I cannot pretend to feel impartial about colours. I rejoice

with the brilliant ones and am genuinely sorry for the

poor browns.

- Sir Winston Churchill

 

One should absorb the colour of life, but one

should never remember its details. Details are

always vulgar.

- Oscar Wilde, "The Picture of Dorian Gray"

 

***

 

PHOTO:

 

Taken in Alanya, Turkey.

 

00 September 2007

 

Svp, info about this unique place can be seen

here and

on my notes to this photo above

So what was meant to be an October project has somehow ballooned. Amet has recounted a bit of this on her own entry but for a little further detail. I /love/ Halloween. Especially Halloween for the dolls. I love trying to think of costumes and nifty ways to photograph them for it. It's a bit of a set up because I always want to try something new and a step up from what we did the year before. We had been bandying around the idea of doing Egyptian gear this year but that wasn't feeling right (as pretty as it would be).

 

I happened to stumble onto Brighnasa's shop on Etsy; it's long, long been in my favorites but I hadn't actually bought anything from her. I guess we needed to find that one perfect item. In this case, it was a ridiculously pretty lock and key back mechanism and as soon as we both saw it, we knew what we could do with it. In short, we got an IDEA and then it got bigger (with a little help from Volks and their sudden steampunk outfit release).

 

The initial idea was to try and take pictures through out October and include writing with it. At this point, I think this has the potential to run long past October. At least I hope it will. I'm excited to try and tell a story again through pictures and writing. I feel like Amet and I have been writing for ourselves for so long that putting some of this out in public again feels daunting. We did have a blast last year though when we attempted to tell a story with our characters through ADAW. Having something less prompt driven and more in our control is exciting and will hopefully be more enjoyable to read.

 

One last quick note, Mitchell's nickname is Misha which is what is used in this piece. Mitchell is owned by Amet.

 

---

 

"Ronan half-turns from the counter to look for his companion and then pauses. Misha is standing in front of the window display, ostensibly inspecting the tools laid out for potential buyers but Ronan can see Misha's head isn't tipped downward. His gaze is fixed on the window glass instead where Misha is studying the faint wavery reflection of himself, smiling features relaxed, sliding into almost blankness.

 

If Misha were human, his gaze might have been called unfocused. It's certainly far more pensive certainly than is his norm, full lips parted and blue eyes faint strips of dark color under pale lowered lashes. The boundless sense of energy that leaves Misha with restless, graceful movements is stilled for once so that the only thing that stirs in Misha's bearing is the silver turnkey in his back, filigree handle making minute twitches as it winds.

 

His hand tightens on the lid of his package, Ronan watching him, telling himself that he's inspecting his handiwork again. Admiring the craftsmanship that came together so perfectly that it still feels like a miracle. His own distance from his creations is suspect, the lines blurred when he thinks of them as friends. Ronan knows it is a failure on his part that he lacks impartiality, that he cannot simply take pride in his work and nothing more. The last line of objectivity (and humility) he has is being able to admire their beauty and not succumb to it.

 

Misha is sorely testing that. There is nothing distant or friendly in the way Ronan finds himself admiring Misha's profile, the slender lines of his muscular legs and wiry hips and the way his back emerges, solid and proud. There is nothing objective in noticing those sweetly curving lips and strong nose or the way his eyes are heavy-lidded, secretive and dreamy. He is beautiful, mannerisms more human than some of the people in this shop -- at least to Ronan and perhaps he is biased.

 

Misha feels like a miracle and Ronan knows he is an awful, terrible person because Misha isn't supposed to be with him at all. Misha isn't supposed to be his and yet the only thing that feels like it matters these days, the only awareness he can't seem to shake, is that of Misha is by his side."

 

---

 

Please check out Amet's post for the next part of this preview.

 

Outfit stats:

Clothing by Volks

Wig by Monique Trading

Necklace and pearl bracelets by Amet

Wood and rose bracelet by Shawnah

A character I had to make for my comparative civilizations course a few years ago. Keep in mind there are changes I made to overall greek myth to allow for this character to work.

 

Aequitas

God of Justice

Mythology: Hephaestus creates a scale with two sides. One was Aequitas, the God of Justice, and his brother Fraus, who is the God of Deception and Crime. When created, Fraus was given the Captio daggers, which gave him access to his powers. Aequitas was given a sarissae (a 21ft spear for those that don't know) as a symbol that justice has no boundaries. Along with that, Hephaestus gave Aequitas a "miniforge" (basically just a lantern), as a sign that justice can't die out/falter. Since they were polar opposites of each other, they never got along. Fraus committed many crimes against the gods, and they wanted to convict him. Aequitas still cared for his brother even if they didn't get along, so he tried to turn a blind eye just for his brother. The gods banished Aequitas and stitched his eyes shut as a symbol of justice being blind, and that it should be impartial with justice meted out objectively without bias or prejudice. Aequitas would live in banishment without eyesight and would bring justice to the world without biasness or prejudice. After several years of service, he was allowed back into Olympus.

Candles lit in honour of the millions of butchered Bangladeshi's massacred by the Pakistani army and their cohorts during Bangladesh's liberation war for freedom in 1971.

 

The Shahbag Mass Movement of 2013 in Bangladesh began on February 5, 2013 in Dhaka, Bangladesh, with the demand of capital punishment for Abdul Quader Mollah and all other accused war criminals of the 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War.

 

On February 5, 2013, the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal sentenced Mollah to life in prison because he was proved guilty of committing genocide, murder and rape (including rape of underage girls) during the liberation war. International human rights groups have, however, raised questions about the conduct of the tribunals.

 

Human Rights Watch has said, "The trials against (...) the alleged war criminals are deeply problematic, riddled with questions about the independence and impartiality of the judges and fairness of the process; and that they had found that "glaring violations of fair trial standards" became apparent in the course of 2012.

 

Mollah was found guilty by this tribunal of being behind a series of killings including large-scale massacres in the Mirpur area of Dhaka, which earned him the nickname of "Mirpurer Koshai (মিরপুরের কসাই)" - Butcher of Mirpur.

 

The movement began at the Shahbag intersection in the heart of Dhaka city. The intersection was soon referred by participants and media as Projonmo Chottor (প্রজন্ম চত্ত্বর), or Generation Square (English translation), which hints at the spontaneous protests and mass movement of youth.

 

Tens of thousands have been holding vigil at Shahbag demanding that they will not leave the streets until Mollah receives capital punishment.

 

Recently I had the honor and pleasure to juror the "5th Annual Drawing Discourse Exhibition" at the University of North Carolina Asheville. There were over 1,100 entries and I was tasked with choosing 30+/- works. The quality of the work was very high and I could have easily chosen any of the top 300 to be in the exhibition. It was the most difficult exhibition jurying I've experienced narrowing it down to 37 works.

 

In January I was able to travel to Asheville to see the work in the exhibition and meet a number of the artists. UNC Asheville professor (and extraordinary artist) Tamie Beldue - the person behind this series of exhibitions - was a wonderful host and is to be commended for her work in bringing these exhibitions together.

 

Tamie also put together the excellent catalogue for the exhibition which is now on-line via Blurb. It includes some rambling thoughts on the exhibition and contemporary drawing by yours truly. You can check it out at the following link. And if you like it buy it or have your local library order it. (Of course I am completely impartial.)

 

www.blurb.com/books/5108449-drawing-discourse

  

Here are some of the amazing artists in the show: Serena Potter, Janvier Rollande, David Stanger, Sue Bryan, Elena Peteva, Krystal Harper, Evie Woltil Richner, Chris LaPorte, Julie Comnick, David Allison, Zoe Hawk, Gillian Lambert, Anthony Pessler, Rachael Davis, Laura Lark, Aaron Bernard, Jeffrey Fichera, Justin Sorenson and Camille Demarinis.

Le château de Pupetières est situé dans la vallée de la Bourbre, au pied du vallon de Lamartine. Le Château a été construit au XIIIème à la suite du mariage de Béatrix de Virieu et Sibould de Clermont.

 

Le château de Virieu donné en dot à la famille de Clermont, la brande cadette fait construire le château de Pupetières. Cette première demeure prend la forme d'une maison forte, représentée ci-dessus par Stéphanie de Virieu.

 

La famille de Virieu demeura à Pupetières jusqu'à la Révolution française.

 

François Henri de Virieu né à Grenoble le 13 août 1754. Devenu orphelin à l'âge de 10 ans, il est confié à une amie intime de sa mère, la Duchesse de Rohan (marraine de François Henri) qui le place au collège d'Harcourt à Paris. Il n'avait que 15 ans quand sur l'ordre exprès du roi, il entre dans le corps des Mousquetaires gris. On le trouve deux ans plus tard lieutenant d'infanterie, puis capitaine à 18 ans. En 1780, il était maître de camp en second du régiment de Monsieur, qu'il quitte le 12 mars 1786 pour prendre le commandement du Régiment de Limousin Infanterie.

   

Esprit vif, sérieux et solide, d'une intelligence peu commune, il avait acquis une vaste culture qui l'amène à s'occuper de très près aux questions intéressant son pays et plus particulièrement sa province. Il devint Franc-maçon, sans que l'on sache où il fut reçu. Le tableau du 30 avril 1780 de la loge la "Bienfaisance" à l'Orient de Grenoble, fondé le 13 juillet 1778, indique qu'il était Maître Ecossais et Député des Loges réunies du Dauphiné. Sincèrement libéral, François Henri s'associe au mouvement issu de la noblesse et de la magistrature contre les décisions du pouvoir royal mettant en vacance les parlements provinciaux.

   

Passant outre, le Parlement Dauphinois se réunit courant mai 1788 et évoque déjà les principes d'une réforme générale de gouvernement, à savoir, convocation d'Etats généraux, vote des impôts par ceux-ci, doublement de la représentation du Tiers et vote par tête, toute mesure que le Marquis de Virieu approuvera. Le gouverneur ordonne l'exil du parlement qui décide l'envoi d'une délégation dirigée par François Henri à Versailles pour fournir des explications sur les événements. Très introduit à la cour, son crédit et son habileté réussirent à aplanir les difficultés et obtenir la convocation de l'assemblée provinciale. Mais c'est alors, en l'absence de la délégation que survint la Journée des tuiles le 7 juin 1788, jour fixé pour le départ des magistrats.

   

Grenoble se révolta, les soldats du gouverneur furent lapidés par des tuiles jetées du haut des toits.

 

Elu député de la noblesse aux Etats Généraux, François Henri était l'un des 47 membres de cet ordre qui, le 25 juin 1789 se réunirent au Tiers Etat. Très actif, il participe à tous les débats importants, vote de l'abolition des privilèges dans la nuit du 4 août, vote le 26 août de "la Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme". Partisan d'une monarchie constitutionnelle, il s'inscrit au Club des Impartiaux fondé au sein de la Constituante par les Députés modérés qui formaient une sorte de centre droit.

   

François Henri fut porté à la présidence de la Constituante le 27 avril 1790. Il donna sa démission car il refusa d'aliéner sa liberté quand on exigea qu'il fit le serment de ne protester contre aucune des décisions de l'assemblée.

 

Il se retira en 1790 en Dauphiné avec sa famille.

 

Quel fut le rôle de François Henri dans cette conjoncture?

 

Il a été profondément blessé par l'exécution de Louis XVI le 21 janvier précédent. Est ce la clairvoyance qui le poussa à décliner l'offre du commandement de l'armée assiégée en pressentant le drame qu'il allait arriver?

 

Il demande alors à son épouse de partir se réfugier en Suisse avec les deux filles ainées, Stéphanie et Eugénie. Le dernier, Aymon, est confié à sa nourrice à Lyon.

   

En octobre 1793, il accepte de prendre la tête de la seconde colonne. Il est tué par un boulet de canon à l'âge de 39 ans.

 

En 1804, La Marquise de Virieu revient de Suisse pour racheter les terres de Pupetières, du Grand Lemps et de Montrevel. Le château de Pupetières, dévasté et brûlé pendant la Révolution, la famille de Virieu s'installe au Grand Lemps. Aymon vient souvent admirer avec son ami Alphonse de Lamartine les ruines de Pupetières. C'est à cette occasion qu'Alphonse de Lamartine écrit son célèbre poème, le Vallon:

 

Aymon a toujours souhaité reconstruire Pupetières ; c'est son fils Alphonse, filleul de Lamartine, très attaché aux origines de sa famille, qui parvient à reconstruire le patrimoine familial. Il confie alors, en 1860, le projet au célèbre architecte Eugène Viollet le Duc. Ce dernier met son expertise au service de l'architecture et de la décoration intérieure du château, c'est à cela que l'on doit le style et le décor particulier de Pupetières.

 

Alphonse décide ensuite de racheter le château de Virieu, était sorti de la famille depuis le XIIIème siècle. Très attachée au Dauphiné, la famille entretient ses maisons. Le château de Virieu a été un des premiers châteaux ouverts au public, suivi de Pupetières, qui a ouvert ses portes en 2009.

.... I rejoice with the brilliant ones and am genuinely sorry for the poor browns."

 

Explore 4~15~09

 

Winston Churchill 1874-1965

 

One more from the Flower Fields. Here it is on black. ;))

Portfolio | Travel Blog | Tumblr | Youtube |Contact Me

Below is an excerpt from my travel blog. Cheers.

 

I walked around Melbourne yesterday for some time. I strolled through many different types of neighborhoods. Melbourne has a variety of different people and it's not hard to see why much of Australian pop culture stems from the interesting and creative people that live here. It got me to thinking what is Australia all about? What is Australia known for? Well there's the obvious Kangaroos and Koalas. Most people think about the landmarks; Uluru Rock (formerly Ayers Rock), the Outback, Sydney Harbor Bridge and Opera House.

 

What about famous people? I had no idea Rupert Murdoch (billionaire media magnate of News Corporation, now lives in the USA) was from Australia. In the acting field, you have Nicole Kidman, Hugh Jackman, Cate Blanchett, Ernie Dingo, Naomi Watts, Paul Hogan (Crocodile Dundee), Famous singers include the newly popular Kylie Minogue. There is of course Steve Irwin who was the Crocodile Hunter before his death a couple years ago. I'm sure there are many more but these are the names that come up in conversation the most here.

 

How would one characterize Australians? As a whole, most Australians are laid back and casual. This shows up in their dress attire as well. Most of their humor is often characterized as sarcastic, ironic and self-deprecating. Australians do love their beer and the bars usually make up the more lively places in town. Clubs are not as popular, although a few good ones can be found in the bigger city. Australian food is more impartial to that of the English and European menus. McDonald's however still exists even in the small Outback towns.

 

All in all, I'd sum up I'd summarize Australia as a laid back, casual extension of the English culture in a extremely different landscape. It has over time taken on a bit of Outback flavor giving it a unique identity that doesn't exist anywhere else.

 

I'm traveling the world right now. I have an HDR travel blog www.LostManProject.com if you're interested in following me. Cheers from Australia.

I camped on the BC coast for 11 nights, and without exception was in bed early and up early. "Bed" = sleeping bag, because I still use a tent and probably always will. I sleep best when I'm close to - but protected from - the elements.

 

On this morning I got up early, made a cup of filter drip coffee (dark roast, organic, fairly traded), and moseyed out onto the beach. Moseying is a habit I've learned this past decade, living on the prairie. And then I saw a sliver of sun poking up from a cloud bank across the strait, and quickly abandoning moseying mode, I ran for my camera.

 

Now here's the processing dilemma. My auto white balance didn't render the scene anything like I remember it, so I tinkered with it a LOT in Photoshop. I remember a red sun. I remember the gunmetal grey sea, with tinges of purple in the water and sky. This looks accurate to me, although slightly surreal. Is my memory trustworthy? And does it matter? Ah. Who knows; I sure don't. But I like it. I think it's close to accurate. And even that isn't a big problem, because we aren't trying to reproduce reality, are we? No. All photography is an interpretation.

 

I should add that the hazy layer above the cloud bank is smoke from forest fires. Almost all of BC was engulfed in smoke by late summer. To the climate change deniers: you are just plain wrong. Our situation is desperate, globally. Anyone who is willing to put aside vested interests and look at the evidence impartially can see this.

 

Photographed from a beach overlooking Broughton Strait, British Columbia (Canada). Don't use this image on websites, blogs, or other media without explicit permission © 2018 James R. Page - all rights reserved.

Everyone has an opinion.

Scotland vote on independence.

I have posted a view from all side to remain impartial.

