks as ad hoc directors of government affairs.

Vizierate of Yanis and first personal regime, 1132–1134
His first vizier was the Armenian Yanis, a former military slave of al-Afdal and thus a prominent member of the same army factions that had raised Kutayfat to power. Yanis had already occupied high offices under al-Amir, including chamberlain (ṣāḥib al-bāb), a post almost as powerful as the vizierate. To enforce his own authority, he executed half of al-Amir's bodyguard and formed a private army, the Yānisiyya. His growing power alarmed the Caliph. When Yanis died in late 1132, after nine months in office, it was rumoured that the Caliph had had him poisoned.

After Yanis' death, the powerful position of vizier was deliberately left vacant. Al-Hafiz also dismissed Yuhanna ibn Abi'l-Layth, the long-serving head of the dīwān al-taḥqīq ('bureau of verification'), responsible for overseeing the financial administration. The Caliph used the opportunity to enlist the support of the ashrāf families (those claiming descent from Muhammad) by appointing the sharīf Mu'tamid al-Dawla as head of the dīwān al-taḥqīq, and his brother as naqīb al-ashrāf ('head representative of the ashrāf'). Al-Hafiz also had to confront a revolt of troops in the eastern Nile Delta, as well as an unexpected danger: al-Husayn, one of the sons of Nizar (the eponymous cause of the Nizari schism) who had fled to the Maghreb upon his father's execution, left his exile to return to Egypt. He gathered an army, but al-Hafiz successfully bribed one of his officers to assassinate him before he reached the country.

At the same time, the Caliph sought to bolster Fatimid credentials in the eyes of the Muslim world by once again taking up the mantle of champions of the jihād against the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, as had been the case under al-Afdal. Taking advantage of the revolt of Hugh II of Jaffa against King Fulk of Jerusalem ((r. 1131 – 1143)), after a long hiatus caused by the loss of Tyre in 1124, the Fatimids resumed their attacks on the Crusader territories from their stronghold at Ascalon. As a result, Fulk was forced to construct a series of new castles—Chastel Arnoul (1133), Beth Gibelin (1137), Ibelin (1141), and Blanchegarde (1142)—to protect the Jaffa–Jerusalem road and provide security for Western settlers. These fortresses shifted the balance in the Crusaders' favour, as they forced the Fatimid garrison of Ascalon into a defensive stance. With the fortification of Gaza in 1150, Ascalon was entirely cut off by land, paving the way for its capture by the Crusaders in 1153.

Vizierates of al-Hafiz's sons, 1134–1135
In 1134, al-Hafiz appointed his own son and designated heir, Sulayman, as vizier. A move designed to further strengthen the dynasty, it backfired disastrously when Sulayman died two months later, thereby once more throwing doubt on the supposed infallibility of the caliph-imam. Sulayman's younger brother Haydara was immediately appointed as heir and vizier, but this provoked the jealousy of another of al-Hafiz's sons, Hasan.

Hasan won the backing of the Juyūshiyya, a regiment of apparently Armenian origin established by Badr and al-Afdal that had been the pillar of their power and that had also supported Kutayfat. The Caliph and Haydara were backed by the Black African regiment of the Rayḥaniyya. This dissension appears to have had religious motivation as well, as Hasan and his followers are said to have backed Sunnism and attacked Isma'ili preachers. On 28 June, the Juyūshiyya defeated the Rayḥaniyya, forcing Haydara to flee to the palace, which was now besieged by Hasan's troops. Faced with this unprecedented situation, al-Hafiz backed down and on 19 July, he appointed Hasan as vizier and heir. As the historian Michael Brett comments, al-Hafiz had effectively appointed his son "in opposition to himself".

To secure his position, Hasan organized a private militia, the ṣibyān al-zarad, with which he terrorized the elites. Al-Hafiz instigated the Black African garrison of Upper Egypt to try and depose his son, but again Hasan's men emerged victorious. In the end, it was Hasan's tyrannical rule that caused his downfall. His brutal treatment of his enemies, the executions of prominent men and the confiscation of property, cost him whatever support he may have had. It was said that as many as 15,000 people were killed in the turmoils caused by Hasan's rule.

Following the murder of several senior commanders, the army rose in revolt in March 1135. Hasan fled to the caliphal palace, where al-Hafiz placed him under arrest. The troops then assembled at the square before the palace and demanded his execution, otherwise threatening to set fire to the palace. Al-Hafiz called to his rescue the governor of the Gharbiyya province (the western Nile Delta), Bahram al-Armani. Before Bahram could arrive in the capital, the Caliph bowed to the soldiers' demands and had his son poisoned by his Jewish physician.

Vizierate of Bahram, 1135–1137
Arriving in Cairo soon after the murder of Hasan, Bahram al-Armani, although a Christian, was named vizier on 4 April 1135 and received the title of 'Sword of Islam' (Sayf al-Islām). The appointment of a Christian to the post of vizier provoked much opposition among the Muslims, as the office was seen as the representative of the imam-caliph, and entailed ritual roles in Islamic ceremonies and precedence over Muslim clerics. Al-Hafiz persisted with his appointment, but gave Bahram a dispensation to absent himself from ritual ceremonies, in which the vizier's role was taken by the chief qāḍī. He also did not receive those customary titles of the Fatimid viziers that implied control over the Muslim religious establishment (qāḍī al-quḍāt and dāʿī al-duʿāt).

The Muslim population continued to oppose Bahram because he showed favour to Christians of all denominations, permitted the conferment of privileges on churches and the construction of new ones, and encouraged Armenian immigration, which in a short time is said by medieval sources to have reached 30,000 people. His brother, Vasak, was appointed governor of Qus in Upper Egypt, and his government was blamed by contemporaries for being tyrannical towards the local population.

In foreign policy, Bahram's tenure inaugurated a period of peace, since the Crusader states of the Levant were occupied with the growing threat of Zengi, the Turkish atabeg of Mosul. Bahram even presided over the release of 300 captives held since the Battle of Ramla in 1102. The vizier appears to have entertained good relations, and possibly formed an alliance, with King Roger II of Sicily.

In the meantime, the Muslim backlash against Bahram grew. His post as vizier was already considered an insult, but the favour shown to Christians, the Armenian immigration, and his close relations with Christian powers further inflamed passions. Ridwan ibn Walakhshi, the Caliph's former gaoler, emerged as the movement's leader. Ridwan was a Sunni who had risen to be one of the leading military commanders under al-Amir, and now held the position of ṣāḥib al-bāb. Bahram tried to dispose of him by sending him to govern Ascalon in May 1135, but there Ridwan busied himself with blocking Armenian immigration, earning plaudits from the Muslim public opinion in Cairo. As a result, Bahram recalled him in November 1136 and sent him to govern his own former province at Gharbiyya. The move backfired, as Ridwan was now placed in possession of an independent power base. Leading Cairene officials began making contact with him, and Ridwan did not hesitate to preach jihād against Bahram from the pulpit of the mosque. Finally, in early 1137 Ridwan raised an army from the local Bedouin and marched on Cairo. Bahram's Muslim soldiers deserted him, and on 3 February he fled Cairo with 2,000 Armenian soldiers, making for Qus. After his departure, an anti-Armenian pogrom broke out in the capital, and even the vizieral palace was plundered.

At Qus, Bahram found his brother killed and defiled by the local townfolk. In revenge, Bahram plundered the city, but resisted calls to torch it so as not to fully alienate the caliph. He then made for Aswan on the southern border of the Fatimid realm—some sources claim that he had intended to found a new realm allied with the Christian kingdoms of Nubia to the south—but the local governor barred his gates to him, and Bahram was forced to retreat to Akhmim. There a letter from al-Hafiz reached him, offering lenient terms: he could choose either a governorship at Qus, Akhmim, or Asyut, but could keep only a fraction of his followers, or he could enter a monastery near Akhmim, with a letter of protection (amān) for himself and his relatives. Bahram chose the latter.

Regime of Ridwan, 1137–1139
The Caliph's leniency towards Bahram is not surprising, as the Christian vizier was not nearly as threatening to his own position as the Sunni Ridwan ibn Walakhshi, who "promised to be a second Nasir al-Dawla, threatening to turn the country over, not to Twelver Shi'ism like Kutayfat, but to Sunnism". Indeed, when Ridwan took office on 5 February 1137, his titles reflected his dangerously powerful position. The new vizier was, like Bahram, the 'Sword of Islam', and once again, being a Muslim, head of the qāḍīs (qāḍī al-quḍāt) and the dāʿīs ('dāʿī al-duʿāt). Instead of 'Most Mighty and Excellent Lord' (al-sayyid al-ajall al-afḍal), he was now 'Most Excellent King' (al-malik al-afḍal), signalling his status as a monarch effectively independent of the imam–caliph. Ridwan's appointment thus marks the culmination of a process that made the Fatimid viziers into sultans, similar to the relationship of the Seljuk rulers vis-à-vis the Abbasid caliphs since the time of Tughril ((r. 1037 – 1063)).