 

A look at The Forum in Norwich — a striking sweep of glass and steel that anchors the city centre. Inside, the building houses shops, cafés, library spaces and one of its key occupants, the BBC.

 

The BBC studios here handle regional news and broadcasting for the East of England, producing local radio, television updates and community-focused journalism. Their presence gives The Forum a working, lived-in feel: reporters coming and going, live segments being prepared, and the quiet hum of a newsroom operating behind the glass.

 

In recent times the BBC as an organisation has faced wider scrutiny and criticism nationally, prompting debates about impartiality, public funding and how a modern broadcaster should operate. That wider conversation inevitably touches local centres like The Forum as well, where people see the BBC working at street level.

 

The Living Tribunal was not guided by any personal motivation or desires, but was entirely impartial, acting only in what was determined to be the greater interest of the universe. The Living Tribunal was a vastly powerful conceptual being, one who had existed since the multiverse came into exsistene. The Living Tribunal's only superior was the One-Above-All. The Tribunal manifests itself as a being with three faces, which represent the three sides of the Tribunal's personality. Its front face, through which it usually speaks, represents equity, the fully hooded face on its right side represents necessity, and the partially hooded face on its left represents just revenge. All three voices must agree in a case before the Tribunal can intervene.

It's a Yes for Him....

Scotland voting on independence. I have posted pics from both sides to remain impartial.

 

If people bring so much courage to this world the world has to kill them to break them, so of course it kills them. The world breaks every one and afterward many are strong at the broken places. But those that will not break it kills. It kills the very good, and the very gentle, and the very brave impartially. If you are none of these you can be sure it will kill you too, but there will be no special hurry.”

Ernest Hemingway

  

;-) Texto en castellano mas abajo ;-)

 

Excuse me the many mistakes that sure I have committed in the translation, I hope that it is understood regardless!

 

Development of the trilogy blog – pride – persons.

The second part of this trilogy that I dedicate to explain, and to explain myself, because I use the captions (feet) of my photos as if they were my personal blog. This time I will comment because I feel proud, basing on my concept of person that I exposed in the first photo of the trilogy.

 

I am a heterosexual crossdresser girl. It is a fact … but, what does it means? If I you tell the truth, I don´t know it with certainty. It seems as if every crossdresser girl had her own definition … probably because there are many branches inside the crossdress … but this it is another theme. I suppose that to the others happen like to me, I am ashamed instinctively of this facet of my life, it is something cultural, the image of the "transvestite" is at least ridiculous, laughable, even I fall down in it without thinking it. It is like if it was so unnatural, so out of place, so incomprehensibly … why a sane man, that considers himself as man, would try to pass off as a woman?... And this it is the nice image, also there is the vicious image, in which you are a disgusting pervert which who know how many more barbarities will do. It is not to feel very proud … not. But the reason wins to the instinct, I am a person, and as such I have reasoning and feelings, and they say to me that this it is not the reality, it is not my reality. Maybe it is a parafilia, as some people say, or maybe it is the aptitude to overcome the assigned role and experiencing positive sensations that are denied to us without reason. I do not have answers, disease or quality, I don´t know, but I know that I do not have motives for which to be ashamed. I am a person, with multiple characteristics, but none of them defines me lonely and to be a crossdresser girl is not the exception, only it is a small part of me. Globally I am not discontented with me, do not understand me badly, I should improve very much as person, but if tomorrow I would die and I would have to give account for my life and for what I am, I believe that I would go out in peace, and it is a motive of pride. The global pride like person, to feel yourself well with total honesty is what really matters. And the pride for the different characteristics that I have? It is a different pride, with different purposes, bad some as arrogance, and other more positive as the reaffirmation. The pride that I feel for be a crossdress girl is of this type. If the things were as they should be, surely I would not feel proud for it, would be another characteristic more as to have small foot or the dark eyes. But unfortunately the things are not like that, and some groups have had to use pride as method of defense, as reaffirmation against discriminations and injustices.The example most clear is the homosexuality. I am hetero and it allows me to see the situation from out, impartially, and I believe that they do very well in feeling proud, because understandable better or worse, what harm do it?, why to make to feel badly to a person for a quality that goes implicit in that person?... My crossdress does not harm anybody either and though I can give up practising it, it is not anything that could make disappear of me, as I cannot change my liking or my way of being, it is a part of my intimate self. So, if I see it good for the others, why not for me?

I look around and see so many motives for what the people should be ashamed, so many attitudes, so many actions that cause so much harm … And later I look at me, being ashamed instinctively for wearing a dress or for feeling feminine … Not … I refuse to accept it, it is possible that in the moment I could not avoid the instinct, but I refuse to accept consciously a shame that does not correspond to me, because of it I am proud! This one is not an allegation in order that we all go out to the light and feel us superproud (though it would be very well also I understand that it is very difficult and dangerous), it is for feeling us well with ourselves and we do not torture psychologically ourselves without motive. The crossdress makes me feel good, and when I dress and look at the mirror, there goes out for me a smile of satisfaction and pride. I am proud!!

 

Desarrollo de la trilogía blog-orgullo-personas.

Segunda parte de esta trilogía que dedico a explicar, y a explicarme a mi misma de paso, el porque utilizo los pies de fotos como si fueran mi blog personal. Esta vez os comentaré porqué me siento orgullosa, basándome en mi concepto de persona que expuse en la primera foto de la trilogía.

 

Soy una chica crossdresser heterosexual. Es un hecho… pero, ¿que significa eso? Si os digo la verdad, ni yo misma lo se con seguridad. Parece como si cada chica cd tuviera su propia definición… quizás porque hay muchísimas ramas dentro del crossdress… pero ese es otro tema. Supongo que a las demás os pasará como a mí, me avergüenzo instintivamente de esta faceta de mi vida, es algo cultural, la imagen del “travesti” es como mínimo ridícula, risible, yo misma caigo en eso sin pensarlo. Es como si fuera tan antinatural, tan fuera de lugar, tan incomprensible… ¿por que un hombre cuerdo, que se considera hombre, intentaría pasar por mujer?... Y esa es la imagen amable, también está la imagen viciosa, en la que eres un pervertido asqueroso que ha saber que barbaridades mas hará. No es para sentirse muy orgullosa… no. Pero la razón vence al instinto, soy una persona, y como tal tengo razonamiento y sentimientos, y ellos me dicen que esa no es la realidad, no es mi realidad. Quizás se trate de una parafilia como dicen algunos, o quizás sea la capacidad de superar el rol asignado y experimentar sensaciones positivas que nos son negadas sin razón. No tengo respuestas, enfermedad o cualidad, no lo se, lo que si se es que no tengo motivos por los que avergonzarme. Soy una persona, con múltiples características, pero ninguna de ellas me define por si sola y ser una chica cross no es la excepción, solo es una pequeña parte de mi. Globalmente no estoy descontenta de mi misma, no me entendáis mal, debería de mejorar muchísimo como persona, pero si mañana muriera y tuviera que rendir cuentas sobre mi vida y lo que soy, creo que saldría en paz, y eso es motivo de orgullo. El orgullo global como persona, el sentirse bien con una misma de forma totalmente sincera es lo que realmente importa. ¿Y el orgullo por las diferentes características que tengo? Ese es un orgullo distinto, con distintas finalidades, algunas malas como la soberbia, y otras mas positivas como la reafirmación. El orgullo que siento por ser una chica crossdress es de este tipo. Si las cosas fueran como deberían de ser, seguramente no me sentiría orgullosa por ello, sería otra característica mas como el tener los pies pequeños o los ojos negros. Pero desgraciadamente las cosas no son así, y algunos colectivos han tenido que tirar de orgullo como método de defensa, como reafirmación ante discriminaciones e injusticias. El ejemplo mas claro de esto es la homosexualidad. Yo soy hetero y eso me permite ver la situación desde fuera, imparcialmente, y creo que hacen muy bien en sentirse orgullosos, porque se entienda mejor o peor, ¿que mal hacen a nadie?, ¿por que hacer sentir mal a una persona por una cualidad que va implícita en ella?... Mi crossdress tampoco hace mal a nadie y aunque puedo renunciar a practicarlo, no es algo que pueda hacer desaparecer de mí, al igual que no puedo cambiar mis gustos o mi forma de ser, es parte de mi yo íntimo. Así que si lo veo bien para los demás, ¿por que no para mí?

Miro alrededor y veo tantos motivos por lo que la gente debería avergonzarse, tantas actitudes, tantas acciones que hacen tanto mal… Y después me miro a mí, avergonzándome instintivamente por ponerme un vestido o por sentirme femenina… No… no lo acepto, puede que en el momento no pueda evitar el instinto, pero me niego a aceptar conscientemente una vergüenza que no me corresponde, ¡por eso estoy orgullosa! Este no es un alegato para que salgamos todas a la luz y nos sintamos superorgullosas (aunque eso estaría muy bien también entiendo que es muy difícil y peligroso), sino para que nos sintamos bien con nosotras mismas y no nos martiricemos psicológicamente sin motivo. El crossdress me hace sentir bien, y cuando me visto y me miro al espejo, me sale una sonrisa de satisfacción y orgullo. ¡¡Estoy orgullosa!!

  

PS: Si quieres ver un video con este look (If you want see a video with this look):

www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GHQJ03rBJg

 

Si quieres ver una versión reducida en Flickrs (If you want see a small version in Flickrs):

www.flickr.com/photos/61410455@N08/6319457850/in/photostream

The central criminal courts, Old Bailey, London. Seen after heavy Spring rain.

 

The court originated as the sessions house of the Lord Mayor and Sheriffs of the City of London and of Middlesex. The original medieval court was first mentioned in 1585; it was next to the older Newgate gaol, and seems to have grown out of the endowment to improve the gaol and rooms for the Sheriffs, made possible by a gift from Richard Whittington. It was destroyed in the Great Fire of London in 1666 and rebuilt in 1674, with the court open to the weather to prevent the spread of disease.

  

Plaque commemorating Bushel's Case of 1670

In 1734 it was refronted, enclosing the court and reducing the influence of spectators: this led to outbreaks of typhus, notably in 1750 when 60 people died, including the Lord Mayor and two judges. It was rebuilt again in 1774 and a second courtroom was added in 1824. Over 100,000 criminal trials were carried out at the Old Bailey between 1674 and 1834

In 1834, it was renamed as the Central Criminal Court and its jurisdiction extended beyond that of London and Middlesex to the whole of the English jurisdiction for trials of major cases. Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service manages the courts and administers the trials but the building itself is owned by the City of London Corporation, which finances the building, the running of it, the staff and the maintenance out of their own resources.

The court was originally intended as the site where only criminals accused of crimes committed in the City and Middlesex were tried. However, in 1856, there was public revulsion at the accusations against the doctor William Palmer that he was a poisoner and murderer. This led to fears that he could not receive a fair trial in his native Staffordshire. The Central Criminal Court Act 1856 was passed to enable his trial to be held at the Old Bailey.

In the 19th century, the Old Bailey was a small court adjacent to Newgate gaol. Hangings were a public spectacle in the street outside until May 1868. The condemned would be led along Dead Man's Walk between the prison and the court, and many were buried in the walk itself. Large, riotous crowds would gather and pelt the condemned with rotten fruit and vegetables and stones. In 1807, 28 people were crushed to death after a pie-seller's stall overturned. A secret tunnel was subsequently created between the prison and St Sepulchre's church opposite, to allow the chaplain to minister to the condemned man without having to force his way through the crowds.

The present Old Bailey building dates from 1902 but it was officially opened on 27 February 1907. It was designed by E. W. Mountford and built on the site of the infamous Newgate gaol, which was demolished to allow the court buildings to be constructed. Above the main entrance is inscribed the admonition: "Defend the Children of the Poor & Punish the Wrongdoer". King Edward VII opened the courthouse.

  

Lady Justice statue on the top of the court building

On the dome above the court stands a bronze statue of Lady Justice, executed by the British sculptor F. W. Pomeroy. She holds a sword in her right hand and the scales of justice in her left. The statue is popularly supposed to show blind Justice, however, the figure is not blindfolded: the courthouse brochures explain that this is because Lady Justice was originally not blindfolded, and because her “maidenly form” is supposed to guarantee her impartiality which renders the blindfold redundant.

During the Blitz of World War II, the Old Bailey was bombed and severely damaged, but subsequent reconstruction work restored most of it in the early 1950s. In 1952, the restored interior of the Grand Hall of the Central Criminal Court was once again open. The interior of the Great Hall (underneath the dome) is decorated with paintings commemorating the Blitz, as well as quasi-historical scenes of St Paul's Cathedral with nobles outside. Running around the entire hall are a series of axioms, some of biblical reference. They read:

"The law of the wise is a fountain of life"

"The welfare of the people is supreme"

"Right lives by law and law subsists by power"

"Poise the cause in justice's equal scales"

"Moses gave unto the people the laws of God"

"London shall have all its ancient rights"

The Great Hall (and the floor beneath it) is also decorated with many busts and statues, chiefly of British monarchs, but also of legal figures, and those who achieved renown by campaigning for improvement in prison conditions in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. This part of the building also houses the shorthand-writers' offices.

The lower level also hosts a minor exhibition on the history of the Old Bailey and Newgate featuring historical prison artefacts.

In 1973, the Belfast Brigade of the Provisional IRA exploded a car bomb in the street outside the courts, killing one and injuring 200 people. A shard of glass is preserved as a reminder, embedded in the wall at the top of the main stairs.

  

South Block extension

Between 1968 and 1972, a new South Block, designed by the architects Donald McMorran and George Whitby, was built to accommodate more modern courts. There are presently 18 courts in use. Court 19 is now used variously as a press overflow facility, as a registration room for first-day jurors or as a holding area for serving jurors.

The original ceremonial gates to the 1907 part of the building are only used by the Lord Mayor and visiting royalty. The general entrance to the building is a few yards down the road in the South Block and is often featured as a backdrop in television news reports. There is also a separate rear entrance, not open to the public, which permits more discreet access. In Warwick Square, on the western side of the complex, is the "Lord Mayor's Entrance".

A remnant of the city wall is preserved in the basement beneath the cells.

I've been thinking about whether it is actually useful to dub photographs. If I were a journalist, this would undoubtedly be my job. But I take pictures freely, it made me no expectations. The photograph also does not serve the acquisition of my livelihood. I can behave very inconsiderate me so without wreak any damage.

 

Every human being, due to its cultural or social origin, religious or political belief, and not least his experience with photography and his attitude to photography, has a different subjective perception of things.

 

I will refrain from these cinematic titles in the future; the viewer should impartially consider the photograph, and this hopefully for longer as a few seconds. A numbering serves me merely as a classification criterion. Brief comments, names of people, music group, places, short notices on special features will remain, also the use of folders and tags.

  

.... and behind the old ruin we can see Corfe Castle.

 

Corfe Castle was destroyed during the English Civil War when Parliamentary forces were able to infiltrate this Royalist stronghold and destroy it from the inside. Allegedly this is where the expression "turncoat" came from, as they came in dressed as Royalists and then turned their coats over to reveal the uniform of the Roundheads.

The village of Corfe was a "Rotten Borough" a term used to describe constituencies where the voting population was so low, and so dependent upon the local parliamentary representative, that elections were not deemed to be fair and impartial.

Today, Corfe is a delightful village, extremely well preserved, and with a history that goes back way past the Civil War.

 

The ruin in the foreground is a much younger one and after a day at the beach is at least feeling feminine, sexy and very happy to be alive.

God-Centeredness

 

1. If you seek first to please God and are satisfied therein, you have but one to please instead of multitudes; and a multitude of masters are hardlier pleased than one.

 

2. And it is one that putteth upon you nothing that is unreasonable, for quantity or quality.

 

3. And one that is perfectly wise and good, not liable to misunderstand your case and actions.

 

4. And one that is most holy, and is not pleased in iniquity or dishonesty.

 

5. And he is one that is impartial and most just, and is no respecter of persons, Acts 10:34.

 

6. And he is one that is a competent judge, that hath fitness and authority, and is acquainted with your hearts, and every circumstance and reason of your actions.

 

7. And he is one that perfectly agreeth with himself, and putteth you not upon contradictions or impossibilities.

 

8. And he is one that is constant and unchangeable; and is not pleased with one thing to-day, and another contrary to-morrow; nor with one person this year, whom he will be weary of the next.

 

9. And he is one that is merciful, and requireth you not to hurt yourselves to please him: nay, he is pleased with nothing of thine but that which tendeth to thy happiness, and displeased with nothing but that which hurts thyself or others, as a father that is displeased with his children when they defile or hurt themselves.

 

10. He is gentle, though just, in his censures of thee; judging truly, but not with unjust rigor, nor making your actions worse than they are.

 

11. He is one that is not subject to the passions of men, which blind their minds, and carry them to injustice.

 

12. He is one that will not be moved by tale-bearers, whisperers, or false accusers, nor can be perverted by any misinformation.

Richard Baxter

 

Mark Water, The New Encyclopedia of Christian Quotations (Alresford, Hampshire: John Hunt Publishers Ltd, 2000), 410–411.

Playing with perspective in the endless Salar de Uyuni (Earth's biggest salt flat, 12,000 square kilometers). I think that's the best picture we had in this set, although since I took it myself i'm not impartial...

In 2000, my wife and I sat on the edge of our bed watching CNN. The Supreme Court had just announced that time had run out on the weeks-long series of recounts for Florida’s 25 electoral votes. George W. Bush had beat Al Gore and was declared the winner in the state. Bush won the Electoral College and the presidency by one electoral vote. Disappointed? You bet. But I remember thinking, “The office of President is one of compromise. Those around him will temper the effects of his decisions.” I was wrong.

 

Twenty-one years later, I sat on that same bed watching as Trump loyalists, incited by President Trump and others, stormed the Capitol shouting, “Stop the Steal” and “Hang Mike Pence.” After Trump’s 2016 campaign, his four years of authoritarian reign, and the aftermath, I no longer believed that Constitutional checks and balances would hold back the right. Our culture had changed. In the Republican Party, conspiracy theories replaced common sense and critical thinking. This is the world of Ginni Thomas, the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. How did we get here?

 

The Road Downhill: Lee Atwater

 

We find deceit at every level of American politics. As mass media developed, backroom deals gave way to more public dirty tricks. In the 1980s, Lee Atwater was this strategy’s most prominent disciple. As South Carolina Republican Congressman Floyd Spence’s campaign consultant in his 1980 re-election bid, he released the results of a fake survey aimed at White suburban voters. The survey showed that Spence’s opponent, Tom Turnipseed, was a member of the NAACP. At a press briefing, he hired a fake reporter to say, “We understand Turnipseed has had psychiatric treatment.” Atwater replied that he “got hooked up to jumper cables,” referring to electroshock therapy Turnipseed had as a teen. Spence was re-elected.

 

Atwater went on to greater notoriety later that decade by suggesting Ronald Reagan could extend the GOP’s Southern Strategy (a racial appeal to White Southerners) without it appearing racial. In an anonymous interview for political scientist Alexander P. Lamis’ book The Two-Party South, he said,

 

“Y’all don’t quote me on this. You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigg*r, nigg*r, nigg*r.’ By 1968, you can’t say ‘nigg*r’—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things, and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.”

 

As Atwater’s star rose in the GOP, its zenith was the infamous Willie Horton television ad during George H. Bush’s 1988 presidential bid. In 1976, Bush’s opponent, Massachusetts Governor Michael Dukakis, supported a prison furlough program for felons started by Republican Governor Francis Sargent in 1972. The state legislature passed a measure outlawing the practice, but Dukakis vetoed it. Shortly after that, the state released convicted murderer Willie Horton on a weekend furlough when he assaulted, robbed, and raped a couple.

 

The ad showed prisoners going through a revolving exit from prison. Only one was African American, and he was the only one who looked directly into the camera. “That’s the guy to be afraid of,” said ABC newsman Sam Donaldson. Atwater used this incident to suggest that Dukakis was too liberal and soft on crime. He vowed to “strip the bark off the little bastard” and “make Willie Horton his running mate.” Dukakis’ seventeen-point summer lead vanished, and Bush won the race.

 

Slash and Burn: Newt Gingrich

 

Lee Atwater’s vision was to get Republicans elected no matter what it took. The man who led those Republicans on a slash and burn sortie into our legislative process was Newt Gingrich. Running in his first successful race for Congress in 1978, he told college Republicans, “One of the great weaknesses of the Republican Party is we recruit middle-class people. Middle-class people, as a group, are told you should not shout at the table, you should be nice, you should have respect for other people, which usually means giving way to them.” He admonished the students to “raise hell” if you’re going to be in politics. And during his twenty years in the House, raising hell was precisely what he did.

 

Gingrich upended the niceties and conventions of Congress. As Congressional scholar Thomas Mann has stated, “Most members still believed in the idea that the Framers had in mind. They believed in genuine deliberation and compromise … and they had institutional loyalty.” Gingrich’s focus was less on legislation and more on tactics to discredit Democrats and moderate members of his party. He did this by ignoring etiquette, sensationalizing issues for TV viewers, and using ethics regulations to spotlight one’s political enemies. “He thought a lot about confrontation and saying things that were explosive because he believed that the more confrontational, the more outlandish you were, the more the media would cover you, and the more the media would replicate what you said about your opponent—whether it was true or not true,” according to Julian E. Zelizer, in his book, Burning Down the House.

 

We can credit Gingrich with the “fierce, institution-destroying partisanship” that gave birth to the tactics of the Tea Party and Donald Trump. Newt sent out a memo to aspiring Republican candidates entitled “Language: A Key Mechanism of Control,” in which he listed words for them to use to describe Democrats. They included words like sick, pathetic, lie, anti-flag, traitors, radical, and corrupt. When you hear Trump give people obnoxious nicknames like President Biden’s “Sleepy Joe,” that comes directly from Gingrich’s playbook.

Release the Kraken: The Ginny and Clarence Thomas Story

 

In our present rarified atmosphere, when laws do get passed, partisan objections often end up on the docket of the Supreme Court. As the ultimate arbiters in legal matters, we hope justices base their opinions on their interpretations of the Constitution. But unlike lower court judges, there are no ethical standards by which they must abide. Each justice determines their own ethics. The only safeguard we have for a rogue justice is impeachment. That has only happened once.

 

The founders of our country envisioned a court that rose above the politics of the Legislative and Executive branches of government. But partisanship has seeped into the court with justice nominees’ confirmations decided by today’s factional Senate. In February 2022, Justice Neil Gorsuch gave a speech behind closed doors to the Federalist Society, a group of conservatives and libertarians. So what did he speak about? We’ll never know. The Society barred the media from the Justice’s talk. That veil of secrecy only magnifies the aura of politicization, questioning the court’s impartiality.

 

This is the backdrop to Ginni Thomas’ power and activism. As the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, she has been a forceful advocate for Trump’s attack on our democratic process. She firmly believes the Democrats stole the election despite a long list of dismissed court challenges to the election results. Former White House Press Secretary Stephanie Grisham confirmed Ms. Thomas’ direct access to President Trump on a recent episode of The View. She said that Thomas would often have lunch with the President, bringing lists of people who should be fired and hired. Grisham described the damage control the staff would have to do after these meetings.

 

Two days after the 2020 election, Ms. Thomas texted Trump’s Chief-of-Staff, Mark Meadows, to “Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down.” In mythology, a Kraken is a gigantic sea monster that resembles a giant squid or octopus. #ReleaseTheKraken is a tag used by conspiracy theorists to discredit President Biden’s victory.

 

She also texted Meadows, “Help This Great President stand firm, Mark!!!... You are the leader, with him, who is standing for America’s constitutional governance at the precipice. The majority knows Biden and the Left is attempting the greatest Heist of our History.” Also, “Biden crime family & ballot fraud co-conspirators (elected officials, bureaucrats, social media censorship mongers, fake stream media reporters, etc.) are being arrested & detained for ballot fraud right now & over coming days, & will be living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition. I hope this is true.” (emphasis mine). She wants a revolution!

 

Thomas and Meadows exchanged twenty-nine texts he released to the House committee investigating the January 6th Insurrection. Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court for The New York Times, said, “It is one thing, experts in legal ethics said, for the spouse of a Supreme Court justice to express political views, even ones shot through with wild conspiracy theories. That may not by itself require the justice’s recusal from cases touching on those views. . . . But the text messages from Ms. Thomas . . . revealed something quite different and deeply troubling.” The texts Thomas sent to Meadows clearly showed she was directly involved in the attempt to overturn the election.

 

So should her husband recuse himself in any case about the 2020 election? Any judge with close relationships with people or institutions associated with an issue should do so. That’s what Justice Elena Kagan did when she ascended to the bench in 2010. Because of her former job as Supreme Court Solicitor General (the court’s chief legal representative to the court and lower appellate courts), she recused herself in 25 of 51 cases during her first term.

 

Justice Thomas has not recused himself in at least one case concerning the 2020 election. In January 2022, he was the lone dissenter in litigation Trump brought to the Supreme Court to prevent the January 6th Committee from obtaining his presidential records. The US Code of Laws expressly prohibits judges from participating in cases where their impartiality might be questioned. Title 28, § 421(5) states that judges shall disqualify themselves when a spouse is likely to be a material witness. Yet there are no penalties when a Supreme Court Justice violates this law.

 

The Thomases are very close and share many political views. In his memoir, Justice Thomas wrote that he and his wife are “one being—an amalgam.” They call each other their best friends. If he’s ethical, he has a moral obligation to stand down in any proceeding concerning the 2020 presidential election, including the January 6th Insurrection. If he doesn’t, he should resign or be impeached. Thomas’ sole job is to interpret the Constitution. There’s no room in American jurisprudence for activist judges. Isn’t that what conservatives say?

 

The System Is Broken. What Can We Do About It?

 

What can we do when people like Ginni Thomas and Mark Meadows (political elites with direct access to power) strongly believe in these conspiracy theories? Or when our legislators aren’t interested in solving the economic and social issues that affect millions of Americans. This animosity is destroying our country. Having to call for Clarence Thomas’ recusal on cases where his wife is deeply involved reveals a much larger problem.

 

The Problem

 

Sixty percent of Americans approve of a woman's right to an abortion. Sixty-four percent support a “wealth tax” to fund public programs. Seventy-six percent of the public wants to protect LGBTQ rights. Why can’t we have reasonable gun control legislation when 84% of Americans approve of universal background checks (including 77% of Republicans)? The effects of climate change concern 60% of Americans. These issues are under attack or considered unimportant in Republican-run states. Yet the majority of Americans support them.

 

Negative partisanship is creating an existential threat to our democracy. “In today’s environment, rather than seeking to inspire voters around a cohesive and forward-looking vision, politicians need only incite fear and anger toward the opposing party to win and maintain power.” According to the Economist magazine’s “Democracy Index 2021,” the United States is no longer considered a full democracy. We’re now considered a “flawed democracy.” Eighty percent of Americans have no confidence in our legislators.

 

In a Princeton University study, Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens, the impact of average citizens’ influence on public policy is near zero when compared to economic elites and organized interest groups. This is the fundamental problem with our political system.

 

The Answers

 

RepresentUs suggests that fixing our elections and ending political bribery will restore influence to the American people. Consulting with Constitutional scholars and strategists, they found that 87% of all Americans (no matter their party affiliation) supported an anti-corruption law that would reduce the influence of special interests. Their model, The American Anti-Corruption Act, provides a plan for ending bribery at all government levels, restores the public's influence over moneyed interests, and fixes our broken elections.

 

Enact Campaign Finance Reform. The costs of a political campaign are staggering. Congresspeople spend 50% of their day fundraising instead of legislating. Political candidates are beholden to large donors to win elections. In 2020, only 1.44% of Americans donated more than $200 to political campaigns and political action committees. Mega-donors have more clout, while the public has little to none. And with these high rollers come the strings of special interests. Lobbyists ply politicians with money to ensure their support. So, instead of legislating on issues important to most Americans, they pass laws that favor these special interests. Where’s health care reform? Why are drug prices so high, and why is Medicare prevented from negotiating with pharmaceutical companies for lower prices? Because “Big Pharma” makes sure any attempt to change the system will be defeated.

 

RepresentUs hired Tulchin Research, a polling and strategic consulting firm, that polled a diverse group of Americans on the financial problems with our elections. Their findings are revealing.

 

While we’re aware of the deep divide in American politics and ideology, voters across the board agreed political corruption is rampant. Instituting reforms is critical to restoring health to our system. Reframing political finance reform as ending political corruption was compelling to poll respondents.

 

Conflict of interest reforms are most important to voters. The Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision damaged financial election reform by allowing corporations and other groups to contribute unlimited funds to elections. This exacerbated the advantage that wealthy donors have and increased the use of “dark money” in our elections. The top three anti-corruption measures supported by those polled were: prohibiting politicians from taking money from the industries they regulate, reducing how much money lobbyists can contribute to political campaigns, and instituting clear limits on unregulated Super PACs.

 

Public Funding is critical to reform. The tax refund and public voucher model was the most supported by those polled. Many local jurisdictions are developing these types of programs. Seattle gives every voter a publicly funded voucher to contribute to candidates. And as the number of jurisdictions using public financing rises, this can eventually have ramifications on the national level.

 

We should also reinstate a nationwide matching fund program, and institute total fundraising and spending transparency. Former elected officials should be prohibited from working for lobbyists, and legislators should be banned from fundraising during working hours (they’re raising funds on our dime!).

 

Eliminate Gerrymandering. One of the most egregious misuses of power is gerrymandering. It makes races less competitive and reduces voters’ say. Several states (both Republican and Democrat) are being called to task for gerrymandering after the 2020 census. State courts are forcing both Republican and Democrat-run states to redraw their maps. Only 16% of Congressional districts are competitive (64 districts are still under review). So 75% of elected officials are winning office without having to communicate outside of their own party.

 

According to Gallup, Independents represent the largest group of voters in America. Yet registered Independents can’t vote in most Democrat or Republican primaries. Nor are third parties invited to take part in presidential debates. Not every vote is equal.

 

But a different way of holding elections would change that. Using Ranked Choice Voting (RCV), you get to rank your choices for public office. This reduces voting for the “lesser of two evils,” candidates with similar platforms form coalitions, and campaigns become less divisive. Forty-three jurisdictions used RCV in their most recent elections.

 

We already know that voter participation increases when we make voting more accessible. But look at how many times the GOP challenged automatic voter registration and voting by mail during the pandemic. The party knows that if more Americans vote, they’ll lose support. Even Trump admitted that. In a Pew study, the number of voters in the US was 31st out of 35 developed countries. Full democracies encourage voter participation.

 

The Electoral College. As our country has developed, we’ve made changes to the Electoral College. We’ve refined the role of electors and allowed citizens to vote for these electors in every state (some states initially gave that role to their legislatures). In addition, we have expanded voting rights (initially, only White male landowners and taxpayers could vote). So the process for electing presidents is not historically set in stone. It’s time to consider making changes that reflect our present society.

 

Some of our Founders thought that most 18th-century voters didn’t have the resources to make fully informed decisions. So they rejected direct voter participation. They also feared mob mentality relying on the populous to make such an important decision. Today, mass media saturates society with information. And, as for mob rule, the Electoral College didn’t prevent the storming of the Capitol on January 6th.

 

Our Founders also believed that this system would stop a drawn-out national recount. But look what happened in 2020. Donald Trump refused to accept the results of the Electoral College and filed over sixty suits to overturn elections in crucial states. Eighteenth-Century concerns about the tyranny of the majority (another original reason for the Electoral College) have given way to the tyranny of conspiracy theorists today.

 

The Electoral College was a compromise when our founders first implemented it. Small states feared the power of larger states. Today, that dynamic has shifted. Now the system emphasizes the role of a few swing states. This means that candidates spend much more time and money in those areas than broadening their campaigns nationwide.

 

Since our country’s inception, there have been five presidential elections where the loser of the Electoral College received more popular votes. The 2000 election between Bush and Gore and the 2016 election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the latest examples. Partisan politics would make it an uphill battle to amend the Constitution to change how we elect presidents. So, many states and the District of Columbia have signed on to the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact. They promise to give their electoral votes to the popular vote winner. This provision will go into effect when enough signatories’ electoral votes reach 270, the amount required for the Electoral College to declare a winner. So far, the Compact has 195 Electoral votes. They need only 75 more to implement the pact. But that could be an uphill battle, as the red states fear the voter's will.

 

Let’s Not Forget Ginni and Clarence Thomas

 

Ginni Thomas’ desire to overthrow our government is a clear example of a corroded political system. Justice Thomas’ refusal to recuse himself in cases that are apparent conflicts of interest should concern Americans. Together, their power undermines the foundation of the American ideal. It smacks of special interests and political corruption at the highest levels of our government.