Now vizier, Ridwan launched an anti-Christian persecution. Christian officials were replaced with Muslims, their properties confiscated, and some were executed. Restrictive and discriminatory sumptuary laws and regulations were introduced for Christians and Jews, such as requiring them to wear specific clothes and to dismount when passing by a mosque, or prohibiting them from riding horses, but only donkeys and mules. The poll tax (jizya) was redefined, and was now required to be paid to a bench set at the height of the head, as a sign of inferiority. Bahram's Armenian troops were disbanded, either settled as peasants or allowed to leave Egypt and return to their homeland. At the same time, Ridwan promoted Sunnism: a Shafi'i madrasa was established on the Syrian model in Alexandria, where Sunnism was more widespread than the capital. Ridwan also continued correspondence with the Burids, a Turkish dynasty that ruled southern Syria, particularly Shams al-Dawla Muhammad of Baalbek, for a common front against the Crusaders, but also possibly with the aim of using the Sunni Syrians to unseat the Fatimid dynasty. In 1138, al-Hafiz undertook a major refurbishment of the al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo, which established the keel-shaped arches and carved stucco decoration seen in the courtyard today, as well as the dome at the central entrance of the prayer hall.

In 1138 Ridwan attempted to remove al-Hafiz from power altogether by consulting a Sunni (the head of the Alexandria madrasa, Ibn Awf), a Twelver (Ibn Abi Kamil), and an Isma'ili jurist (the chief dāʿī Isma'il ibn Salama) on the possibility of deposing al-Hafiz. Their answers were fairly predictable: Ibn Abi Kamil argued that the claim to the imamate by al-Hafiz and his ancestors was false, Ibn Salama supported the Caliph, and Ibn Awf took a more cautious stance and advised that the deposition should be handled in accordance with religious law. Ridwan began arresting and executing members of the Caliph's entourage, while al-Hafiz demonstratively recalled Bahram from exile and allowed him to settle in the palace. Ridwan in turn appeared in public on the Eid al-Fitr on 31 May wearing a robe in a style normally reserved for monarchs.

Matters came to a head on 8 June, as al-Hafiz, enthroned atop the Golden Gate of the palace, engaged in a heated exchange with Ridwan below. The vizier then ordered the palaces surrounded by troops, and presented one of the Caliph's sons, aiming to place him on the throne. This failed as the palace remained closed to him, and due to the resistance of Ibn Salama, who insisted that only the imam could sanction his successor by conferring naṣṣ upon him. This impasse allowed al-Hafiz to regain the initiative. The turncoat son and his followers were killed, and on 12 June a group of twenty men of the caliphal bodyguard entered the city through the Bab Zuwayla gate shouting "al-Hafiz, the Victorious" (al-Ḥāfiz yā manṣūr). They were quickly joined by the populace and the bulk of the army, which rose in revolt against Ridwan. It was only with the assistance of his brother and nephew, and some loyal troops of the Rayḥaniyya, that Ridwan was able to break through and escape the city via the Bab al-Nasr (Victory Gate). The vizier's palace was once more plundered by the mob behind him.

Aided by the Bedouin in his employ, Ridwan fled to Ascalon and thence to the Burid domains. The Burid governor of Salkhad, Kumushtakin, gave him a force of Turks, with whom he returned to Egypt. Rallying the Bedouin around him, he marched on Cairo, but was repulsed in front of the city gates on 28 August 1139. A month later, al-Hafiz led his army, comprising the Ḥāfiziyya and Āmiriyya regiments and his own bodyguard, to defeat Ridwan's forces. Ridwan fled to Upper Egypt, but soon had to surrender himself to the Caliph's forces in exchange for an amān. Al-Hafiz had Ridwan interned in the palace, in the room next to Bahram's.

Return to personal rule, 1139–1149
After Ridwan's downfall, al-Hafiz offered to reappoint Bahram as vizier, but the latter refused. He remained al-Hafiz's closest aide, however, and on his death in November 1140, al-Hafiz participated in the funeral cortège in person. For the remainder of his reign, al-Hafiz did not appoint another vizier, but rather chose secretaries (kātib) to lead the administration. At some point in 1139/40, the Berber Salim ibn Masal was appointed as leading minister, but the title of vizier was deliberately avoided, and he was instead titled 'supervisor of affairs' (nāẓir fi'l-umūr) or 'supervisor of the public interests' (nāẓir fi'l-maṣāliḥ). Ibn Masal would be named vizier only after al-Hafiz's death. This was a deliberate attempt to reverse the progressive transformation of the vizierate into a sultanate: unlike the viziers, the secretaries were civilian bureaucrats without ties to the army, and often non-Muslims as well, and hence utterly dependent on the Caliph.

The first of these secretaries was the Egyptian Christian Abu Zakari, who had been appointed as 'supervisor of the bureaus' (nāẓir fi'l-dawāwīn, likely indicating the head of the dīwān al-taḥqīq) by Bahram and been dismissed and exiled by Ridwan. Al-Hafiz restored him to his position, and awarded him the title 'Protege of the Caliphate' (ṣanīʿat al-khilāfa). He appears to have used his position as head of the fiscal administration to contract for tax revenues and appropriate the surplus income for himself. As a result, in 1145 he was arrested and executed at the Caliph's orders along with his father and brother. Muslim writers denigrated Abu Zakari as 'the Slit-Nosed One' (al-akhram), twisting his honorific al-akram ('the Most Noble One'). This anti-Christian animus perhaps explains why his two successors were both Muslim qāḍīs who had served under Ridwan. The first, Abu'l-Karam al-Tinnisi, received the title of 'the Successful One' (al-Muwaffaq), and held the post for two years, until September 1147. He was replaced by Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Tarabulusi, surnamed 'the Chosen One' (al-Murtaḍā). Al-Tarabulusi was also appointed head of the chancery, and given quasi-vizieral prerogatives: he was allowed to wear the tail of his turban (ḥanak) in a style reserved for palace eunuchs, and attended the caliph at the Friday prayer.

In foreign affairs, al-Hafiz's final decade was largely peaceful. Both the Fatimids and the Kingdom of Jerusalem were focused on internal troubles, and the Crusaders were preoccupied with Zengi. In April/May 1141, Crusader knights appeared before Ascalon, but were chased away by the Fatimid garrison. In 1142/3, Fatimid envoys visited the court of Roger II of Sicily. Roger pursued expansionist plans against the former Fatimid domains in Ifriqiya, now ruled by the Zirid dynasty, and his fleet had recently captured the old Fatimid capital of al-Mahdiya there. Despite the possible danger posed by the Christian expansion into North Africa, and incidents where Norman warships captured Egyptian merchant vessels, relations remained cordial. The chronicler Romuald of Salerno even records the conclusion of a commercial treaty between Egypt and Sicily in 1143. According to Halm, Roger's decision to abstain from the Second Crusade (1147–1150) may have played a role in maintaining friendly relations until both monarchs died. The historian Jeremy Johns points out that while the Fatimids had long lost the ability to intervene directly in Ifriqiya, they adopted a "laissez-faire" attitude towards Norman expansion since the kings of Sicily, a "trading partner of proven worth", promised "restoration of law and order along the North African coast", which would be of benefit to Egyptian commerce. Johns also points out that even many of the trade networks linking the Indian Ocean and Red Sea to Egypt and the Mediterranean appear to have been in the hands of Sicilian and Ifriqiyan merchants at this time, which may further explain Cairo's interest in the Norman venture.

In 1139/40, al-Hafiz sent envoys to the Zurayid ruler of Aden, Ali ibn Saba ibn Abu'l-Su'ud, to formally invest him as dāʿī for Yemen. By the time the Fatimid envoy arrived, Ali had died, so the investiture passed to his brother and successor, Muhammad. Another embassy to Yemen is recorded in 1144, most likely again heading to Aden. In September 1147, a Fatimid embassy arrived in Damascus, apparently in an attempt to make common cause with its ruler, Unur, against the ambitions of Zengi's son, Nur al-Din. Given the continuing troubles in Egypt, however, any thought of a Fatimid intervention in Syria remained an impossibility.

The last years of al-Hafiz's reign were dominated by domestic challenges that laid bare the unstable foundations of his authority. In 1144/5, one of al-Hafiz's uncles, Abu'l-Husayn, tried to gain the support of the ṣāḥib al-bāb for his own bid to the caliphate, promising to make him vizier as a reward. The ṣāḥib al-bāb, Khumartash, informed al-Hafiz, who had his uncle thrown into prison. In 1146, the commander Bakhtiyar rebelled in Upper Egypt, but was defeated by a force of Luwata Berbers from the Western Desert. In May 1148, Ridwan managed to escape from his confinement in the palace, cross the Nile, and rally followers to his banner, including Bedouin, regular soldiers, and Luwata. With this army he marched once more on Cairo, defeated the Caliph's troops and pursued them into the city itself. Al-Hafiz barred the gates of the palace, but pretended to be cooperative, and even sent money when Ridwan asked for it to pay his men. At the same time, the Caliph selected ten Black African members of the caliphal bodyguard to assassinate Ridwan. Shouting "al-Hafiz, the Victorious", they attacked and killed him and his brother near the Aqmar Mosque. In 1149, another pretender, a supposed son of Nizar, gathered Berber supporters—Luwata and even some Kutama, once the mainstay of the early Fatimid dynasty—to attack Alexandria. The rebels scored a victory against the first army sent to confront them, but the rebellion was ended when al-Hafiz bribed the Luwata chieftains to withdraw with money and promises of land grants in the Nile Delta. The pretender's severed head was sent to Cairo. In 1149, the rival military factions, the Juyūshiyya and the Rayḥaniyya, once again clashed in the streets of Cairo, so that people were afraid to enter the capital. The Juyūshiyya emerged victorious and drove their opponents out of the city to Giza. These years were also ones of natural disasters. The Nile floods were particularly low in 1139, while famine and pestilence ravaged Egypt in 1142. In 1148, the Nile flood was too high, with the water reaching to the gates of Cairo.

Death and legacy
Al-Hafiz died on 10 October 1149, of a severe intestinal colic. His survival on the throne through all the threats he had faced was remarkable, and he had managed to restore the caliph's personal control over the administration to an extent unseen for a century. But on his death he left behind a severely shaken regime, which survived mostly thanks to inertia and the vested interest of large sections of society in keeping it running. The Isma'ili mission, which had animated the early Fatimid expansion, had lost its drive, and the dynasty's legitimacy was increasingly challenged. The Fatimid empire during his reign had shrunk to Egypt, and the parts of Yemen and Makuria that recognized its overlordship. While the Fatimid cause flagged, beyond Egypt's borders, Zengi and Nur al-Din were building a militantly Sunni regime in Syria whose ideological zeal was making itself felt across the region. Enfeebled, Egypt would soon become the prize in the conflict between the Nur al-Din and the Crusaders, leading to the final collapse of the Fatimid dynasty.

Al-Hafiz was succeeded by the youngest and only surviving of his five sons, the 16-year-old Abu Mansur Isma'il, with the regnal name al-Zafir bi-Amr Allah. Al-Hafiz was the last Fatimid caliph who rose to the throne as an adult. The next three Fatimid imam-caliphs, until the end of the dynasty in 1171, were little more than puppet rulers, with real power lying in the hands of their viziers.

title: Al-Hafiz


text:
Natura & Co

Natura & Co is a Brazilian global personal care cosmetics group headquartered in São Paulo. The Natura & Co Group currently includes Natura Cosméticos and Avon Products. The Group is present in 73 countries across all continents except Antarctica. Natura Cosméticos, the parent company, was founded in 1969 by Antônio Luiz Seabra and became a public company listed on São Paulo Stock Exchange in 2004. Currently the company is the largest Brazilian cosmetics company by revenue. In May 2019 Natura & Co announced that it had entered into definitive agreement to acquire Avon Products, Inc. The transaction was approved by Brazilian regulations authorities in the beginning of November 2019 and was completed in January 2020, making Natura & Co the 4th largest pure-play beauty company in the world.

History
In 1974, Natura adopted direct sales as sales model. In 2018 it had more than 6.6 million "consultants" (resellers) worldwide being the largest in the world.

Natura is a founding member of the Union for Ethical BioTrade, gradually ensuring that its sourcing practices promote the conservation of biodiversity, respect traditional knowledge and assure the equitable sharing of benefits all along the supply chain. During the steps of their development and production of cosmetics, Natura does not test on animals and follows the most stringent international safety standards.

Being a public company since 2004, its shares are listed on Novo Mercado (the highest level of corporate governance or Stock Exchange Ibovespa). Natura's performance in 2017 shows a consolidated gross revenue of R$9.9 billion, a growth of 24.5% over the previous year. Its consolidated net income was R$670.3 million.

In 2005, Natura opened its first boutique in Paris, France. In 2013, Natura acquired Aesop. In January 2023, Natura sold the brand to L'Oréal.

In Brazil, major competitors of Natura are O Boticário, L'Oréal, Estée Lauder Companies, Jequiti and others.

From 2020 until 2024 American depositary shares of Natura traded on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). Its acquisition of Avon Products in 2020 turned Natura into the world’s fourth largest pure-play beauty group.

Business model
Natura is a one-level marketing company. Natura promotes its image as an eco-friendly, sustainable company (using natural products, working toward sustainable environment and social support etc.). The company also uses ordinary women rather than supermodels in its advertisements.

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

title: Natura & Co


text:
The Knock

The Knock is a British television crime drama, created by Anita Bronson and broadcast on ITV, which portrayed the activities of customs officers from the London City & South Collection Investigation Unit of HM Customs and Excise. The series derived its name from the distinctive "Knock knock knock" command used over the radio to synchronise a raid.

Five series were broadcast from 10 April 1994, until 11 November 2000. 37 episodes were made. The series had a rotating cast, with only a small number of cast members appearing throughout the series' run. The only three cast members to appear in every series were Caroline Lee-Johnson, Trevor Byfield and Steve Toussaint. The series also adopted a number of different formats: while the early series interspersed various storylines and had running plots across the series; later series adopted a multi-part format resulting in two or three cases per series; while the final series adopted a stand-alone week by-week format.

The series was axed in 2001 following poor viewing figures for the final series. This was blamed on the loss of several main cast members, a change in the format and the overall look of the series which changed dramatically following an overhaul by ITV executives in 1999.

Guest cast

 * Anthony Valentine as George Webster (Series 1—2)
 * Ian Burfield as Tommy Maddern (Series 1—2)
 * Oliver Tobias as Allan De Montfort (Series 2)
 * Alan Gear as Swedish Sea Captain (Series 2-3)
 * John Vine as Jeffrey Faulds (Series 2)
 * Lenny McLean as Eddie Davies (Series 2—3)
 * Colin Baker as Desmond Dewhurst (Series 3)
 * Dennis Waterman as John Danson (Series 3)
 * Fiona Dolman as Anna Ransley (Series 3)
 * Michael Brandon as Greg Taylor (Series 4)
 * Bryan Marshall as Frankie Johnson (Series 4)
 * Cherie Lunghi as Toni Maxwell (Series 4)
 * Rik Mayall as Simon Reid (Series 5)
 * Steve John Shepherd as Rick Foster (Series 5)
 * Jay Simon as Jan Lund (series 5)
 * Martine McCutcheon as Jenny Foster (Series 5)
 * David Threlfall as Barry Connery (Series 5)
 * Gillian Taylforth as Anne Gilbraith (Series 5)
 * Danny Webb as John Gilbraith (Series 5)

Series 1 (1994)
The first series consists of seven episodes, and was broadcast from 10 April to 22 May 1994. It was released on DVD on 27 November 2006. The DVD release of the series has become hard to obtain. The series was rebroadcast in Australia for the first time in 2014. This series was repeated on ITV3 on 10 January 2017, 11 January 2017, 12 January 2017, 13 January 2017, 14 January 2017, 17 January 2017 and 18 January 2017.

Series 2 (1996)
The second series consists of thirteen episodes, and was broadcast from 28 April to 21 July 1996. It was released on DVD on 27 August 2007. The DVD release of the series has become hard to obtain. The series was rebroadcast in Australia for the first time in 2014. This series was rebroadcast on ITV3 on 19 January 2017, 20 January 2017, 21 January 2017, 24 January 2017, 25 January 2017, 26 January 2017, 27 January 2017, 28 January 2017, 31 January 2017, 1 February 2017, 2 February 2017, 3 February 2017 and 7 February 2017.

Series 3 (1997)
The third series consists of seven episodes, and was broadcast from 6 April to 18 May 1997. The series has never been released on DVD, and repeats have been very few and far between. This series was rebroadcast on ITV3 on 8 February 2017, 9 February 2017, 10 February 2017, 14 February 2017, 15 February 2017, 16 February 2017 and 17 February 2017.

Series 4 (1999)
The fourth series consists of six episodes, and was broadcast from 7 January to 11 February 1999. This series was the last to feature many of the original cast members, including Enzo Squillino, Jr. and Andrew Dunn; and was also the last series to feature multi-part stories (in this case, two stories of three episodes each). The series has never been released on DVD, and although repeats have been very few and far between, the series was repeated in full from 13–20 June 2016, on ITV3. This Series was rebroadcast on ITV3 on 21 February 2017, 22 February 2017, 23 February 2017, 24 February 2017, 28 February 2017 and 1 March 2017.