 

As David Frum wrote in The Atlantic, “Washington has always been full of polarizing people like the Thomases, and always will be. What’s been different in the Donald Trump years has been the complicity and cowardice of the people who should have kept those polarizing figures in check.” My initial expectations about the people surrounding the president (or any government official) were correct. Trust in our politicians demands constant oversight.

 

It’s time we the people release our own Kraken.

  

Feel free to pass this poster on. It's free to download here (click on the down arrow just to the lower right of the image).

 

See the rest of the posters from the Chamomile Tea Party! Digital high res downloads are free here (click the down arrow on the lower right side of the image). Other options are available. And join our Facebook group.

 

Follow the history of our country's political intransigence from 2010-2020 through a seven-part exhibit of these posters on Google Arts & Culture.

BBC World Service

Website | Facebook | Google+ | 500px | Twitter | Getty Images | Instagram | Youtube

    

Building of the Swiss Federal Statistical Office in Neuchâtel.

 

The color comes from the B+W ND Filter (10 stops). I think I'm gonna switch to Formatt Hitech Filters which are hopefully more color neutral. Wanted to buy Lee Filters but they are again sold out almost worldwide.

 

Anyone experiences with Hitech Filters?

______________________________________________________________________________

    

The Federal Statistical Office (FSO) is a Federal authority of the Swiss Confederation. It is the Statistics Office of Switzerland, situated in Neuchâtel and attached to the Federal Department of Home Affairs (FDHA).

The FSO is the national service provider and competence centre for statistical observations in areas of national, social, economic and environmental importance. The FSO is the main producer of statistics in the country and runs the Swiss Statistics data pool. It provides information on all subject areas covered by official statistics.

The FSO is closely linked to the national statistics scene as well as to partners in the worlds of science, business and politics. It works closely with EUROSTAT, the Statistics Office of the European Union, in order to provide information that is also comparable at international level.

The key principles upheld by the FSO throughout its statistical activities are data protection, scientific reliability, impartiality, topicality and service orientation.

    

The FSO produces and publishes key statistical information on the current situation and development of the nation and society, of the economy and the environment. It completes these with comprehensive analyses, it creates scenarios of future developments and safeguards historical data.

Various methods are employed for data acquisition: direct interviews, more or less automated observation, analyses of administrative data, complete enumeration surveys and representative sample surveys. The efficiency of modern statistical information systems is largely determined by the type of data acquisition. For legal and financial reasons, preference is given to the systematic use of existent data rather than to new direct surveys with the ensuing burden on those interviewed.

Statistical findings are disseminated in various forms and using varying channels: as tables or indicators accompanied by commentaries or graphs and maps, as printed documents or in electronic form, in standard issue or made-to-measure versions.

[Source: Wikipedia]

    

Canon EOS 60D

Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM

Aperture: f/16

Exposure time: 10s

Focal length: 15mm

ISO Speed: 100

Manfrotto Tripod 055XPROB with 410 Gear Head

B+W 110 ND Filter (10 Stops)

Processed with PS CS5

explore # 393 on Sunday, December 7, 2008

 

The line between imprisoning the innocent and the guilty is some times way too thin.

I spent much of the last 27 months helping Juan, who was jailed for murder, capital murder, and kidnapping. Facing automatic life sentence and never being released from prison, Juan maintained his innocence of all charges. Then the jury was chosen and heard 60 witnesses over 9 days. The prosecutors and Juan's lawyers summed up the evidence and argued for guilt or innocence 50 hours ago. The jury took over five hours to say not guilty of capital murder, murder, kidnapping. The jury found Juan guilty of unlawfully restraining another, for which he then faced 25 years to life in prison. Juan thanked the judge who rendered a sentence when Juan agreed to never appeal his conviction or sentence to any higher court. Was justice done with Juan receiving only five years in prison? Not if Juan is completely innocent; but the jury spoke and Juan accepted their verdict, rather than receiving any where from 25 years in prison to life in prison from that jury, after which his lawyers would have spent about another 500 hours trying to convince the higher courts of appeal that a fair and impartial jury trial was not had due to the misconduct of the State's police, lawyers, witnesses.

Thanks so much for YOUR prayers,. encouragement, and thoughts for Juan and others like him that receive injustice in the courts around the WORLD.

PLEASE, NO invitations or self promotions, THEY WILL BE DELETED. My photos are FREE to use, just give me credit and it would be nice if you let me know, thanks.

 

The Court of Appeal has been in existence since 1849 and is the highest court in Quebec. In the vast majority of cases, the Court of Appeal is the final arbiter of the matters brought before it. Through its commitment to judicial independence and impartiality, and its efforts to ensure access to justice, it stands today as one of the primary bastions of the rule of law in Quebec.

George Orwell was the pen name of British novelist, essayist, and journalist Eric Arthur Blair (1903-06-25 – 1950-01-21).

 

George Orwell wrote "Nineteen Eighty-Four" (1949). Question: How much of what George wrote about is now reflected in the daily life of those living in your country or our world?

 

I learned the below at en.wikiquote.org/wiki/George_Orwell

 

Notes on Nationalism (1945)

 

Polemic (October 1945); full essay here at www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/work/essays/nationalism.html

 

* By "nationalism" I mean first of all the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled "good" or "bad." But secondly — and this is much more important — I mean the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests. Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By "patriotism" I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseperable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.

 

* Nationalism is power-hunger tempered by self-deception.

 

* The nationalist not only does not disapprove of atrocities committed by his own side, but he has a remarkable capacity for not even hearing about them.

 

* The majority of pacifists either belong to obscure religious sects or are simply humanitarians who object to taking life and prefer not to follow their thoughts beyond that point. But there is a minority of intellectual pacifists, whose real though unacknowledged motive appears to be hatred of western democracy and admiration for totalitarianism. Pacifist propaganda usually boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but if one looks closely at the writing of the younger intellectual pacifists, one finds that they do not by any means express impartial disapproval but are directed almost entirely against Britain and the United States.

 

* If one harbours anywhere in one's mind a nationalistic loyalty or hatred, certain facts, although in a sense known to be true, are inadmissible. Here are just a few examples. I list below five types of nationalist, and against each I append a fact which it is impossible for that type of nationalist to accept, even in his secret thoughts:

BRITISH TORY: Britain will come out of this war with reduced power and prestige.

COMMUNIST. If she had not been aided by Britain and America, Russia would have been defeated by Germany.

IRISH NATIONALIST. Eire can only remain independent because of British protection.

TROTSKYIST. The Stalin regime is accepted by the Russian masses.

PACIFIST. Those who "abjure" violence can only do so because others are committing violence on their behalf.

All of these facts are grossly obvious if one's emotions do not happen to be involved: but to the kind of person named in each case they are also intolerable, and so they have to be denied, and false theories constructed upon their denial.

 

* It is, I think, true to say that the intelligentsia have been more wrong about the progress of the war than the common people, and that they were more swayed by partisan feelings. The average intellectual of the Left believed, for instance, that the war was lost in 1940, that the Germans were bound to overrun Egypt in 1942, that the Japanese would never be driven out of the lands they had conquered, and that the Anglo-American bombing offensive was making no impression on Germany. He could believe these things because his hatred for the British ruling class forbade him to admit that British plans could succeed. There is no limit to the follies that can be swallowed if one is under the influence of feelings of this kind. I have heard it confidently stated, for instance, that American troops had been bought to Europe not to fight the Germans but to crush an English revolution. One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.

 

* There is no crime, absolutely none, that cannot be condoned when 'our' side commits it.

 

EXPLORE # 194 on Wednesday, November 21, 2007, for 11-20.

I cannot pretend to feel impartial about colours. I rejoice with the brilliant ones and am genuinely sorry for the poor browns.

 

Sir Winston Churchill (1874 - 1965)

 

SHG:

11. Hot

" Limestone, united with carbonic acid, forms the carbonites of limestone, or calcareous stones, such as marble, chalk, building stones, the stalactites of grottos."

 

First Formation of Living Beings By the combination of two bodies, in order to form a third, a particular concurrence of circumstances is exacted, — either a determined degree of heat, dryness or humidity, movement or repose, or an electric current, etc. If these conditions do not exist, the combination does not take place.

 

5. When there is combination, the bodies composing it lose their characteristic properties, whilst the composition resulting from it possesses new ones, different from those of the first. It is thus, for example, that oxygen and hydrogen, which are invisible gases, being chemically combined, form water, which is liquid, solid or vaporous according to temperature. Water, properly speaking, is no more oxygen and hydrogen, but a new body. This water decomposed, the two gases, becoming again free, recover their properties and are no more water. The same quantity of water can thus be decomposed and recomposed ad infinitum.

 

6. The composition and decomposition of bodies take place according to the degree of affinity that the elementary principles possess for one another. The formation of water, for example, results from the reciprocal affinity of oxygen and hydrogen but, if one places in contact with the water a body having a greater affinity for oxygen than for hydrogen, the water is decomposed; the oxygen is absorbed, the hydrogen liberated, and there is no more water.

 

7. Compound bodies are always formed in definite proportions; that is to say, by the combination of a quantity determined by the constituent principles. Thus, in order to form water, one part of oxygen is needed and two of hydrogen. If you mix two volumes of hydrogen with more than one of oxygen, then cause them to unite, the hydrogen would only unite with one volume of oxygen; but, if in other conditions there are two parts of oxygen combined with two of hydrogen, in place of water, the dentoxide of hydrogen is obtained, — a corrosive liquid, formed, however, of the same elements as water, but in another proportion.

 

8. Such is, in few words, the law which presides at the formation of all natural bodies. The innumerable variety of these bodies is the result of a very small number of elementary principles combined in different proportions.

 

Thus oxygen, combined in certain proportions with sulfur, carbon, and phosphorus, forms carbonic, sulfuric, and phosphoric acids. Oxygen and iron form the oxide of iron, or rust; oxygen and lead, both inoffensive, give place to the oxides of lead, such as litharge, white lead, and red lead, which are poisonous. Oxygen, with metals called calcium, sodium, potassium, forms limestone, soda, and potassium. Limestone, united with carbonic acid, forms the carbonites of limestone, or calcareous stones, such as marble, chalk, building stones, the stalactites of grottos. United with sulfuric acid, it forms the sulfate of limestone, or plaster and alabaster; with phosphoric acid, the phosphate of limestone. The solid base of bones, hydrogen, and chlorine form hydrochloric acid. Hydrochloric acid and soda form the hydrochloride of soda, or marine salt.

 

9. All these combinations, and thousands of others, are artificially obtained on a small scale in chemical laboratories. They are operated on a large scale in the grand laboratory of nature.

 

The Earth, in its beginning, did not contain these combinations of matter, but only their constituent elements in a state of volatility. When the calcareous and other soils became after a long time stony, they had been deposited on its surface. They did not at first exist as formations, but in the air were found in a gaseous state. These substances, precipitated by the effect of cold under the sway of favoring circumstances, have been combined according to the degree of their molecular affinity. It is then that the different varieties of carbonates and sulfates, etc., have been formed, — at first in a state of dissolution in the water, then deposited on the surface of the soil.

 

Let us suppose that by some cause the Earth should return to its primitive incandescent state; all that we see would decompose; the elements would separate; all fusible substances would melt; all those which were volatile would return to a state of volatility; after which a second cooling process would lead to a new precipitation, and the ancient combinations would form anew. "

 

CHAPTER X ORGANIC GENESIS First Formation of Living Beings – Vital Principle – Abiogenesis – Spontaneous Generation – Scale of Material Beings – Man.

  

1. Coming to his hometown, he began teaching the people in their synagogue, and they were amazed. “Where did this man get this wisdom and these miraculous powers?” they asked. “Isn’t this the carpenter’s son? Isn’t his mother’s name Mary, and aren’t his brothers James, Joseph, Simon and Judas? Aren’t all his sisters with us? Where then did this man get all these things?” And they took offense at him. But Jesus said to them, “Only in his hometown and in his own house is a prophet without honor.” And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith. (Matthew, 13: 54 to 58)

 

2. Jesus announced there a truth which passed into a proverb, which, from the beginning of time has been true as now, and to which one can still add: “That no one is a prophet during life.”

 

In the present acceptation of this maxim, it is understood to be the credit which a man enjoys among his own people, and among those in whose midst he lives, by the confidence in his superior knowledge and intelligence with which he inspires them. If there are some exceptions, they are rare; and in all cases they are never absolute. The principle of this truth is a natural consequence of human weakness, and can be explained thus:

 

The habit of seeing them from infancy up, in the common circumstances of life, establishes between men a sort of material equality which makes one often refuse to recognize a moral superiority in him of whom one has been the companion and comrade, who has sprung from the same place, and of whom one has seen the first weakness. Pride suffers from the superiority which one is obliged to submit to. Whoever is educated above the common level is always a motive for jealousy and envy. Those who feel themselves unable to attain to his height must perforce try to lower him by slander and calumny. They cry out against him so much the louder as they see themselves inferior to him, believing by so doing to aggrandize themselves, and eclipse him, by the noise they make. Such has been, and such will be, the history of humanity as long as men will not comprehend their spiritual nature, and will not enlarge their moral horizon. This is also a prejudice characteristic of narrow-minded and common spirits who yield to all this in their selfishness.

 

On the other hand, they make generally of men whom they do not know personally, only by their mind, an ideal which increases by distance, time, and place. They nearly despoil them of humanity. It seems to them that they must not speak or feel like the rest of the world, that their language and thoughts must constantly be at the height of sublimity, without thinking that the mind cannot be incessantly strained and in a perpetual state of excitability. In the daily contact of private life they see too many men who live for the greater part of the material plane, in whom is nothing to distinguish them from the common man. The man who lives on the material plane, who impresses the senses, eclipses nearly always the spiritual one, who interests the spirit. From afar one only sees the lightning of genius; nearer, they see the spirit at rest.

 

After death, the comparison existing no more, the spiritual part of man alone is left; and he appears so much the grander as the remembrance of the corporeal man has been put farther away. That is the reason why men, who have marked their passage upon the Earth by works of real value, have been better appreciated after death than in life. They have been judged with more impartiality, because, the envious and jealous having disappeared, personal antagonisms exist no more. Posterity is a disinterested judge, which appreciates the work of the spirit, – accepts it without blind enthusiasm if it is good, and rejects it without hatred if it is bad. A separation from the individuality that has produced it has taken place.

 

Jesus suffered the more from the consequences of this principle, inherent in human nature, because he lived among people who were much unenlightened, and among men who lived entirely upon the material plane. His compatriots saw in him only the son of the carpenter, the brother of men as ignorant as themselves; and they demanded why he could be superior to them, and where he obtained the right to censure them. Therefore, seeing his words had less power over his own people, who despised him, than over strangers, he went to preach among those who would listen to him, and give him that sympathy which he needed.

 

One can judge somewhat of the feelings which his relatives entertained of his action by reading the account where his mother, accompanied by his brothers, came into an assembly where he was, and tried to induce him to go home with them, accusing him of being deranged in mind (Mark, 3: 20, 21, and 31-35; “The Gospel According to Spiritism,” chap. 14).

 

Thus on one side priests and Pharisees accused Jesus of being influenced by evil spirits, and on the other he was accused of insanity by his nearest relatives. Is this not the same treatment that Spiritists receive in our day? And must they complain if they are not better treated by their fellow-citizens than Jesus was? That which was not astonishing among an ignorant people two thousand years ago is more so now in this nineteenth century of a more advanced civilization.