Series 5 (2000)
The fifth and final series consists of four episodes, and was broadcast from 21 October to 11 November 2000. This series saw a major overhaul in both the production team and cast; with Caroline Lee-Johnson, Steve Toussaint and Daniel Brown the only three cast members to return. The format of the series was also very different, featuring four stand-alone stories, with the running time extended to 105 minutes per episode, with advertisements. A new theme tune and title sequence was also introduced. The series has never been released on DVD, and although repeats have been very few and far between, the series was repeated in full from 21—24 June 2016 on ITV3. This Series was rebroadcast on ITV3 on 2 March 2017, 3 March 2017, 9 March 2017 and 10 March 2017.

title: The Knock


text:
User talk:Darth Polus

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. Meelar (talk) 18:26, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Darth Polus


text: User talk:210.8.252.2

title: User talk:210.8.252.2


text:
Grand Combin

The Grand Combin is a mountain massif in the western Pennine Alps in the canton of Valais. At a height of 4309 m the summit of Combin de Grafeneire is one of the highest peaks in the Alps and the second most prominent of the Pennine Alps. The Grand Combin is also a large glaciated massif consisting of several summits, among which three are above 4000 metres (Combin de Grafeneire 4309 m, Combin de Valsorey 4184 m, Combin de la Tsessette 4132 m). The highest part of the massif is wholly in Switzerland, although the border with Italy lies a few kilometres south.

The normal route starts from the Panossière Hut, which lies on the north side in the Corbassière valley. Despite the fact that no major difficulties exist, a particularly dangerous passage has to be traversed on the north flank: Le Corridor. It is a couloir dominated by seracs continuously falling on it.

Geography
The massif of the Grand Combin lies in Lower Valais, south of Verbier between the Val d'Entremont (west) and Val de Bagnes (west). The north-western facing side of Grand Combin is entirely covered by eternal snows and glaciers which are prone to serac falls. The southern and eastern walls are more steep and thus exempt of snow.

The topography of the Grand Combin is intricate. Between the Val d'Entremont and the Val de Bagnes are two high ridges, nearly parallel to each other and to those valleys, which both diverge from a short transverse ridge of great height. The southern end of the space enclosed between these three ridges is an elevated plateau of great extent, where the snows accumulate and feed the Corbassière Glacier which descends thence for about ten kilometers to the north. The glacier is surrounded by the peaks of Petit Combin, Combin de Corbassière and Combin de Boveire on the west, Grand Tavé and Tournelon Blanc on the east. Smaller glaciers lie on the external flanks such as Boveire and Mont Durand Glacier.

At the south-east extremity of the plateau, the highest part of the enclosing ridge is surmounted by two conical summits, of which the higher south-west point (Grand Combin de Grafeneire) is 4,309 meters in height, while the neighbouring north-east summit (Aiguille du Croissant) is lower by less than 60 meters (4,260 metres). Two other minor summits over 4,000 metres are located on the ridge: the Grand Combin de Valsorey (4184 m) on the west and the Combin de la Tsessette (4132 m) on the east. On the west side, the plateau sinks to a considerably lower level, and over this lies the Col des Maisons Blanches (3,418 m), by which access to the Corbassiere valley is obtained from the side of the Val d'Entremont.

All the waters flowing on the region end up in the Dranse river and the Rhone. After Dom, Weisshorn, it is the highest massif of the Alps situated out of the main chain. South of the Grand Combin, the ridge separating the glaciers of Mont Durand and Sonadon reaches the Grande Tête de By a few kilometres away, which is located on the main watershed and border with the Italian region of Aosta Valley. The ridge diverges to the south-west and appears to be continuous with the range of the Aiguilles Vertes, or Aiguilles de Valsorey, and that of Mont Vélan. From this branches the lower range, which divides the channel of the Glacier du Mont Durand (north) from the Val d'Ollomont in the Aosta Valley (south), and extends by the Col de Fenêtre to the Mont Gelé.

Climbing history
The Grand Combin, which yields in height to only a few European mountains, was long one of the least known of Alpine summits. The first to commence the exploration of the great massif which separates the Val de Bagnes from the Val d'Entremont was Gottlieb Samuel Studer, of Berne, who on August 14, 1851 reached for the first time the summit of the Combin de Corbassière with the guide Joseph-Benjamin Fellay, and has published an account of that and a subsequent excursion in Bergund Gletscher-Fahrten. He was followed in that ascent five years later by W. and C. E. Mathews, and in 1857, William Mathews anticipated Studer in the ascent of the second peak of the Grand Combin.

The first four expeditions on Grand Combin reached only the minor summit east of Grand Combin (Aiguille du Croissant). The first one was made by mountain guides from the valley (Maurice Fellay and Jouvence Bruchez) on July 20, 1857. The first complete ascent of Grand Combin was finally made on July 30, 1859 by Charles Sainte-Claire Deville with Daniel, Emmanuel and Gaspard Balleys, and Basile Dorsaz.

The Grand Combin de Valsorey on the west was reached for the first time on 16 September 1872 by J. H. Isler and J. Gillioz. They climbed the south-west face above the Plateau du Couloir. The itinerary on the south-east ridge was opened on 10 September 1891 by O. Glynne Jones, A.Bovier and P. Gaspoz.

Climbing huts

 * Panossière Hut (2,641 m), north side
 * Valsorey Hut (3,030 m), south-west side
 * Bivouac Biaggio Musso (3,658 m), south side

title: Grand Combin


text: File:Shut yo mouth.jpg

title: File:Shut yo mouth.jpg


text:
Talk:Khalil al-Wazir

Personal Life
The article Mentions that Khalil Alwazir's eldest son Jihad was killed in a car accident in Beirut, the source if this infromation is wrong. Jihad Alwazir is alive, he lives in Ramallah and he was appointed by president Mahmoud Abbas on December 31st 2007 as governor of the Palestinian Monetary Authority (Alhayat newspaper, dec. 31st 2007). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nalwazir (talk • contribs) 21:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, you are correct. I made the change. Thanks! --Al Ameer son (talk) 22:05, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Assassination
I do not understand why the Maariv  1997 report is given such prominence. Barak´s involvement was known, (or rather, more formally; "alleged",) long before that. In fact already in 1988, see e.g. in Time magazine: Middle East Assignment: Murder. That article is much, much more detailed than the Maariv "revelation" 11 years later. Regards, Huldra (talk) 10:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

does anyone ever just give you an easy answer.... i just need to know important main things about him. I have a final tomorrow and i dont have time to read this entire thing... plus i started and its too complicated!!!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.99.191.247 (talk) 22:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

The Sayeret Matkal commando who shot Khalil al-Wazir was codenamed "Sword." The Sayeret Matkal commandos also used a "silent" explosive to blow open the door of Khalil al-Wazir's Tunis villa. "Gideon's Spies."L.J. Tibbs (talk) 18:03, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Other sources
I'm sorry, so the opinion of one author, Chomsky , is enough to state what "most Israelis" thought, but the opinion of another author , a non-Israeli can't be used to state that other sources think so as well? How does that work? Bad Dryer (talk) 22:13, 17 November 2015 (UTC)
 * here's Dr. Gus Martin published by SAGE calling him a terrorist. As if there was ever a question. It would be more precise to say that Palestinians think he was a hero but others think he was a terrorist. This is not limited to Israelis, obviously, and wording it to make it seem like it is is what's weaselly in this sentence. No More Mr Nice Guy (talk) 07:46, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * agreed. It should be "Palestinians view him as X, others view him as Y'. I will make the change later today. Bad Dryer (talk) 17:12, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) It is absolutely biased, undue and loaded to imply that an author's reference to Wazir as a terrorist justifies the inclusion of "... and others think he's a terrorist". Nice Guy, I didn't know you were a spokesmen for world opinion (with the exception of the Palestinians). I could provide you with more authors that call Wazir a terrorist, but without it being made clear which group of people or which country has those views, the vague assertion that "others" consider him a terrorist does not fly. I agree that using just one source to say that most Israelis view him as a terrorist and most Palestinians view him as a martyr is also not ideal. However, the solution to that is either finding more sources to that effect or getting rid of the entire sentence. You can't just slap "others" onto the sentence because a few authors call him a terrorist. The reason that the focus of the sentence is on Israelis and Palestinians is obvious: the latter was his enemy and the former his people so the opinions of both groups about him are relevant. --Al Ameer (talk) 17:24, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If multiple sources call him a terrorist, it is perfectly permissible to say "other sources describe him as a terrorist". If you think otherwise, please cite the relevant Wikipedia policy.
 * As you think about this, compare to Carlos the Jackal - "Ramírez Sánchez is commonly described as one of the most notorious political terrorists of his era.[7][8][9] " Bad Dryer (talk) 17:33, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Brad, none of what you're trying to do here will fly and this reasoning does not help your argument. The point I was trying to make is that we don't just say the very vague and broad "others" consider al-Wazir a terrorist in addition to most Israelis. We have to attribute such opinions to their holders i.e. Gus Martin or whoever. And obviously Mr Martin's attributed opinion wouldn't belong in the lead of the article (or anywhere in the article for that matter because it would be undue weight). If you have a source that says the U.S. or whatever country also considered al-Wazir to be a terrorist, that's a different story. If anything, what is present right now (that Palestinians consider him a martyr and Israelis consider him a terrorist) based on the content in Chomsky's article probably isn't clearly supported enough by Chomsky's article and should be removed or replaced by a source that more clearly describes the opinions of Palestinians and Israelis. I should also mention that I added that sentence in the first place, a long time ago. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:49, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No, what's not going to fly is you asserting that my edits are not going to fly, without providing a policy-based explanation for why you are reverting them. I gave you the Carlos example for a reason - that article said he was widely described as a terrorist, supported by 3 sources that describe him as such. That's as exactly what we are doing here, and is quiet appropriate.Bad Dryer (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Use of the word terrorist has to be attributed by in line citation. This is wikipedia policy.  The text should really say according to Noam Chomsky most Israelis considered him a terrorist.Johnmcintyre1959 (talk) 21:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps, if the Chomsky article actually said that. But it doesn't. Bad Dryer (talk) 16:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If it wasn't common sense that using the vague and unlimited word "others" because an author described Wazir as such, please see WP:Weasel and WP:Terrorist. We don't use unclear words like "others" or "some" to make assertions, especially with regard to describing someone as a "terrorist", especially someone like a senior military leader of the PLO, an organization which most governments did not regard as a terrorist group even before Oslo. Attribution is required for these type of politically charged words. I don't care what has been done in the Carlos page because two wrongs don't make a right and this page is about al-Wazir, not Carlos. Moreover, avoid audacious edits like your most recent where you restored the unattributed and vague weasel word by saying "per talk" as if there has been a consensus here because it amounts to disruptive editing. And as I said above, the Chomsky bit should be removed until it could be properly sourced. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:25, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * What is disruptive is you edit warring to remove materiel that is sourced, without consensus on the talk page and over the objections of multiple editors. We of course use "others" all over the encyclopedia: "They have been described by others as post-rock" Rothko (band); " has been described by others as a vanity press." - Edwin Mellen Press; " has been described by others as "a hawkish Washington" group" Institute for the Study of War - these are just the first three that come up in a search for the exact phrase "described by others". variant of this phrase will yield countless more. What is your policy based objection to using "others", when supported by multiple sources? WP:Weasel clearly says " views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions". Bad Dryer (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't know how many times I have to say this, but we do not use a weasel word that has no defined boundaries like "others" when calling someone a politically-charged word like "terrorist". That is Wikipedia policy. I gave you the links to WP:Terrorist which is a pretty quick read: Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution.
 * I gave you the link to WP:Weasel: Weasel words are words and phrases aimed at creating an impression that something specific and meaningful has been said, when in fact only a vague or ambiguous claim has been communicated ... Claims about what people say, think, feel, or believe, and what has been shown, demonstrated, or proved should be clearly attributed. Some weasel word are not automatically weasel words, as they may also be used in the lead section of an article or in a topic sentence of a paragraph, where the article body or the rest of the paragraph supplies attribution. Likewise, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the Neutral point of view.
 * And what multiple editors? You and Nice Guy? There are two other editors here who disagree with you. --Al Ameer (talk) 18:55, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You are being quite selective in your usgae of policy. Let me bold the relevant part for you:
 * WP:TERRORIST: "Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject".
 * WP:Weasel:"Some weasel word are ''not automatically weasel words,...views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions"
 * Could you also esxplain why you are not objecting to the Weaselly usage of "Palestinians viewed him as a martyr"? Bad Dryer (talk) 19:04, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You forgot the "in which case use in-text attribution" and that if such weasel words are to be used in the lead, which is a summary of the article, then the "article body or the rest of the paragraph [needs tp] supply [sic] attribution". And I do object to the weasely usage of "Palestinians viewed him as martyr" and said twice above that the whole sentence should be removed until we get proper sourcing and more explicit support. Also, for the record, the two sources you pointed to above don't explicitly call al-Wazir a terrorist but say he was Arafat's right hand man and the head of Fatah's or the PLO's terrorist operations. See, Likewise, views which are properly attributed to a reliable source may use similar expressions if they accurately represent the opinions of the source. Reliable sources may analyze and interpret, but we, as editors, cannot do so ourselves, since that would be original research or would violate the Neutral point of view. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, you said you objected to the Palestinian description, but have not removed it. Why? I will add the in-text direct attribution to the Encyclopedia of Terrorism, as well as to several other sources shortly. Bad Dryer (talk) 19:13, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I just removed it. By the way the line also included that Israelis considered him a terrorist so it's not like I was editing in a biased way. And you will be reverted and maybe even reported for ignoring the talk and unilaterally pushing your POV in an obvious way. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:42, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, the sage encyclopedia of terrorism calls Wazir the head of the PLO's terrorist operations. This is the POV of SAGE and must be attributed to SAGE or the author of the entry and it describes the PLO as a terrorist organization which is an obvious POV and I hope you could see that. --Al Ameer (talk) 19:47, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Will you also be reverted and maybe even reported for ignoring the talk and unilaterally pushing your POV in an obvious way? I don't respond well to threats, and make sure to keep your hands clean (they are not, currently) if you are considering a report - per WP:BOOMERANG. Bad Dryer (talk) 19:49, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I've been here for over 8 years and have been an administrator for most of that time so I have bit of familiarity with policy when it comes to NPOV. I'm telling you because I know, not because I'm making it up, that it is Wikipedia policy to attribute such highly-charged opinions to their holders and only if the cited source explicitly says so per WP:Original research. In other words calling al-Wazir the head of the PLO's terrorist operations is different than calling him a high-profile terrorist. And then of course, we have to consider WP:UNDUE; does the opinion of the SAGE encyclopedia have enough weight to be given priority in the lead? These are in addition to WP:Terrorist and WP:Weasel that I noted above and which you selectively and incorrectly interpreted. There are numerous policies that support the basic concept that I've been arguing and I know that you are relatively new here, but that's just how it is. Wikipedia's not a place to push POVs. Your argument that I'm pushing a POV has absolutely no merit. I had no problem removing the line about Palestinians considering him a martyr and Israelis considering him a terrorist because the sources did not adequately support it so your charge that I'm editing in a biased way simply doesn't hold. I've never reported anyone (at least I can't remember) for this kind of POV pushing and I'd rather not start now, but it is becoming clearer that you don't want to grasp simple and long-time Wikipedia guidelines. If you would like to report me, go ahead, you will fail I promise. --Al Ameer (talk) 20:52, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You seemed to have no WP:UNDUE problem with Chomksy's opinion, from his personal website, being in the lead (in fact, you put it there), yet question the use of an academic source like SAGE encyclopedia. That is...interesting. It took quite a bit of prodding to get you to remove that from the article. Like I said, administrator or not, you should weigh your own actions here VERY carefully (e.g reverting twice, removing sourced material w/o consensus, before even starting to participate in the discussion on the Talk page) before reporting. I am well aware of the clannish behavior of admins, bit I've also seem enough of them being sanctioned. take care. Bad Dryer (talk) 21:45, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) It is your incorrect assumption that you eventually pushed me to remove the neutral—if not properly sourced—line, which as I've said for the hundredth time also included that "most Israelis considered him a terrorist" and not just a one-sided statement of how Palestinians view him. I also added the line a several years ago and I immediately agreed with the complaint that was raised here that the line was not adequately backed by the source and should be removed/replaced. And even if, as you falsely claim, that I did not want to remove it, I removed it anyway didn't I so what's your argument here? Nothing worth the salt. And for the record, with the exception of the DYK process, I rarely ever interact with other admins, not that I have a problem with any, so your assertion that "admins are clannish" doesn't apply. --Al Ameer (talk) 21:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * You may be an exception, but you'd be very hard pressed to seriously claim that there is no clannish behavior among admins. Anyway, you finally did the right thing and removed your statement (which was neither well sourced nor neutral), and whether it was my prodding that prompted it or something else is not really the point. Thank you for doing that. Bad Dryer (talk) 22:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Compare edit summary here with this claim that removing sourced material w/o consensus here is sanction worthy. As far as the content, Al Ameer is absolutely right. There is a source that flat out says most Israelis held that view, if you want to challenge the reliability of that go right ahead. But using a single other source to say unnamed others consider him a terrorist is both a NPOV and a WEASEL violation.  nableezy  - 21:50, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Really ? and which source "flat out says most Israelis held that view"? Be precise. Bad Dryer (talk) 22:57, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Khalil al-Wazir. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ipc.gov.ps/ipc_e/ipc_e-1/e_News/news2004/2004_04/108.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031203022645/http://www.jmcc.org/politics/pna/pagovnov03.htm to http://www.jmcc.org/politics/pna/pagovnov03.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Khalil al-Wazir. 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/20080929033140/http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/chronology/19631988.htm to http://www.passia.org/palestine_facts/chronology/19631988.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070510122154/http://www.palestinehistory.com/biography/palestine/palbio32.htm to http://www.palestinehistory.com/biography/palestine/palbio32.htm
 * Added tag to http://fr.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1181813047962&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140418233959/http://www.abujna.frplp.org/ to http://www.abujna.frplp.org/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:40, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Khalil al-Wazir