3. (After the cure of the lunatic.) – While everyone was marveling at all that Jesus did, he said to his disciples, “Listen carefully to what I am about to tell you: The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men.” But they did not understand what this meant. It was hidden from them, so that they did not grasp it, and they were afraid to ask him about it. (Luke, 9: 44 and 45)

 

4. From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. (Matthew, 16: 21)

 

5. When they came together in Galilee, he said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. 23. They will kill him, and on the third day he will be raised to life.” And the disciples were filled with grief. (Matthew, 17: 22 and 23)

 

6. Now as Jesus was going up to Jerusalem, he took the twelve disciples aside and said to them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and the Son of Man will be betrayed to the chief priests and the teachers of the law. They will condemn him to death And will turn him over to the Gentiles to be mocked and flogged and crucified. On the third day he will be raised to life!” (Matthew, 20: 17 to 19)

 

7. Jesus took the Twelve aside and told them, “We are going up to Jerusalem, and everything that is written by the prophets about the Son of Man will be fulfilled. He will be handed over to the Gentiles. They will mock him, insult him, spit on him, flog him and kill him. On the third day he will rise again.” The disciples did not understand any of this. Its meaning was hidden from them, and they did not know what he was talking about. (Luke, 18: 31 to 34)

 

8. When Jesus had finished saying all these things, he said to his disciples, “As you know, the Passover is two days away—and the Son of Man will be handed over to be crucified.” Then the chief priests and the elders of the people assembled in the palace of the high priest, whose name was Caiaphas, And they plotted to arrest Jesus in some sly way and kill him. “But not during the Feast,” they said, “or there may be a riot among the people.” (Matthew, 26: 1 to 5)

 

9. At that time some Pharisees came to Jesus and said to him, “Leave this place and go somewhere else. Herod wants to kill you.” He replied, “Go tell that fox, ‘I will drive out demons and heal people today and tomorrow, and on the third day I will reach my goal.” (Luke, 13: 31 and 32)

 

43. Then Jesus said to his disciples, “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. What good will it be for a man if he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory with his angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom.” (Matthew, 16: 24 to 28)

 

44. Then the high priest stood up before them and asked Jesus: “Are you not going to answer? What is this testimony that these men are bringing against you?” But Jesus remained silent and gave no answer. Again the high priest asked him: “Are you the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” “I am,” said Jesus. “And you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” The high priest tore his clothes. “Why do we need any more witnesses?” he asked. “You have heard the blasphemy. What do you think?” (Mark, 14: 60 to 63)

 

45. Jesus announces his second coming; but he does not say he will return with a carnal body, neither that the Consoler will be personified in him. He presents himself as coming in spirit, in the glory of his Father, to judge the good and wicked, and render to each one according to his works, when the time shall be accomplished.

 

This saying, “I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom,” seems a contradiction, since it is certain that he has not come during the life of anyone of those who were present. Jesus could not, however, be deceived in a prophecy of this nature, and above all in a contemporary fact which concerned him personally. At first it is necessary to demand if his words have always been faithfully rendered. One can doubt it when one thinks that he has written nothing himself; that a compilation of his teachings has not been made until after his death. And, when one sees the same discourse nearly always reproduced in different terms by each evangelist, it is an evident proof that they are not the textual expressions of Jesus. It is also probable that the sense has been sometimes altered in passing through successive transitions.

 

On the other hand, it is certain, that, if Jesus had said all that he could have said, he would have explained all things in a distinct and precise manner which had not given place to any equivocation, as he does it for moral principle; whilst he must have veiled his thoughts upon subjects which he has not judged proper to propose to them. The apostles, persuaded that the present generation must be the witness of that which he announced, must have interpreted the thought of Jesus according to their idea. They have been able, consequently, to draw from it a more absolute sense of the present than he has perhaps intended to convey himself. Whatever it may be, the fact is there, which proves that the circumstances have not happened as they have believed they would.

 

46. A capital point which Jesus has not been able to develop, because that men of his time were not sufficiently prepared for this order of ideas and its consequences, but of which he has, however, based the principle, as he has done for all things: this is the great and important law of reincarnation. This law, studied and brought to the light of day by Spiritism, is the key of many passages of the Gospel, which without that would appear nonsensical.

 

It is in this law that one can find the rational explanation of the above words by admitting them as textual. Since they cannot be applied to any one of the apostles, it is evident they refer to the future reign of Christ; that is to say, in the time when his doctrine, better comprehended, will be the universal law. By telling them that anyone of those who were present would see his coming, could not be understood in the sense that he would inhabit the carnal body at this epoch. But the Jews imagined they were to see all that Jesus announced, and took his allegories literally.

 

Finally, a few of his predictions have been accomplished in their time, – such as the ruin of Jerusalem, the misfortunes which followed it, and the dispersion of the Jews; but he saw farther, and, in speaking of the present, he makes constant allusion to the future.

 

kardecpedia.com/en/study-guide/888/genesis-the-miracles-a...

Another Interesting Memorial in Salisbury Cathedral

 

Thomas Wyndham lord chancellor of Ireland, was born 27 December 1681, fourth and youngest son of John Wyndham of Norrington, Wiltshire, England, twice MP for Salisbury, and his wife Alice, daughter of Thomas Fownes of Dorset. He was also grandson of a notable English judge and cousin to a well known statesman of Anne's reign, Sir William Wyndham. His early education was in Salisbury school and possibly at Eton, though the epitaph he composed for himself later in life does not mention this. He entered Wadham College, Oxford (an institution which had been founded by a maternal ancestor) on 17 November 1698, aged sixteen, having previously enrolled in Lincoln's Inn on 11 July 1698. He first attended Wadham, however, and did not actually go to Lincoln's Inn till 1701. It appears that he left Oxford without a degree. While a law student he contracted smallpox but still qualified as a barrister in 1705. He was then appointed recorder of the close of Sarum in 1706. He also attended the trials of adherents to the Stuart Pretender around this time. His career between 1706 and his dispatch to Ireland in 1724 is not well documented, but it can be assumed that he enjoyed an active career at the bar in London.

Wyndham came to Ireland when appointed (9 December 1724) to succeed Sir Richard Levinge (qv) as chief justice of the common pleas, a post that Archbishop Hugh Boulter (qv) described as ‘one of the most easy stations among the judges here’ (Philips & Faulkner, Letters written by . . . Hugh Boulter, i. 197). It is not apparent why Wyndham, specifically, was appointed to the Irish bench, but he may have had a powerful patron in the earl of Pembroke (qv), who controlled the pocket borough of Wilton, to which Wyndham had been elected a burgess the previous year. Appointment to the Irish privy council followed and he was subsequently elected a bencher of Lincoln's Inn. His appointment was part of a wider policy to appoint Englishmen to Irish offices after the ‘Wood's halfpence’ crisis. It was made easier by a disagreement between Alan Brodrick (qv), Lord Midleton, and William Conolly (qv) over the most suitable Irish candidate to be nominated to the post. Others appointed to Irish offices for the same reasons included Hugh Boulter, as archbishop of Armagh (1724), and Richard West (d. 3 December 1726) who became lord chancellor in place of Midleton (1725). Wyndham's judicial role led him to travel Ireland extensively while on circuit and also brought him into high political circles. Archbishop Boulter soon gained a good impression of him and, on Boulter's advice, Wyndham was appointed lord chancellor in succession to West by Robert Walpole in November 1726. The poet Ambrose Philips (qv) was made Wyndham's secretary, again with Boulter's encouragement.

By virtue of his position as lord chancellor, Wyndham became the second of three lords justices, consequently acting as co-governor of the kingdom on eight different occasions during the viceroy's absence, between 1726 and 1738. This role gave him a great influence on government patronage. He came to look favourably on converts from catholicism and on Irish-born candidates for advancement, which eventually put him at odds with Boulter. Aside from this Wyndham acted as speaker of the Irish house of lords, presiding over six sessions. These assorted offices meant that he played a major part in efforts to get legislation enacted. In this role he frequently sought to counteract the influence of the speakers William Conolly (qv) and Sir Ralph Gore (qv). Another parliamentary task he performed was the laying of the foundation stone for the new parliamentary buildings in College Green on 3 February 1729, alongside Conolly.

Wyndham was noted for his diligence and impartiality in the fulfilment of his judicial function, and he was honoured by the University of Dublin with a doctorate of laws honoris causa in 1730. The same year, he helped established Irish legal precedent when consulted on the case of Daniel Kimberly, an attorney who had been sentenced to death for abduction and had petitioned the lords justices, the lord lieutenant, and the king for mercy. The lord lieutenant consulted with the lords justices and agreed that mercy should not be granted. Wyndham then convened the Irish privy council, which also rejected the petition. This established the legal principle that petitions invoking the Irish prerogative of mercy could not thereafter be referred to England. Further honour followed on 17 September 1731, when he was created Baron Wyndham of Finglas . In April 1739 he presided as lord high steward at the trial of the 4th Baron Barry of Santry (1710–51) for murder and treason, finding the defendant guilty and sentencing him to death. This was the first trial of a lord by his peers in Ireland and consequently Wyndham was the first person to be appointed to the post of lord high steward in the kingdom. The Barry episode upset him greatly, however, and he retired three months later, aged 58, on the grounds of ill health. Wyndham then left for England on 8 September 1739, and settled in Salisbury, where he died unmarried on 14 November 1745; he left a considerable bequest to Wadham College. He was buried in Salisbury cathedral, under a notable funerary monument erected for him by Rysbrack. There is a portrait at Wadham College, Oxford.

  

A set of model plastic Japanese ice cream in buckwheat (soba) and green tea (maccha) flavours. Japanese like to see the food their are ordering before ordering it. The brown things stuck into the ice cream are not chocolate flake but traditional Japanese biscuits.

 

That the Japanese eat buckwheat and green tea flavoured ice-cream is less surprising than the fact that they are so good at copying things. I take the liberty of writing about Japanese "authenticopies" again since the above is my most popular photograph.

 

The culture of copying things in Japan is sufficiently widespread and revered as to have received academic attention (Cox, 2007). The Japanese copy everything from mirrors, horses, and cars, to foreign villages and especially food. While no one will attempt to eat these plastic ice cream cornets, they are seen as being delicious: sufficiently identical to the real thing as to arouse desire. Copies of things are given as offerings to Japanese deities at shrines where they are seen as sufficiently identical to sate desire.

 

I think that the practice can be understood by reference to the way in which Westerners believe in the copying power of the sign (Derrida, 2011). Words are thought to create a copy in the mind of their recipients of the meaning of the their sender. I have an idea and translate it into the "signified" the word "sender" for instance, and you read it and recreate an identical copy of the idea that I had in my mind. If I did not believe in this identical copies - these words that arise in my mind and yours - then I would be faced with an identity crisis since one of the ideas, the one corresponding to the phoneme "I" spoken to myself, is myself (Benveniste, 1971).

 

But how is it that you, dear reader, can understand my words in the same way as I do? The ability for humans to believe in the transference of meaning in this way, for meanings to be objective is due to their belief in God, or a simulation of the same. Gods too can be simulated (Baudrillard, 1995). Words "exist in", or are pegged to their understanding - a sort of gold standard - in the mind of an intra-psychic third party: someone that is always listening. As we speak to real others, we believe that we also speak to an impartial spectator (Adam Smith, 1812), a generalised other (Mead, 1967), an Other (Lacan, 2007), superego (Freud, 1913) or superaddressee (Bakhtin, 1986): all these are either words for a sort of imaginary friend or a deity (see Marková, 2006, for a downloadable review). By this device, since words are always public, as well as being in our heads we believe in their identical copy-ability.

 

In Japan the gods look rather than listen. The visual world is always shared. The visual world in Japan, which relegated to the nether land, a "mere image" or "veil" in the West, has the same properties as the Western sign: it is both in the world and in the head. The world and mind meet at the plane of the mirror that is seen with Japanese deities, especially the sun-goddess, who is that mirror itself.

 

We think nothing of copying signs. The Japanese think nothing of copying food.

 

Bibliography

Baudrillard, J. (1995). Simulcra and Simulation. (S. F. Glaser, Trans.). Univ of Michigan Pr.

Benveniste, E. (1971). Problems in General Linguistics. (M. E. Meek, Trans.) (Vol. 3). University of Miami Press Coral Gables, FL.

Cox, R. (2007). The Culture of Copying in Japan: Critical and Historical Perspectives. Routledge.

Bakhtin, M. M. (1986). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. (V. W. McGee, Trans.) (Second Printing.). University of Texas Press.

Freud, S. (1913). Totem and taboo. (A. A. Brill, Trans.). New York: Moffat, Yard and Company. Retrieved from en.wikisource.org/wiki/Totem_and_Taboo

Lacan, J. (2007). Ecrits: The First Complete Edition in English. (B. Fink, Trans.) (1st ed.). W W Norton & Co Inc.

Marková, I. (2006). On the inner alter in dialogue. International Journal for Dialogical Science, 1(1), 125–147.

Mead, G. H. (1967). Mind, self, and society: From the standpoint of a social behaviorist (Vol. 1). The University of Chicago Press.

Derrida, J. (2011). Voice and Phenomenon: Introduction to the Problem of the Sign in Husserl’s Phenomenology. Northwestern Univ Pr.

 

“Pale death knocks with impartial foot at poor men's hovels and king's palaces.” Horace

 

One of the most unusual graves at the Alter Friedhof in Darmstadt, and certainly one of my favourites - even the memorial figure is designed to decay. Here the light and shadows were ideal.

 

Please view in full size for the best effect.

El judici polític del 9-N, una oportunitat per explicar la causa catalana al món.

 

Som aquí per defensar els nostres càrrecs electes, imputats per la justícia espanyola.

No els deixarem sols.

No estareu mai sols!

No permetrem que la justícia espanyola, partidista i gens imparcial, ens barri el pas del nostre camí, ferm, cívic i democràtic, cap a la República Catalana. (L’ANC de Terrassa )

 

El judici contra Mas, Ortega i Rigau -i el que s'acabi fent contra Homs- és la primera línia de defensa de Carme Forcadell i el mateix Parlament. (Salvador Cot ).

 

“Amb el judici del 6F, l’Estat espanyol ens declara oficialment territori colonial. És bo saber-ho, dir-ho i que el món ho sàpiga. Per això… Seguim!”. (Lluís Llach).

 

"Cap amenaça d'inhabilitació, ni cap judici polític podran aturar la voluntat del poble de Catalunya" (Neus Munté).

 

«Si l'estat espanyol vol aturar-nos, s'haurà d'arriscar molt. Molt! Haurà d'empresonar molta gent. I així i tot, no ho aconseguirà» ( Pere Cardús )

www.vilaweb.cat/noticies/el-combat-del-2017-esteu-a-punt-...

 

Per la Democràcia - Diumenge 13N-2016 - Fonts de Montjuïc, Av. de Maria Cristina - Barcelona (CAT.)

----------------------------------------------------

The 6F we judged all 2,305,290 voters.

The trial of N-9, an opportunity to tell the world the Catalan cause.

We are here to defend our elected officials, accused by the Spanish justice.

Do not leave alone.

Is never alone!

We will not allow the Spanish justice, partisan and not impartial in our way on our road signs, civic and democratic to the Catalan Republic. (The ANC Terrace)

 

PLEASE, NO invitations or self promotions, THEY WILL BE DELETED. My photos are FREE to use, just give me credit and it would be nice if you let me know, thanks.

 

There was security on the right so I did not go farther in.

 

The Court of Appeal has been in existence since 1849 and is the highest court in Quebec. In the vast majority of cases, the Court of Appeal is the final arbiter of the matters brought before it. Through its commitment to judicial independence and impartiality, and its efforts to ensure access to justice, it stands today as one of the primary bastions of the rule of law in Quebec.

#ABFav_Autumnal

Sambucus is a genus of flowering plants in the family Adoxaceae.

The various species are commonly called elder or elderberry.

  

There is evidence elderberries may have anti-viral properties so whip up a batch of this delicious syrup ahead of cold and flu season.

 

"Elder" comes from the Anglo-Saxon 'aeld', meaning fire, because the hollow stems were used to blow air into the centre of a hearth.

It was thought that if you burned elder wood you would see the Devil, but if you planted elder by your house it would keep the Devil away.

 

The foliage was used to keep flies away and branches were often hung around dairies.

There are still those who believe a rub down with elder leaves will keep the dreaded Scottish midge at bay. Good luck with that!

 

Elder trees were the sources of many coloured dyes used historically to make lushly-patterned Harris Tweed.

Blue and purple from the berries; yellow and green from the leaves; grey and black from the bark.

 

Vitamin and nutrient packed as they are, the berries have long had a health-boosting reputation.

 

But can they really get rid of colds and flu?

 

A little online research reveals those making the boldest claims for elderberry extract are usually linked to selling it.

But more sober and impartial scientific voices seem convinced there is evidence elderberry has antiviral properties - and might knock a few days off the duration of symptoms even if not offering total prevention or cure.

Given elderberry syrup won’t hurt and even tastes great, why not. I grew up with it, whenever a cough: a soupspoon before bed and hey, sleep like a rose.

 

Do not consume raw berries, can induce vomiting and diarrhoea.