text: Category:Italian philologists

title: Category:Italian philologists


text:
Rabdentse

Rabdentse was the second capital of the former Kingdom of Sikkim from 1670 to 1814. The capital city was destroyed by the invading Gurkha army and only the ruins of the palace and the chortens are seen here now. However, the ruins of this city are seen close to Pelling and in West Sikkim district in the Northeastern Indian state of present-day Sikkim; Pemayangtse Monastery is one of the oldest monasteries in Sikkim which is close to the ruins. From the vantage point of this former capital, superb views of the Khanchendzonga ranges can be witnessed. This monument has been declared as of national importance by the Archaeological Survey of India. It was first established in 1670 by the 2nd Chogyal Tensung Namgyal son of the 1st Chogyal Phuntsog Namgyal by shifting from the first capital of Yuksom that was consecrated in 1642.

The Rabdentse ruins are part of Buddhist religious pilgrimage circuit starting with the first monastery at Yuksom known as the Dubdi Monastery, followed by Norbugang Chorten, Tashiding Monastery, the Pemayangtse Monastery, the Sanga Choeling Monastery, and the Khecheopalri Lake.

History
Phuntsog Namgyal, the first Chogyal or King of Sikkim, was consecrated as king of Sikkim at Yuksom and succeeded by his son, Tensung Namgyal in 1670. The reign of the Chogyal was peaceful and saw the capital shifted from Yuksom to Rabdentse. The Namgyal had three wives – a Tibetan, a Bhutanese and a Limbu girl. The Limbu girl, daughter of the Limbu chief Yo Yo-Hang had inducted seven girls from her family who all married into noble Sikkim families. Many of them became councillors to the King and were given the title Kazi, which gave them enormous powers and privileges.

The king's second wife's son Chador Namgyal, took over the reins of power in Sikkim, after his father's death, in 1700. He was a minor at that time. This outraged his elder half-sister Pendiongmu (daughter of the first wife of Tensung Namgyal), of Bhutanese descent, who opposed the succession and with help from Bhutan evicted Chador. Chador fled to Tibet (Yungthing Yeshe, a loyal Minister escorted the minor king to Lhasa) where he remained in exile for ten years before returning and reclaiming his lost territory with the help of the Tibetans.

While in Lhasa, Chador Namgyal became very proficient in Buddhism and Tibetan literature, and also became the state astrologer to the Sixth Dalai Lama. During his exile, the Sixth Dalai Lama pleased with the erudition of Chador Namgyal had conferred on his exclusive rights to an estate in Tibet. During this period, the son of Yugthing Yeshe (who had saved Chador and taken him to Tibet) was imprisoned by the Bhutanese in Rabdentse. Tibet intervened in the matter and also prevailed on King Deb of Bhutan to withdraw from Sikkim. Chador Namgyal then returned to Rebdantse and the small forces of Bhutan which remained were forced to withdraw. During this period, Sikkim lost some areas in its south-eastern region since Bhutan had colonized the area.

Pedi, the Chogyal's half-sister, had not given up on her enmity against her half brother Chador. With the help of a medicinal man from Tibet, she got Chador Namgyal murdered in 1716 through mysterious bloodletting from the main artery while the king was on a holiday at the Ralang hot water spring. Immediately, the royal armed forces executed the Tibetan doctor and also put Pedi to death by strangling her with a silk scarf.

Gurmed Namgyal succeeded his father Chadok in 1717. Gurmed's reign saw many skirmishes between the Nepalese and Sikkimese. He had Rabdentse fortified to prevent invasions by the Gurkhas (Nepalese) and Bhutanese. Besides, a local Magar chieftain Tashi Bidur had also rebelled but was subdued.died in 1733 at the young age of 26. Since he did not have any legitimate children, on his death bed he conveyed that a nun at Sanga Cheoling was carrying his child (this is said to be the story concocted by the Lamas to perpetuate the Namgyal dynasty). Subsequently, the nun gave birth to a male child who was accepted as heir to Gurmed and was given the name Phuntsog, after the first temporal and the spiritual head of Sikkim.

Phunstog Namgyal II, the illegitimate child of Gurmed, succeeded his father to the throne in 1733. His reign was tumultuous as he was faced with attacks by the Bhutanese and the Nepalese, apart from rebellions within Sikkim from Magars and the Tsongas in 1752. Since Namgyal II was a weak king, the Nepalese had made 17 invasions against Sikkim. Bhutan had also attacked Sikkim and occupied areas east of Tista River; however, they later withdrew to present frontiers after negotiations held at Rhenock.

Tenzing Namgyal, the next king was also a weak ruler, and his sovereignty saw most of Sikkim being appropriated by Nepal. The Chogyal was forced to flee from Rabdentse to Lhasa where he died in 1780. Tshudpud Namgyal, his son returned to Sikkim in 1793 to reclaim the throne with the help of China. Finding Rabdentse too close to the Nepalese border, he shifted the capital to Tumlong. Consequent to the repeated attacks by the Bhutanese and Nepalese over the many invasions, the capital city was reduced to ruins by the liberating army of Nepal.

Structures
Rabdentse Palace, Sikkim, India.jpg The ruins seen now in Rabdentse consist mainly of "chunky wall stubs" whose heritage value is accentuated by its location on a ridge, near upper Pelling (3 km away) from where commanding views of the Kanchendzong hill ranges and surroundings on one side and the mountains and valleys on the other side are visible. The approach to this location is from an ornamental yellow gate near the Pelling–Geyshing road, from where it is a walking distance of about 15 minutes through a lake and forested hills.

Along the trek path from the gate, an avenue of chestnut trees with sodden moss leads to a stone throne comprising three standing stones called "Namphogang", which was the pulpit of the judges from where judgments were pronounced during the active days of the king's reign from Rabdentse. Further ahead, the 'Taphap Chorten' is seen in the semi-ruined condition. This was the entry point to the palace and people seeking access to the palace had to dismount from their horses and remove their hat as a mark of respect to the King here. The palace ruins are at the center of the fourth courtyard.

The ruins of the palace are made up of two of the northern and southern wings. The northern wing was the residence of the royal family. This wing has an open quadrangle where the "Dab Lhagang", now in ruins, is also seen; the royal family used to offer prayers with incense to their deities here. A white marble slab of size 7 ftx5 ft (reported to have been shifted from the river and carried by a single person ) is also seen at this location, which was once the location of the monastery known as "Risum Gompa".

Next to the ruins of the palace are three chortens, religious sites where members of the royal family offered incense to the deities. The chortens are in a fair state of preservation. On the southern wing, common people were given an audience by the king, which is obvious from the stone throne seen here. The Archaeological Survey of India has declared Rabdentse as a heritage monument and has undertaken the needed preservation and restoration measures.

title: Rabdentse


text:
Talk:Thiruvannaamalai district

Fair use rationale for Image:Tnlogo.png
Image:Tnlogo.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:00, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Thiruvannaamalai district


text:
Sound of Truth: The Independent Collection

Sound of Truth: The Independent Collection is a 1997 album by 54-40. It compiles the band's first two independent releases, 1982's Selection (tracks 10-15) and 1984's Set the Fire (tracks 1-9).

Track listing

 * 1) "Set the Fire"  – 4:51
 * 2) "A Big Idea"  – 3:39
 * 3) "What to Do Now"  – 3:10
 * 4) "Sound of Truth"  – 4:24
 * 5) "Around the Bend"  – 5:35
 * 6) "One Place Set"  – 3:27
 * 7) "Cha Cha"  – 5:22
 * 8) "Lost My Hand"  – 4:28
 * 9) "Broken Pieces"  – 6:41
 * 10) "Yank"  – 4:54
 * 11) "He's Got"  – 3:14
 * 12) "Vows, Sobs, Tears & Kisses"  – 3:39
 * 13) "Selection"  – 4:17
 * 14) "Re-in-living"  – 3:52
 * 15) "(Jamming with) Lawrence"  – 5:12


title: User:210.8.252.2


text:
Patrick Collins (mayor)

Patrick Andrew Collins (March 12, 1844 – September 13, 1905)  was an American politician lawyer who served as mayor of Boston and as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts.

Early life
Collins was born March 12, 1844, near Fermoy, County Cork, Ireland. His family emigrated to the United States and settled in Chelsea, Massachusetts, in 1848 after the death of his father.

Collins attended public schools until the age of 12. He then worked at various trades in Massachusetts and Ohio. At age 15, he returned to Boston and learned the upholstery trade. Working in an upholstery shop, he rose to position of foreman and became active in the trade union movement. He became a secretary of his union and a delegate to the Trades Assembly.

Interested in a career in law, Collins saved his money and became active in politics.

Public service
In 1867, Collins was nominated for a seat in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. Shortly afterward, he started working for a law firm. He was elected to the House, serving two terms in 1868 and 1869. He then served two terms in the Massachusetts Senate in 1870 and 1871. During his time in the state legislature, he studied law at Harvard Law School. He graduated and was admitted to the bar in 1871.

Collins practiced law in Boston. He served as judge advocate general of Massachusetts in 1875. He also served as delegate to the Democratic National Conventions in 1876, 1880, 1888, and 1892. He lived on Percival Street in Meeting House Hill in Dorchester.

Collins was elected to the U.S. Congress in 1882 and served three terms in the 48th, 49th and 50th Congresses from 1883 to 1889. He was also Chairman of the Democratic State Committee from 1884 to 1890. He retired from Congress in 1889 and resumed his law practice. He also served on the boards of directors of several companies and civic organizations. Collins served as consul general in London under President Grover Cleveland from May 6, 1893, to May 17, 1897.

Collins was the Democratic candidate for Mayor of Boston three times. In December 1899, he lost to Republican incumbent Thomas N. Hart (40,838 votes to 38,557 votes). The two candidates had a rematch in the December 1901 election, this time with Collins prevailing (52,035–33,196) to win his first term as mayor. Collins was re-elected in December 1903, defeating Republican challenger George N. Swallow (48,745–22,369). Collins served as mayor from January 1902 until his death. He died during an official visit to Hot Springs, Virginia, on September 13, 1905. He was interred in Holyhood Cemetery in Brookline, Massachusetts. His memorial includes a bronze portrait sculpture by renowned sculptor Cyrus Dallin who also designed the cross made from Tennessee marble.

title: Patrick Collins (mayor)


text:
Erik Breukink

Erik Breukink (born 1 April 1964) is a former Dutch professional road racing cyclist. In 1988, Breukink won the youth competition in the Tour de France. In 1990, finished 3rd in the 1990 Tour de France. Most recently, he served as the manager of the team.

Amateur cycling years
Born in Rheden, Breukink was born in a cycling family, as his father Willem Breukink was director of the Gazelle bicycle factory. Despite this, he chose to be a footballer. In 1980 he changed to pursue a cycling career. In 1982, this appeared to be a good choice, when he won the Dutch national pursuit championship for juniors. At the 1984 Olympic Games, Erik Breukink competed with Gert Jakobs, Maarten Ducrot and Jos Alberts in the 100 km Team Pursuit and finish fourth place. In 1985, Breukink won 2 time trial stages in Olympia's Tour, and finished 3rd place overall. He decided to switch to a professional career.

Professional cycling years
Breukink made his debut as a pro in 1986 for the Skala-Gazelle team. He turned out to be a time trial specialist and was a good climber. In his Tour de France debut in 1987, he won one stage and finished second in the young rider classification. His real breakthrough in the major courses was the 1988 Giro d'Italia, where he debuted with a 2nd place, winning the Gavia Pass stage in a snowstorm. In the 1988 Tour de France he won the young rider classification and finished 13th place. In the 1989 Tour de France, he showed his time trial skills by winning the prologue, and wearing the yellow jersey for one day. In that year's Giro d'Italia, he almost won, but lost the lead in the Dolomites due to hunger. In 1990, Breukink wanted to focus on the Tour de France, so he switched to the PDM team, that allowed him to do so. In the 1990 Tour de France, the result was good, winning two stages and finishing 3rd overall. The result could even have been better, but Breukink suffered from some bad luck: in the climb to the Tourmalet Breukink had to switch bicycles three times. In 1991, Breukink together with the entire PDM-team had to leave the tour ranked 3rd, officially due to food poisoning, but it was later exposed that it was due to Intralipid. In 1992, he appeared weak, especially in his favourite time trials. In 1993, Breukink switched to the team, where his performance improved again. Bad luck followed him however, as just before the start of the 1993 Tour de France, he was hit by a car test riding the new Lotus 110. The damage to his left knee caused him to give up during the Tour. Breukink rode the Tour de France four times afterwards, but never reached his old level. In 1997 he ended his professional cycling career, having ridden 11 Tours de France and won 4 stages. He garnered 61 career victories in total.

Sports commentator
After one year as a Public Relations officer for the Rabobank-team, Breukink started as co-commentator for the NOS, covering the Tour de France. In 2002 and 2003, the GP Erik Breukink, a UCI level 2.3 course, was run, with Erik Dekker and Fabian Cancellara as winners, but it was discontinued in 2004 due to financial problems.

Team manager
On 13 January 2004, it was announced that Erik Breukink started as a team manager for the team. Thanks to his ONCE-years, Erik Breukink speaks Spanish fluently, which is helpful to communicate with the Spanish cyclists in the Rabobank team and cyclist Denis Menchov, who also speaks Spanish better than English. Since Breukink became team manager, the Rabobank cycling team's successes have included Paris–Tours, Milan–San Remo, the Brabantse Pijl (3×), the Tirreno–Adriatico (2×), the Tour de Romandie, the final classification and three stages in the Vuelta a España, 6 stages in the Tour de France and the mountains classification (2×) in the Tour de France. On, 20 July 2006, Breukink received the "médaille de la fidélité" from the Tour de France organisation, because he had been present in the Tour de France for 20 years. (11 times as rider, 1 time as PR-officer, 5 times as sports commentator and 3 times as team manager).

Major results

 * 1982
 * 1st MaillotHolanda.PNG Team pursuit, National Track Championships

 * 1984
 * 3rd Overall Olympia's Tour
 * 1st Stage 7a

 * 1985
 * Olympia's Tour
 * 1st Prologue & Stage 7a
 * 1st Stage 4b Tour de Liège

 * 1986
 * 1st Stage 4 Tour de Suisse

 * 1987
 * 1st Stage 13 Tour de France
 * 3rd Overall Giro d'Italia
 * 1st Stage 1a
 * Held Jersey pink.svg after Stages 1a–2
 * Held Jersey violet.svg after Stages 1a–3
 * Held Jersey green.svg after Stages 1a & 1b
 * 4th Grand Prix Eddy Merckx
 * 4th Circuit des Frontières
 * 6th Nokere Koerse

 * 1988
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Tour of the Basque Country
 * 1st Stages 5a & 5b (ITT)
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Critérium International
 * 1st Stage 3 (ITT)
 * 1st Omloop van het Waasland
 * Tour de France
 * 1st Jersey white.svg Young rider classification
 * 1st Stage 2 (TTT)
 * 2nd Overall Giro d'Italia
 * 1st Stage 14
 * 2nd Overall Ronde van Nederland

 * 1989
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Escalada a Montjuïc
 * 1st Stages 1a & 1b (ITT)
 * Tour de Romandie
 * 1st Prologue & Stage 4b
 * Tour de France
 * 1st Prologue
 * Held Jersey yellow.svg & Jersey green.svg after Prologue
 * 1st Stage 6b (ITT) Volta a Catalunya
 * 4th Overall Giro d'Italia
 * Held Jersey pink.svg after Stages 8 & 10–13
 * 7th Overall Nissan Classic
 * 9th Milano–Torino

 * 1990
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Nissan Classic
 * 1st Stage 2a (ITT)
 * 1st Stage 4 (ITT) Tour de Suisse
 * 1st Stage 8 (ITT) Tirreno–Adriatico
 * 1st Stage 7a (ITT) Volta a Catalunya
 * 1st Stage 1b (ITT) Vuelta a Asturias
 * 1st Grand Prix de la Libération (TTT)
 * 2nd Overall Ronde van Nederland
 * 3rd Overall Tour de France
 * 1st Stages 12 (ITT) & 20 (ITT)
 * 3rd Overall Tour DuPont
 * 10th Overall Tour of the Basque Country