 

With love to you and thank you for ALL your faves and comments, M, (* _ *)

  

For more: www.indigo2photography.com

 

IT IS STRICTLY FORBIDDEN (BY LAW!!!) TO USE ANY OF MY image or TEXT on websites, blogs or any other media without my explicit permission. © All rights reserved

 

----------------

 

8è dia de vaga de fam

 

------------------------

 

More than 400 academics in the fields of political science, law and other disciplines express their worries that electoral monitors in Spain are being threatened with jail over their role in Catalonia’s independence referendum

 

Letters

 

Fri 7 Dec 2018 17.00 GMT

Last modified on Fri 7 Dec 2018 19.19 GMT

 

Following the decision of four Catalan political prisoners to go on hunger strike (Report, theguardian.com, 4 December), we write to draw attention to the plight of many others who remain under the radar of international attention. As academics in the fields of political science, law and other disciplines, we are particularly concerned about the decision by the Spanish judiciary to prosecute two political science scholars and two law scholars based at three different universities in Barcelona. The four academics, (Jordi Matas, Tània Verge, Marc Marsal and Josep Pagès) along with a lawyer (Marta Alsina) were appointed members of the electoral commission in September 2017 by the parliament of Catalonia to monitor the 1 October 2017 referendum.

 

Even though the Spanish constitutional court forced them to resign through fines of €12,000 per person for each day that they remained in their position, the Spanish judiciary has charged the electoral monitors with the offences of “disobedience” and “usurpation of functions” and they are facing the very real possibility of up to two years and nine months in prison.

 

It is probably the first time in the history of the EU that political scientists and lawyers are being threatened with a prison sentence for using their expertise to guarantee that a referendum is held in a fair and impartial way. In doing so, they acted at the request of the parliament of Catalonia, which had a valid legal mandate at the time.

 

While we do not take a position on the question of Catalonia’s independence in this letter, we are indignant over the prosecution of our colleagues and demand the immediate removal of the threat of a prison sentence and the dropping of all criminal charges against them.

Monica Clua-Losada University of Texas Rio Grande Valley, USA, David Whyte University of Liverpool, UK, Noam Chomsky MIT, USA, Yanis Varoufakis University of Athens, Greece, Alain-G Gagnon Université du Québec à Montréal, Canada, Jane Mansbridge Harvard Kennedy School, USA, Fiona MacKay University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Bart Maddens Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, Meryl Kenny University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Angela Wilson On behalf of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom, UK, Lars-Erik Cederman ETH Zürich – International Conflict Research, Switzerland, James Galbraith University of Texas at Austin, USA, Jill Vickers Carleton University, Canada, Mona Lena Krook Rutgers University, USA, Shirin Rai University of Warwick, UK, Joan Ramon Resina Stanford University, USA, Pablo Beramendi Duke University, USA, Carles Boix Princeton University, USA, Louise Chappell University of New South Wales, Australia, Sarah Childs Birkbeck College, University of London, UK, Klaus Detterbeck Universität Göttingen, Germany, Mario Diani University of Trento, Italy, David Farrell University College Dublin, Ireland, André Freire ISCTE-IUL, Lisbon, Portugal, Jonathan Hopkin London School of Economics and Political Science, UK, John Kincaid Lafayette College, USA, Joni Lovenduski Birkbeck College, University of London, UK, Shirin Rai University of Warwick, UK, Joan Ramon Resina Stanford University, USA, Birgit Sauer Universität Wien, Austria, Michael Saward University of Warwick, UK, Klaus Stolz Technische Universität Chemnitz, Germany, Wilfried Swenden University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Linda Trimble University of Alberta, Canada, Ingrid Van Biezen Leiden University, Netherlands, Mieke Verloo Radboud University, Netherlands, Georgina Waylen University of Manchester, UK, Paul Webb University of Sussex, UK, and more than 400 others (full list of signatories at tinyurl.com/y8k3yc4b)

[S167]

When you look at this photo you realize what a terrible decision it was to scrap the Mumbles trams for a bus service. It was not exactly an impartial vote with bus company interests ignoring local protests. Even more tragic that no complete tram exists today. What a tourist attraction this would be for traffic gridlocked Swansea today. I love the fact that Ashliegh Road halt is on the FLICKR base map some 60 years after it was closed.

  

Due to the recent unauthorized publication of my images in a magazine. newspaper and two published books without payment I have to now make this statement. I keep attending online Railway Soc events where speakers brazenly show my images without any acknowledgment of the photographer or the fact they have just stolen them off my FLICKR site. Hence I have been forced to add a copyright sign in the corner.

 

This image is the copyright of © Peter Brabham or © Derek Chaplin family ; Any users, found to replicate, reproduce, circulate, distribute, download, manipulate or otherwise use my images without my written consent will be in breach of copyright laws. I will retrospectively claim £50 per print image if prior written authorization for publication has not been sought. Please contact me at pete.brabham@ntlworld.com for permission to use any of my FLICKR photographs in hard copy publication. I will usually give permission free of charge to Heritage Railways and steam loco restoration project advertising, but profit-making magazines and book authors must pay a reproduction fee. Authors should know the provenance of high quality digital images that they use.

 

The first two nights in Saigon we chose the Hotel Grand Saigon because "A" it was across the street from the Hotel Reverie where Avalon Waterways would house us as part of the tour & "B" it was about 1/4 the price of the Reverie.

 

Lucky us we were assigned rooms in the historic part of the 1930 built gem. Our huge room was a delight and overlooked the inner courtyard and swimming pool.

 

One of the city’s most historic buildings, the Grand is better known as the former Saigon-Palace, one of the leading hotels of the 1930s.

 

The Grand-Hôtel de Saigon was founded by Henri Chavigny de Lachevrotière (1883-1951), a Eurasian journalist, plantation owner and businessman who is perhaps best known as the editor of the leading colonial-era newspapers L’Impartial (1917-1926) and La Dépêche (1928-1940).

 

In 1929 de Lachevrotière embarked on the construction of the 68-room Grand-Hôtel de Saigon at 8 rue Catinat. It opened in 1930.

 

The Grand-Hôtel de Saigon survived for just two years; in 1932, Chavigny de Lachevrotière sold it to a French Corsican businessman named Patrice Luciani.

 

Immediately after acquiring the Grand-Hôtel de Saigon from Chavigny de Lachevrotière in 1932, Luciani changed the name of the Grand-Hôtel to “Saigon-Palace Hôtel.

 

When Luciani retired in 1939, the Saigon-Palace Hôtel was purchased by another French Corsican businessman named Antoine Giorgetti, and it was under his management in the 1940s that it was converted into rented apartments.

 

After 1955, the Saigon Palace was reinstated as a hotel under the Vietnamese name Sài Gòn Đại Lữ Quán, but in subsequent years it became increasingly shabby and down-market. It continued to function as a hotel after Reunification, although in 1989 it was renamed the Đồng Khởi Hotel, a name which is still posted today on one side of the building.

 

Following a major renovation in 1995-1998, the hotel reopened as the Grand Hotel. It was awarded four stars in 2004.

   

Fuck the Tories and their media cheerleaders

Eine sehr freie Interpretation der Ärztekammer in Hannover. Das Foto wurde am Nachmittag aufgenommen, bei schönem blauen Himmel und leichten Wolken. Das Ergebnis hat tatsächlich nicht viel mit dem objektiven Eindruck vor Ort zu tun - aber sehr viel damit, wie ich die Struktur des Gebäudes wahrgenommen habe.

 

Ich hoffe, es gefällt euch.

 

Die technischen Details für die Interessierten:

Hardware: Canon EOS 500d, SIGMA 10-20mm, 1000x B+W Graufilter

Aufnahme: Brennweite 16mm, ISO 100, Blende f/13, Belichtungszeit 121 Sekunden

Software: RAW-Entwicklung in Adobe Lightroom, Schwarz-Weiß-Konvertierung mit Silver Efex Pro 2, die restliche Bildbearbeitung erfolgte in Adobe Photoshop Elements

 

Mehr Infos und andere Bilder findet ihr auf www.schmaidt.de!

 

---

 

A very free interpretation of the medical association in Hanover, Germany. The photo was taken during the afternonn at a very blue sky with some light clouds. The result has definitely not that much in common with the impartial impression at the building - but it has a lot to do with the way a saw the the structure of the building.

 

I hope, it's pleasing for you.

 

For those of you that are interested in the technical stuff:

Hardware: Canon EOS 500d, SIGMA 10-20mm, 1000x B+W ND filter

Shot: focal length 16mm, ISO 100, aperture f/13, exposure time 121 seconds

Software: RAW development with Adobe Lightroom, black-and-white conversion with Silver Efex Pro 2, the rest was done in Adobe Photoshop Elements.

 

Mehr Infos und andere Bilder findet ihr auf www.schmaidt.de!

A close up of me, not as a much make up as I normally do as it was quite warm on Saturday and didn't want impartiality my foundation running. Not a good look xx ❤❤

~Anna Quindlan

 

Just a couple of books I've read lately so anyone looking out for christmas presents might get a few ideas from this or my previous post - www.flickr.com/photos/kaymaguire/3807914144/in/set-721576...

 

Another great book is " The TIme Travellers Wife" don't have it here as lent it to my Mother to read. I would say read the book before the movie as the book is so much better:) but I always get more from a book than a movie....

"I cannot pretend to feel impartial about colors."

Sir Winston Churchill

 

Follow me on: Facebook - Flickriver - Tumblr. - Twitter

© Copyright Natalie Panga - All rights reserved.

* Lightbox: Best seen in larger size on black (click image above)

Sir Thomas Brisbane:

 

Sir Thomas Makdougall Brisbane (1773-1860), governor, was born on 23 July 1773 at Brisbane House, near Largs, Ayrshire, son of a family of ancient Scottish lineage. He was educated by tutors and attended both the University of Edinburgh and the English Academy, Kensington. In 1789 he was commissioned an ensign in the 38th Regiment, which next year he joined in Ireland; there he struck up a long and profitable friendship with a fellow subaltern, Arthur Wellesley. From 1793 to 1798 he served in Flanders as a captain, from 1795 to 1799 in the West Indies as a major, and from 1800 to 1803 he commanded the 69th Regiment in Jamaica as a lieutenant-colonel, earning high praise from the governor, Sir George Nugent. From 1803 to 1805 he served in England, but when the 69th was ordered to India went on half-pay in Scotland because of his health.

 

He then was able to indulge his interest in astronomy, which he developed after nearly being involved in a shipwreck in 1795, and in 1808 he built at Brisbane House the second observatory in Scotland. In 1810 he was promoted colonel and elected a fellow of the Royal Society of London, and in 1812 at Wellington's request he was promoted brigadier-general. He commanded a brigade which was heavily engaged in the battles of the Peninsular war from Vittoria to Toulouse, and continued to practise his astronomy so that in Wellington's words, he 'kept the time of the army'. In 1815 he was created a K.C.B., received the thanks of parliament, and commanded a brigade in the American war. From 1815 to 1818 he commanded a division in the army of occupation in France and in 1817 he was created a K.C.H. (G.C.H., 1831). He returned to England in 1818 and next year married Anna Maria, daughter and heiress of Sir Henry Hay Makdougall of Makerstoun, Scotland, whose surname he added to his own by letters patent on 14 August 1826. In 1815 he applied for appointment as governor of New South Wales, but the post was not then vacant; in November 1820 on Wellington's advice Brisbane, then in command of the Munster district in Ireland, was appointed. He arrived in the colony on 7 November 1821 and took over from Governor Lachlan Macquarie on 1 December.

 

Brisbane's policies for the colony were usually sensible answers to pressing problems, based on Commissioner John Thomas Bigge's report and the instructions derived from it, modified by his own impressions. Though he was on good terms with Macquarie he condemned the latter's 'system' and told Earl Bathurst later that he had changed New South Wales in so many ways that if Macquarie had returned 'he would not have recognised the place'.

 

When Brisbane arrived 340,000 acres (137,593 ha) of promised grants had still to be located and there were many confused permissive occupancies and nebulous promises. Lands were occupied and transferred without legal title, and boundary disputes seemed never ending. Proper survey was essential for a workable policy of alienation to be evolved, and the Ripon regulations of 1831 were made to a large extent possible by the practical development of the policies which Brisbane had implemented.

 

In 1822 he issued tickets-of-occupation which enabled land to be immediately occupied without a preliminary survey and graziers to be given security against trespass without the land being permanently alienated. Additional assistant surveyors were appointed to reduce arrears in the surveying and granting of land, but Brisbane promised land only to those with the inclination and ability to use it productively, forbade the acceptance of chits signed by irresponsible persons as valid titles, and gave tickets-of-occupation only when extra stock had actually been obtained. He granted land to sons of established settlers only if their fathers' properties had been considerably improved, and to immigrants in proportion to their capital. He was reluctant to make grants to his newly-appointed officials, even though this subjected him 'to a most unpleasant feeling'. In order to promote settlement of the colony by settlers who really wanted to improve the land and to deter speculators with fictitious capital, he insisted that grantees should maintain one convict labourer, free of expense to the Crown, for every 100 acres (40 ha) they were given, and he maintained this rule against criticism from the Colonial Office that it would hamper settlement. Brisbane insisted that although the regulation had been temporarily unpopular genuine settlers did not oppose it, for convict servants were coming to be looked on as a boon. It would help to control the intense demand for land, though even that check would not be sufficient. 'Not a cow calves in the colony but her owner applies for an additional grant in consequence of the increase in his stock', he wrote. 'Every person to whom a grant is made receives it as the payment of a debt; everyone to whom one is refused turns my implacable enemy'. He asked the British government 'to fix an invariable proportion of land to be cultivated in every grant' and to appoint a Commission of Escheat, for without it, since a judgment by Barron Field, the 'clearing and cultivating clauses' in the grants had become 'a dead letter'. The instructions on the disposal of crown lands which were sent from London in January 1825 owed so much to Brisbane's advice that he found 'great satisfaction' in noticing 'the very prominent similarity' between them and the practice he had been following in New South Wales.

 

Acting on one of Bigge's suggestions Brisbane in 1824 had begun selling crown lands, at 5s. an acre. 'While the system of free grants exists, there is little chance of extensive improvement taking place generally in the colony, as the improver of land can never enter the market in competition with the individual who gets his land for nothing', Brisbane told Bathurst. Between May and December 1825 more than 500,000 acres (202,345 ha) were sold. In land policy Brisbane had recognized the need to encourage men of capital, though at the same time opposing over-lavish land grants. Seeing the need for consolidation rather than expansion, and for more accurate surveys of the settled areas, he gave less encouragement to land exploration than either his predecessors or successors, but he continued, as instructed, to organize coastal surveys.

 

Brisbane received from Bathurst full instructions on convict affairs, derived from Bigge's report. These were based on the belief that Macquarie had been too lenient and too extravagant, and Brisbane conscientiously carried them out. He rigidly adhered to the rules against the premature granting of tickets-of-leave. He reduced the number of road-gangs, whose members often indulged in dissipation and crime, and the numbers employed on public works in Sydney, and organized in their place gangs to clear land for settlers in return for payment to the government; this greatly speeded up the rate of clearing. He ordered convict mechanics to be hired instead of being assigned; this brought in revenue and made for a more efficient distribution of labour. He established new centres of secondary punishment as Bigge had recommended, first at Moreton Bay and later at Bathurst's suggestion on Norfolk Island, and he sent educated convicts to be confined first at Bathurst and later at Wellington valley, but he opposed excessive corporal punishment, reprieved many prisoners sentenced to death and was criticized by Bathurst for his improvidence in granting pardons.

 

Brisbane set up an agricultural training college and was the first patron of the New South Wales Agricultural Society, founded in 1822, which among other activities, financed the importation of livestock. On Bathurst's instructions, he drastically reduced the assistance given to new settlers and so, by making it virtually impracticable to begin farming without capital, helped to improve production. He conducted experiments in growing Virginian tobacco, Georgian cotton, Brazilian coffee and New Zealand flax, but unfortunately without much success.

 

Brisbane looked forward to getting the 'Colony on to its own Resources' and regarded the achievement of economy in government expenditure as one of his major successes. In 1822, on the advice of Frederick Goulburn, colonial secretary, and William Wemyss, deputy commissary general, he initiated currency reforms by which commissariat payments were to be made in dollars at a fixed value of 5s. or about one-eighth above their intrinsic value. This attempt to set up a dollar standard was intended both to reduce expenditure and to provide the colony with a coinage which would prevent a repetition of the issue of store receipts as practised by the former commissary, Frederick Drennan, and it would discourage imports by depreciating the local currency. But the system was not a success and after the terms on which the dollars would be received had been modified the dollar standard was replaced by a sterling exchange standard on instructions sent from London in July 1825. In 1823 all commissariat supplies were called by tender, though the introduction of price competition hurt small farmers and favoured the larger ones; when only three month's grain was bought by tender, instead of a year's at a fixed price, a minor depression occurred, but this was partly due to the suddenness of the change.

 

Brisbane was devout and broadminded in religious matters, and prepared to support any sect that did not threaten the state. He encouraged Wesleyan societies, advocated and gave financial aid to the Roman Catholics, but opposed what he regarded as extravagant demands by the Presbyterians, considering them wealthy enough to build their own church. He supported Bible and tract societies. He attempted to encourage education by appointing a director-general of all government public schools, but this was quashed by the Colonial Office. He believed that clergy, like government officials, should not indulge in private trade, which of course made him unpopular with Samuel Marsden. His policy towards Aboriginals was ambivalent. On one occasion he ordered some to be shot; on another he imposed martial law beyond the Blue Mountains because of 'the aggressions of the Native Blacks'. However, he favoured compensating them for lost land, and in 1825 granted the London Missionary Society 10,000 acres (4047 ha) as an Aboriginal reserve.

 

Like other governors, Brisbane found the emancipist-exclusive quarrel a major difficulty, and the success of many of his policies was vitiated because some of his officials ignored him and favoured the exclusives. Brisbane himself did not have great faith in the future of a colony based on emancipists; but though he preferred the large-scale immigration of free settlers, especially those with capital, his cautious liberalism was to the emancipists' tastes. Unlike the exclusives, they gave him a warm farewell. Brisbane appears to have believed, as he said at a public meeting just before he left, that free institutions could be safely established in New South Wales. In 1824 he did not apply any censorship when William Charles Wentworth's Australian began publication, and ended control of the Gazette by government officials. He ordered the holding of Courts of Quarter Sessions at which there would be trial by jury, an experiment which Chief Justice (Sir) Francis Forbes reported to have been very successful; they were abolished by the Act of 1828, but not before the exclusives had grossly misused them at Parramatta in their vendetta against Henry Grattan Douglass. The Legislative Council set up by the New South Wales Act of 1823, which began meeting in August 1824, operated calmly under his rule and began the process of reducing the powers of the governor from the autocracy of the past.

 

At first Brisbane had too few men to do the work of government; by 1824 he found himself with a number of departmental heads appointed independently of him, varying in ability, at odds with each other and the government. He thought Judge Barron Field and Judge-Advocate (Sir) John Wylde responsible for much of the party feeling in the colony, and was heartily glad to see them go in 1824, but John Oxley, Saxe Bannister and Frederick Goulburn were also sources of trouble. Men like George Druitt, John Jamison, Marsden, John Dunmore Lang, the Macarthurs and the Blaxlands frequently made vicious misrepresentations in London about Brisbane's administration. They gave the governor much to contend with and, though he 'evinced a forbearance amounting to Stoicism', in the end he felt compelled to remove some 'exclusive' magistrates for grossly improper behaviour. It was partly to counter their misrepresentations that he sent Dr Douglass to London in February 1824, but his patronage of Douglass, who was in trouble with the War Office, in the end contributed to his recall. Brisbane did not find Goulburn easy to work with and in January 1824 asked for an assistant-secretary. Goulburn refused to carry out some of Brisbane's instructions; he suppressed letters or answered them without reference to the governor; on 19 April 1824 he even claimed that the governor's proclamations and orders were invalid unless they went through his department. Such conduct Brisbane clearly could not countenance and he protested to the Colonial Office; the reply in December was the recall of both governor and secretary, and in November 1825 Brisbane departed.

 

Brisbane did not concern himself with all the details of his administration; but a governor could no longer attend to everything. The colony had expanded in size in recent years, and Macquarie had ruined his health and peace of mind by a concern with every administrative detail and petty squabble as Governor (Sir) Ralph Darling was soon to do also. Brisbane had worked well with Lieutenant-Governors William Sorell and (Sir) George Arthur in Van Diemen's Land, which was still under his jurisdiction, and he had no trouble there. Unfriendly contemporaries, Marsden, Archdeacon Thomas Scott and the Macarthurs, found Brisbane amiable, impartial but weak. His enemies accused him of a lack of interest in the colony, but this was untrue. Judge Forbes, whom he found 'a great blessing', praised his work; an emancipist address on his departure spoke of 'a mild, an unpartial, and a firm administration'; but soon afterwards John Dunmore Lang was to make what became the standard comment on his governorship; 'a man of the best intentions, but disinclined to business, and deficient in energy'. Of the quality of his intentions there is little doubt: highly patriotic, and regarding New South Wales as being of considerable moral, political and strategic value to the United Kingdom, he was genuinely concerned in its future progress. The stock criticisms, that he was weak and lacked interest in administrative detail, either because he was lazy or more concerned with 'star-gazing', are very misleading. 'In place of passing my time in the Observatory or shooting Parrots, I am seldom employed in either. And Altho' I rise oftener at 5 o'clock in the Morning than after, I cannot get thro' the various and arduous duties of my Government', he wrote. Brisbane had been a very respected and successful soldier, as indicated by Nugent's admiration and Wellington's occasional recorded praise and continued championship. Brisbane's dispatches are permeated with bitter realism about the greed and duplicity of leading colonists, and his policies for the colony were usually sensible. He was ready to delegate work to subordinates who were too often untrustworthy, but he was extremely diligent in the duties which he undertook himself as pertinent to his office. Sensitive, respectful to others, and never vindictive, he was rather out of his element when surrounded by the arrogance of the New South Wales magistracy, the disloyalty and factiousness of officials and the explosive rifts in colonial society. At the same time a more forceful man, living in Sydney not Parramatta, who ignored his wife and infant family (two of whom were born in the colony and a third on the voyage home), would probably have had more success in overcoming his difficulties. It was an unhappy period in Brisbane's life and, as Wellington commented on his recall, 'there are many brave men not fit to be governors of colonies'.

 

His astronomical activities had continued in Australia and indeed were probably a reason for his seeking the appointment. He built an observatory at Parramatta and made the first observations of stars in the southern hemisphere since Lacaille's in 1751-52 of which he published an account. 'Science' was 'not allowed to flag'. When he departed he left his astronomical instruments and 349 volumes of his scientific library to the colony, as he wanted his name to be associated with 'the furtherance of Science'; but he had had to leave most of his observatory work to Christian Rümker. There is little reference to astronomy in his letters after 1823, but he kept up his interest and in 1828 reported on the subject to the Royal Society, London. His astronomical achievements indeed brought him as much fame as his military and vice-regal career. When in 1823 Oxford University made him a D.C.L. he wrote that 'no Roman General ever felt prouder of the Corona Triumphatus … than I do on this occasion'. In 1826 he built another observatory at Makerstoun. Later he became president of the Edinburgh Astronomical Institution and did much to make the Edinburgh Royal Observatory highly efficient. In 1832 he was elected president of the Royal Society of Edinburgh in succession to Sir Walter Scott. In 1836 he was created a baronet, in 1837 awarded a G.C.B. and in 1841 promoted general. In 1826 he had been given command of the 34th Regiment; in 1836 he was offered the command of the troops in the North American colonies, but refused on grounds of ill health, as he did in 1838 when offered the Indian command. In 1858, when he was 'the oldest officer in the Army' he twice sought a field-marshal's baton; but though asked for without emolument it was refused. Much of his later life was occupied in paternal works at Largs. He improved its drainage, endowed a parish school and the Largs Brisbane Academy. Predeceased by his four children, he died on 27 January 1860, after enjoying locally great popularity and respect. The city of Brisbane, Queensland’s capital since 1859, was founded as a convict settlement in 1824, and it and its river were named for the governor at the suggestion of the explorer Oxley, the first European to survey the area. Brisbane himself visited the new settlement that year. It was declared a town in 1834 and opened for free settlement in 1839.

 

Source: Australian Dictionary of Biography.

The Living Tribunal was not guided by any personal motivation or desires, but was entirely impartial, acting only in what was determined to be the greater interest of the universe. The Living Tribunal was a vastly powerful conceptual being, one who had existed since the multiverse came into exsistene. The Living Tribunal's only superior was the One-Above-All. The Tribunal manifests itself as a being with three faces, which represent the three sides of the Tribunal's personality. Its front face, through which it usually speaks, represents equity, the fully hooded face on its right side represents necessity, and the partially hooded face on its left represents just revenge. All three voices must agree in a case before the Tribunal can intervene.

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre is a church in the Christian Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem. According to traditions dating back to the 4th century, it contains the two holiest sites in Christianity: the site where Jesus was crucified, at a place known as Calvary or Golgotha, and Jesus's empty tomb, where he is believed by Christians to have been buried and resurrected. Each time the church was rebuilt, some of the antiquities from the preceding structure were used in the newer renovation. The tomb itself is enclosed by a 19th-century shrine called the Aedicule. The Status Quo, an understanding between religious communities dating to 1757, applies to the site.

 

Within the church proper are the last four stations of the Cross of the Via Dolorosa, representing the final episodes of the Passion of Jesus. The church has been a major Christian pilgrimage destination since its creation in the 4th century, as the traditional site of the resurrection of Christ, thus its original Greek name, Church of the Anastasis ('Resurrection').

 

Control of the church itself is shared, a simultaneum, among several Christian denominations and secular entities in complicated arrangements essentially unchanged for over 160 years, and some for much longer. The main denominations sharing property over parts of the church are the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic, and to a lesser degree the Coptic, Syriac, and Ethiopian Orthodox churches.

 

Following the siege of Jerusalem in AD 70 during the First Jewish–Roman War, Jerusalem had been reduced to ruins. In AD 130, the Roman emperor Hadrian began the building of a Roman colony, the new city of Aelia Capitolina, on the site. Circa AD 135, he ordered that a cave containing a rock-cut tomb be filled in to create a flat foundation for a temple dedicated to Jupiter or Venus. The temple remained until the early 4th century.

 

After allegedly seeing a vision of a cross in the sky in 312, Constantine the Great began to favor Christianity, signed the Edict of Milan legalising the religion, and sent his mother, Helena, to Jerusalem to look for Christ's tomb. With the help of Bishop of Caesarea Eusebius and Bishop of Jerusalem Macarius, three crosses were found near a tomb; one which allegedly cured people of death was presumed to be the True Cross Jesus was crucified on, leading the Romans to believe that they had found Calvary. Constantine ordered in about 326 that the temple to Jupiter/Venus be replaced by a church. After the temple was torn down and its ruins removed, the soil was removed from the cave, revealing a rock-cut tomb that Helena and Macarius identified as the burial site of Jesus. A shrine was built, enclosing the rock tomb walls within its own.

 

In 327, Constantine and Helena separately commissioned the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem to commemorate the birth of Jesus.

 

The Church of the Holy Sepulchre, planned by the architect Zenobius, was built as separate constructs over the two holy sites: a rotunda called the Anastasis ("Resurrection"), where Helena and Macarius believed Jesus to have been buried, and across a courtyard to the east, the great basilica, an enclosed colonnaded atrium (the Triportico, sometimes called the Martyrium) with the traditional site of Calvary in one corner. The church was consecrated on 13 September 335. The Church Of The Holy Sepulchre site has been recognized since early in the 4th century as the place where Jesus was crucified, buried, and rose from the dead.

 

This building was destroyed by a fire in May of AD 614, when the Sassanid Empire, under Khosrau II, invaded Jerusalem and captured the True Cross. In 630, the Emperor Heraclius rebuilt the church after recapturing the city. After Jerusalem came under Islamic rule, it remained a Christian church, with the early Muslim rulers protecting the city's Christian sites, prohibiting their destruction or use as living quarters. A story reports that the caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab visited the church and stopped to pray on the balcony, but at the time of prayer, turned away from the church and prayed outside. He feared that future generations would misinterpret this gesture, taking it as a pretext to turn the church into a mosque. Eutychius of Alexandria adds that Umar wrote a decree saying that Muslims would not inhabit this location. The building suffered severe damage from an earthquake in 746.

 

Early in the 9th century, another earthquake damaged the dome of the Anastasis. The damage was repaired in 810 by Patriarch Thomas I. In 841, the church suffered a fire. In 935, the Christians prevented the construction of a Muslim mosque adjacent to the Church. In 938, a new fire damaged the inside of the basilica and came close to the rotunda. In 966, due to a defeat of Muslim armies in the region of Syria, a riot broke out, which was followed by reprisals. The basilica was burned again. The doors and roof were burnt, and Patriarch John VII was murdered.

 

On 18 October 1009, Fatimid caliph al-Hakim bi-Amr Allah ordered the complete destruction of the church as part of a more general campaign against Christian places of worship in Palestine and Egypt. The damage was extensive, with few parts of the early church remaining, and the roof of the rock-cut tomb damaged; the original shrine was destroyed. Some partial repairs followed. Christian Europe reacted with shock and expulsions of Jews, serving as an impetus to later Crusades.

 

In wide-ranging negotiations between the Fatimids and the Byzantine Empire in 1027–28, an agreement was reached whereby the new Caliph Ali az-Zahir (al-Hakim's son) agreed to allow the rebuilding and redecoration of the church. The rebuilding was finally completed during the tenures of Emperor Constantine IX Monomachos and Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople in 1048. As a concession, the mosque in Constantinople was reopened and the khutba sermons were to be pronounced in az-Zahir's name. Muslim sources say a by-product of the agreement was the renunciation of Islam by many Christians who had been forced to convert under al-Hakim's persecutions. In addition, the Byzantines, while releasing 5,000 Muslim prisoners, made demands for the restoration of other churches destroyed by al-Hakim and the reestablishment of a patriarch in Jerusalem. Contemporary sources credit the emperor with spending vast sums in an effort to restore the Church of the Holy Sepulchre after this agreement was made. Still, "a total replacement was far beyond available resources. The new construction was concentrated on the rotunda and its surrounding buildings: the great basilica remained in ruins."

 

The rebuilt church site consisted of "a court open to the sky, with five small chapels attached to it." The chapels were east of the court of resurrection (when reconstructed, the location of the tomb was under open sky), where the western wall of the great basilica had been. They commemorated scenes from the passion, such as the location of the prison of Christ and his flagellation, and presumably were so placed because of the difficulties of free movement among shrines in the city streets. The dedication of these chapels indicates the importance of the pilgrims' devotion to the suffering of Christ. They have been described as 'a sort of Via Dolorosa in miniature'... since little or no rebuilding took place on the site of the great basilica. Western pilgrims to Jerusalem during the 11th century found much of the sacred site in ruins." Control of Jerusalem, and thereby the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, continued to change hands several times between the Fatimids and the Seljuk Turks (loyal to the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad) until the Crusaders' arrival in 1099.

 

Many historians maintain that the main concern of Pope Urban II, when calling for the First Crusade, was the threat to Constantinople from the Turkish invasion of Asia Minor in response to the appeal of Byzantine Emperor Alexios I Komnenos. Historians agree that the fate of Jerusalem and thereby the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was also of concern, if not the immediate goal of papal policy in 1095. The idea of taking Jerusalem gained more focus as the Crusade was underway. The rebuilt church site was taken from the Fatimids (who had recently taken it from the Abassids) by the knights of the First Crusade on 15 July 1099.

 

The First Crusade was envisioned as an armed pilgrimage, and no crusader could consider his journey complete unless he had prayed as a pilgrim at the Holy Sepulchre. The classical theory is that Crusader leader Godfrey of Bouillon, who became the first Latin ruler of Jerusalem, decided not to use the title "king" during his lifetime, and declared himself Advocatus Sancti Sepulchri ("Protector [or Defender] of the Holy Sepulchre"). By the Crusader period, a cistern under the former basilica was rumoured to have been where Helena had found the True Cross, and began to be venerated as such; the cistern later became the Chapel of the Invention of the Cross, but there is no evidence of the site's identification before the 11th century, and modern archaeological investigation has now dated the cistern to 11th-century repairs by Monomachos.

 

According to the German priest and pilgrim Ludolf von Sudheim, the keys of the Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre were in hands of the "ancient Georgians", and the food, alms, candles and oil for lamps were given to them by the pilgrims at the south door of the church.