 * 1991
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Tour DuPont
 * 1st Prologue & Stage 11
 * 1st Grand Prix Eddy Merckx
 * 1st Stage 8 (ITT) Tirreno–Adriatico
 * 2nd Grand Prix des Nations
 * 3rd Overall Escalada a Montjuïc
 * 3rd Overall Vuelta a Asturias
 * 3rd Road race, National Road Championships
 * 5th Overall Critérium International

 * 1992
 * 1st Giro del Piemonte
 * Tirreno–Adriatico
 * 1st Prologue & 7 (ITT)
 * 1st Stage 7 (ITT) Vuelta a España
 * 2nd Overall Volta a la Comunitat Valenciana
 * 3rd Road race, National Road Championships
 * 6th Overall Ronde van Nederland
 * 7th Overall Tour de France
 * 7th Overall Tour de Suisse
 * 8th Overall Tour of the Basque Country

 * 1993
 * 1st MaillotHolanda.PNG Road race, National Road Championships
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Critérium International
 * 1st Stage 3 (ITT)
 * 1st Jersey yellow.svg Overall Ronde van Nederland
 * 1st Stage 3b (ITT)
 * 1st Jersey blue.svg Overall Vuelta a Asturias
 * 1st Stage 1
 * 1st Stage 2 Volta a la Comunitat Valenciana
 * 4th La Flèche Wallonne
 * 5th Overall Paris–Nice
 * 7th Overall Vuelta a España
 * 8th Overall Tour of the Basque Country

 * 1994
 * 4th Time trial, UCI Road World Championships
 * 8th Overall Volta a Catalunya
 * 8th Overall Ronde van Nederland

 * 1995
 * 1st MaillotHolanda.PNG Time trial, National Road Championships
 * 2nd Overall Vuelta a Murcia
 * 2nd Subida a Urkiola
 * 4th Overall Critérium International
 * 5th Overall Ronde van Nederland
 * 6th Time trial, UCI Road World Championships

 * 1996
 * 1st Druivenkoers Overijse
 * 3rd Overall Tour de Luxembourg
 * 7th Overall Ronde van Nederland

 * 1997
 * National Road Championships
 * 1st MaillotHolanda.PNG Time trial
 * 2nd Road race
 * 3rd Overall Tour de Luxembourg
 * 5th Overall Ronde van Nederland
 * 5th Grand Prix des Nations
 * 7th Time trial, UCI Road World Championships

title: Erik Breukink


text:
Ovicaprid

In zooarchaeology and paleontology, ovicaprids or caprines are domestic sheep and goats taken together.

Distinguishing sheep and goats from post-cranial skeletal remains has historically been difficult, so in many archaeological reports, the two are often reported in a single ovis/capra category. This is problematic because of their different roles in early animal husbandry.

Nonetheless, experienced analysts using systematic criteria can distinguish the two with high reliability. They can also be distinguished using DNA analysis or collagen fingerprinting. Collagen has the advantage of surviving longer than DNA.

title: Ovicaprid


text: Category:China-related lists

title: Category:China-related lists


text:
John T. Browne

John Thomas Browne (March 23, 1845 – August 19, 1941) was an American merchant and politician. He served on the Houston City Council, two terms as Mayor of Houston, and three terms in the Texas House of Representatives.

Early life
John Thomas Browne was born March 23, 1845, in Ballylanders, County Limerick, Ireland to Michael and Winifred (Hennessy) Browne. His family emigrated into the United States in October 1851. Not long after arriving in New Orleans, his father died. In 1852, Winifred relocated with her five children to Houston, Texas to be closer to family of her mother. Winifred's Irish uncle, Patrick Hayes, was an herbal medicine doctor and farmer in Madison County, Texas.

Browne spent much of the 1850s on Spann Plantation in Washington County, Texas at the behest of Father Gunnard, where he also received an education. At age fourteen in 1859, he left the plantation and found work hauling bricks in Madison County, Texas. He returned to Houston to first work as a baggage hauler, then performed messenger duties for Commercial and Southwestern Express Company before settling in at the Houston and Texas Central Railroad. The 1860 Census listed John residing with his mother in Houston's Fourth Ward.

Civil War
Correction: The tombstone of Mayor John T. Browne in the City of Houston actually states that he served in Company A, 36 Texas Cavalry. Family history passed down that he was seriously wounded in a major battle of the Civil War, but recovered fully. Browne joined the Confederacy, officially serving in Company B of the Second Texas Infantry. He served in Houston, detached from his unit, maintaining employment with the Houston and Texas Central Railroad, but in a new capacity as a fireman. He was briefly dispatched to the defense of Galveston, Texas. He was officially released from military duty in Houston on June 27, 1865.

Rise to the Merchant Class
Browne returned to messenger service in Houston after the Civil War. He worked for Adams Express Company, then for Southern Express Company. He transitioned into the grocery business first as a bookkeeper and clerk for H.P. Levy.

Browne married Mary Jane "Mollie" Bergin on September 13, 1871. They were the first marriage to be recorded at the Annunciation Catholic Church. In 1872, Browne and Charles Bollfrass started a business as wholesale and retail grocers with $500 in capital. By the early 1890s, this grocery was amassing about $340,000 in annual sales.

He was a member of the Ancient Order of Hibernians and the Knights of Columbus.

Political life
Browne was elected to Houston City Council, representing the Fifth Ward while chairing the Finance Committee in 1887. He ran for Mayor of Houston in 1892. He won in a landslide: 3900 to 600. During his time as mayor he lived in the Fifth Ward. Browne's first term as Mayor of Houston began the same year as the Panic of 1893. He had campaigned on a platform of balancing the budget. The City of Houston ran budget deficits during Browne's first term, but these deficits were proportionately lower than those in previous years. Browne had been an advocate for lowering municipal utility bills through municipal ownership of the utilities. However, estimates for the City of Houston to build its own waterworks and electrical power plant had gone up to a range $500,000 to $900,000. Browne abandoned this option while favoring a policy of dedicating all capital spending on street paving and sewerage. The Browne administration also hired a city planning expert to study demands based hypothetically on a population of 75,000.

Mayor Browne proposed converting the Houston Volunteer Firefighters to a professional department under municipal management. The City of Houston would need to buy existing equipment and horses from the volunteer department, but could lease firehouses and would not be required to buy them. Houston City Council drafted an ordinance and passed it.

In April 1895, the Texas Supreme Court ruling in Higgins v. Bordages, "held that special assessment tax liens were unenforceable against urban homesteads." The City of Houston imposed special tax levies for road and sewerage projects on owners of property abutting the sections of street being improved. The ruling effectively removed the only tool the city had for enforcing payment of the special assessments by homeowners. Road construction contractors stopped all work because they feared the city would not pay them. Many homeowners stopped paying their assessment bills.

To meet this immediate revenue crisis, the Browne administration devised a plan to issue $500,000 in municipal bonds to be sold over a three to four-year period. The Labor Council opposed the bonding measure and organized to defeat the measure when the referendum made it to the ballot. The City of Houston would need to find another way to compensate for $300,000 in uncollected taxes.

Browne represented Houston in the Texas House of Representatives from 1897 to 1899, and again in 1907.

Death
Browne died on August 19, 1941, of pneumonia in Houston. He was buried at Glenwood Cemetery in Houston. He was survived by six children and thirty-eight grand children.

In 1979, his former residence in the Fifth Ward was used by an Italian American-owned grocery, Orlando's Grocery.

title: John T. Browne


text:
Heavy Mellow

Heavy Mellow is a 1999 live album by Canadian rock group, 54-40.

It is a two-disc set; as its name implies, one disc contains "heavy" rock performances and the other contains "mellow" acoustic renditions. Many acoustic album versions vary greatly from their studio counterparts, due to the addition of new instruments that weren't used before (such as accordions). These tracks include "Radio Luv Song", "Crossing a Canyon", and "Miss You". In addition, the live version of "Music Man" is extended compared to the studio version. At least some tracks were recorded at the October 28th, 1998 show at the Phoenix club in Toronto.

Disc one

 * 1) "She La"
 * 2) "Ocean Pearl"
 * 3) "Nice to Luv You"
 * 4) "Lies to Me"
 * 5) "Since When"
 * 6) "Assoholic"
 * 7) "Baby Ran"
 * 8) "Music Man"
 * 9) "Love You All"

Disc two

 * 1) "One Gun"
 * 2) "One Day in Your Life"
 * 3) "Miss You"
 * 4) "Radio Luv Song"
 * 5) "I Go Blind"
 * 6) "Crossing a Canyon"
 * 7) "I Could Give You More"
 * 8) "Laughing"
 * 9) "She La"
 * 10) "Ocean Pearl"

title: Heavy Mellow