 

Eight 11th- and 12th-century Crusader leaders (Godfrey, Baldwin I, Baldwin II, Fulk, Baldwin III, Amalric, Baldwin IV and Baldwin V — the first eight rulers of the Kingdom of Jerusalem) were buried in the south transept and inside the Chapel of Adam. The royal tombs were destroyed by the Greeks in 1809–1810. It is unclear if the remains of those men were exhumed; some researchers hypothesize that some of them may still be in unmarked pits under the church.

 

William of Tyre, chronicler of the Crusader Kingdom of Jerusalem, reports on the renovation of the Church in the mid-12th century. The Crusaders investigated the eastern ruins on the site, occasionally excavating through the rubble, and while attempting to reach the cistern, they discovered part of the original ground level of Hadrian's temple enclosure; they transformed this space into a chapel dedicated to Helena, widening their original excavation tunnel into a proper staircase. The Crusaders began to refurnish the church in Romanesque style and added a bell tower. These renovations unified the small chapels on the site and were completed during the reign of Queen Melisende in 1149, placing all the holy places under one roof for the first time. The church became the seat of the first Latin patriarchs and the site of the kingdom's scriptorium. It was lost to Saladin, along with the rest of the city, in 1187, although the treaty established after the Third Crusade allowed Christian pilgrims to visit the site. Emperor Frederick II (r. 1220–50) regained the city and the church by treaty in the 13th century while under a ban of excommunication, with the curious consequence that the holiest church in Christianity was laid under interdict. The church seems to have been largely in the hands of Greek Orthodox patriarch Athanasius II of Jerusalem (c. 1231–47) during the Latin control of Jerusalem. Both city and church were captured by the Khwarezmians in 1244.

 

There was certainly a recognisable Nestorian (Church of the East) presence at the Holy Sepulchre from the years 1348 through 1575, as contemporary Franciscan accounts indicate. The Franciscan friars renovated the church in 1555, as it had been neglected despite increased numbers of pilgrims. The Franciscans rebuilt the Aedicule, extending the structure to create an antechamber. A marble shrine commissioned by Friar Boniface of Ragusa was placed to envelop the remains of Christ's tomb, probably to prevent pilgrims from touching the original rock or taking small pieces as souvenirs. A marble slab was placed over the limestone burial bed where Jesus's body is believed to have lain.

 

After the renovation of 1555, control of the church oscillated between the Franciscans and the Orthodox, depending on which community could obtain a favorable firman from the "Sublime Porte" at a particular time, often through outright bribery. Violent clashes were not uncommon. There was no agreement about this question, although it was discussed at the negotiations to the Treaty of Karlowitz in 1699. During the Holy Week of 1757, Orthodox Christians reportedly took over some of the Franciscan-controlled church. This may have been the cause of the sultan's firman (decree) later developed into the Status Quo.

 

A fire severely damaged the structure again in 1808, causing the dome of the Rotunda to collapse and smashing the Aedicule's exterior decoration. The Rotunda and the Aedicule's exterior were rebuilt in 1809–10 by architect Nikolaos Ch. Komnenos of Mytilene in the contemporary Ottoman Baroque style.[citation needed] The interior of the antechamber, now known as the Chapel of the Angel, was partly rebuilt to a square ground plan in place of the previously semicircular western end.

 

Another decree in 1853 from the sultan solidified the existing territorial division among the communities and solidified the Status Quo for arrangements to "remain in their present state", requiring consensus to make even minor changes.

 

The dome was restored by Catholics, Greeks and Turks in 1868, being made of iron ever since.

 

By the time of the British Mandate for Palestine following the end of World War I, the cladding of red marble applied to the Aedicule by Komnenos had deteriorated badly and was detaching from the underlying structure; from 1947 until restoration work in 2016–17, it was held in place with an exterior scaffolding of iron girders installed by the British authorities.

 

In 1948, Jerusalem was divided between Israel and Jordan and the Old City with the church were made part of Jordan. In 1967, Israeli forces captured East Jerusalem in the Six Day War, and that area has remained under Israeli control ever since. Under Israeli rule, legal arrangements relating to the churches of East Jerusalem were maintained in coordination with the Jordanian government. The dome at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre was restored again in 1994–97 as part of extensive modern renovations that have been ongoing since 1959. During the 1970–78 restoration works and excavations inside the building, and under the nearby Muristan bazaar, it was found that the area was originally a quarry, from which white meleke limestone was struck.

 

East of the Chapel of Saint Helena, the excavators discovered a void containing a second-century[dubious – discuss] drawing of a Roman pilgrim ship, two low walls supporting the platform of Hadrian's second-century temple, and a higher fourth-century wall built to support Constantine's basilica. After the excavations of the early 1970s, the Armenian authorities converted this archaeological space into the Chapel of Saint Vartan, and created an artificial walkway over the quarry on the north of the chapel, so that the new chapel could be accessed (by permission) from the Chapel of Saint Helena.

 

After seven decades of being held together by steel girders, the Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) declared the visibly deteriorating Aedicule structure unsafe. A restoration of the Aedicule was agreed upon and executed from May 2016 to March 2017. Much of the $4 million project was funded by the World Monuments Fund, as well as $1.3 million from Mica Ertegun and a significant sum from King Abdullah II of Jordan. The existence of the original limestone cave walls within the Aedicule was confirmed, and a window was created to view this from the inside. The presence of moisture led to the discovery of an underground shaft resembling an escape tunnel carved into the bedrock, seeming to lead from the tomb. For the first time since at least 1555, on 26 October 2016, marble cladding that protects the supposed burial bed of Jesus was removed. Members of the National Technical University of Athens were present. Initially, only a layer of debris was visible. This was cleared in the next day, and a partially broken marble slab with a Crusader-style cross carved was revealed. By the night of 28 October, the original limestone burial bed was shown to be intact. The tomb was resealed shortly thereafter. Mortar from just above the burial bed was later dated to the mid-fourth century.

 

On 25 March 2020, Israeli health officials ordered the site closed to the public due to the COVID-19 pandemic. According to the keeper of the keys, it was the first such closure since 1349, during the Black Death. Clerics continued regular prayers inside the building, and it reopened to visitors two months later, on 24 May.

 

During church renovations in 2022, a stone slab covered in modern graffiti was moved from a wall, revealing Cosmatesque-style decoration on one face. According to an IAA archaeologist, the decoration was once inlaid with pieces of glass and fine marble; it indicates that the relic was the front of the church's high altar from the Crusader era (c. 1149), which was later used by the Greek Orthodox until being damaged in the 1808 fire.

 

The courtyard facing the entrance to the church is known as the parvis. Two streets open into the parvis: St Helena Road (west) and Suq ed-Dabbagha (east). Around the parvis are a few smaller structures.

 

South of the parvis, opposite the church:

 

Broken columns—once forming part of an arcade—stand opposite the church, at the top of a short descending staircase stretching over the entire breadth of the parvis. In the 13th century, the tops of the columns were removed and sent to Mecca by the Khwarezmids.

The Gethsemane Metochion, a small Greek Orthodox monastery (metochion).

On the eastern side of the parvis, south to north:

 

The Monastery of St Abraham (Greek Orthodox), next to the Suq ed-Dabbagha entrance to the parvis.

The Chapel of St John the Evangelist (Armenian Orthodox)

The Chapel of St Michael and the Chapel of the Four Living Creatures (both are disputed between the Copts and Ethiopians), giving access to Deir es-Sultan (also disputed), a rooftop monastery surrounding the dome of the Chapel of St Helena.

North of the parvis, in front of the church façade or against it:

 

Chapel of the Franks (Chapel of Our Lady of Sorrows): a blue-domed Roman Catholic Crusader chapel dedicated to Our Lady of Sorrows, which once provided exclusive access to Calvary. The chapel marks the 10th Station of the Cross (the stripping of Jesus's garments).

Oratory of St. Mary of Egypt: a Greek Orthodox oratory and chapel, directly beneath the Chapel of the Franks, dedicated to St. Mary of Egypt.

The tomb (including a ledgerstone) of Philip d'Aubigny aka Philip Daubeney (died 1236), a knight, tutor, and royal councilor to Henry III of England and signer of the Magna Carta—is placed in front of, and between, the church's two original entrance doors, of which the eastern one is walled up. It is one of the few tombs of crusaders and other Europeans not removed from the Church after the Khwarizmian capture of Jerusalem in 1244. In the 1900s, during a fight between the Greeks and Latins, some monks damaged the tomb by throwing stones from the roof. A stone marker[clarification needed] was placed on his tomb in 1925, sheltered by a wooden trapdoor that hides it from view.[citation needed]

A group of three chapels borders the parvis on its west side. They originally formed the baptistery complex of the Constantinian church. The southernmost chapel was the vestibule, the middle chapel the baptistery, and the north chapel the chamber in which the patriarch chrismated the newly baptized before leading them into the rotunda north of this complex. Now they are dedicated as (from south to north)

 

The Chapel of St. James the Just (Greek Orthodox),

The Chapel of St. John the Baptist (Greek Orthodox),

The Chapel of the Forty Martyrs of Sebaste (Greek Orthodox; at the base of the bell tower).

 

The 12th-century Crusader bell tower is just south of the Rotunda, to the left of the entrance. Its upper level was lost in a 1545 collapse. In 1719, another two storeys were lost.

 

The wooden doors that compose the main entrance are the original, highly carved arched doors. Today, only the left-hand entrance is currently accessible, as the right doorway has long since been bricked up. The entrance to the church leads to the south transept, through the crusader façade in the parvis of a larger courtyard. This is found past a group of streets winding through the outer Via Dolorosa by way of a souq in the Muristan. This narrow way of access to such a large structure has proven to be hazardous at times. For example, when a fire broke out in 1840, dozens of pilgrims were trampled to death.

 

According to their own family lore, the Muslim Nuseibeh family has been responsible for opening the door as an impartial party to the church's denominations already since the seventh century. However, they themselves admit that the documents held by various Christian denominations only mention their role since the 12th century, in the time of Saladin, which is the date more generally accepted. After retaking Jerusalem from the Crusaders in 1187, Saladin entrusted the Joudeh family with the key to the church, which is made of iron and 30 centimetres (12 in) long; the Nuseibehs either became or remained its doorkeepers.

 

The 'immovable ladder' stands beneath a window on the façade.

 

Just inside the church entrance is a stairway leading up to Calvary (Golgotha), traditionally regarded as the site of Jesus's crucifixion and the most lavishly decorated part of the church. The exit is via another stairway opposite the first, leading down to the ambulatory. Golgotha and its chapels are just south of the main altar of the catholicon.

 

Calvary is split into two chapels: one Greek Orthodox and one Catholic, each with its own altar. On the left (north) side, the Greek Orthodox chapel's altar is placed over the supposed rock of Calvary (the 12th Station of the Cross), which can be touched through a hole in the floor beneath the altar. The rock can be seen under protective glass on both sides of the altar. The softer surrounding stone was removed when the church was built. The Roman Catholic (Franciscan) Chapel of the Nailing of the Cross (the 11th Station of the Cross) stretches to the south. Between the Catholic Altar of the Nailing to the Cross and the Orthodox altar is the Catholic Altar of the Stabat Mater, which has a statue of Mary with an 18th-century bust; this middle altar marks the 13th Station of the Cross.

 

On the ground floor, just underneath the Golgotha chapel, is the Chapel of Adam. According to tradition, Jesus was crucified over the place where Adam's skull was buried. According to some, the blood of Christ ran down the cross and through the rocks to fill Adam's skull. Through a window at the back of the 11th-century apse, the rock of Calvary can be seen with a crack traditionally held to be caused by the earthquake that followed Jesus's death;[78] some scholars claim it is the result of quarrying against a natural flaw in the rock.

 

Behind the Chapel of Adam is the Greek Treasury (Treasury of the Greek Patriarch). Some of its relics, such as a 12th-century crystal mitre, were transferred to the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate Museum (the Patriarchal Museum) on Greek Orthodox Patriarchate Street.

 

Just inside the entrance to the church is the Stone of Anointing (also Stone of the Anointing or Stone of Unction), which tradition holds to be where Jesus's body was prepared for burial by Joseph of Arimathea, though this tradition is only attested since the crusader era (notably by the Italian Dominican pilgrim Riccoldo da Monte di Croce in 1288), and the present stone was only added in the 1810 reconstruction.

 

The wall behind the stone is defined by its striking blue balconies and taphos symbol-bearing red banners (depicting the insignia of the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre), and is decorated with lamps. The modern mosaic along the wall depicts the anointing of Jesus's body, preceded on the right by the Descent from the Cross, and succeeded on the left by the Burial of Jesus.

 

The wall was a temporary addition to support the arch above it, which had been weakened after the damage in the 1808 fire; it blocks the view of the rotunda, separates the entrance from the catholicon, sits on top of four of the now empty and desecrated Crusader graves and is no longer structurally necessary. Opinions differ as to whether it is to be seen as the 13th Station of the Cross, which others identify as the lowering of Jesus from the cross and located between the 11th and 12th stations on Calvary.

 

The lamps that hang over the Stone of Unction, adorned with cross-bearing chain links, are contributed by Armenians, Copts, Greeks and Latins.

 

Immediately inside and to the left of the entrance is a bench (formerly a divan) that has traditionally been used by the church's Muslim doorkeepers, along with some Christian clergy, as well as electrical wiring. To the right of the entrance is a wall along the ambulatory containing the staircase leading to Golgotha. Further along the same wall is the entrance to the Chapel of Adam.

 

The rotunda is the building of the larger dome located on the far west side. In the centre of the rotunda is a small chapel called the Aedicule in English, from the Latin aedicula, in reference to a small shrine. The Aedicule has two rooms: the first holds a relic called the Angel's Stone, which is believed to be a fragment of the large stone that sealed the tomb; the second, smaller room contains the tomb of Jesus. Possibly to prevent pilgrims from removing bits of the original rock as souvenirs, by 1555, a surface of marble cladding was placed on the tomb to prevent further damage to the tomb. In October 2016, the top slab was pulled back to reveal an older, partially broken marble slab with a Crusader-style cross carved in it. Beneath it, the limestone burial bed was revealed to be intact.

 

Under the Status Quo, the Eastern Orthodox, Roman Catholic, and Armenian Apostolic Churches all have rights to the interior of the tomb, and all three communities celebrate the Divine Liturgy or Holy Mass there daily. It is also used for other ceremonies on special occasions, such as the Holy Saturday ceremony of the Holy Fire led by the Greek Orthodox patriarch (with the participation of the Coptic and Armenian patriarchs). To its rear, in the Coptic Chapel, constructed of iron latticework, lies the altar used by the Coptic Orthodox. Historically, the Georgians also retained the key to the Aedicule.

 

To the right of the sepulchre on the northwestern edge of the Rotunda is the Chapel of the Apparition, which is reserved for Roman Catholic use.

 

In the central nave of the Crusader-era church, just east of the larger rotunda, is the Crusader structure housing the main altar of the Church, today the Greek Orthodox catholicon. Its dome is 19.8 metres (65 ft) in diameter, and is set directly over the centre of the transept crossing of the choir where the compas is situated, an omphalos ("navel") stone once thought to be the center of the world and still venerated as such by Orthodox Christians (associated with the site of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection).

 

Since 1996 this dome is topped by the monumental Golgotha Crucifix, which the Greek Patriarch Diodoros I of Jerusalem consecrated. It was at the initiative of Israeli professor Gustav Kühnel to erect a new crucifix at the church that would not only be worthy of the singularity of the site, but that would also become a symbol of the efforts of unity in the community of Christian faith.

 

The catholicon's iconostasis demarcates the Orthodox sanctuary behind it, to its east. The iconostasis is flanked to the front by two episcopal thrones: the southern seat (cathedra) is the patriarchal throne of the Greek Orthodox patriarch of Jerusalem, and the northern seat is for an archbishop or bishop. (There is also a popular claim that both are patriarchal thrones, with the northern one being for the patriarch of Antioch — which has been described as a misstatement, however.)

 

South of the Aedicule is the "Place of the Three Marys", marked by a stone canopy (the Station of the Holy Women) and a large modern wall mosaic. From here one can enter the Armenian monastery, which stretches over the ground and first upper floor of the church's southeastern part.

 

West of the Aedicule, to the rear of the Rotunda, is the Syriac Chapel with the Tomb of Joseph of Arimathea, located in a Constantinian apse and containing an opening to an ancient Jewish rock-cut tomb. This chapel is where the Syriac Orthodox celebrate their Liturgy on Sundays.

 

The Syriac Orthodox Chapel of Saint Joseph of Arimathea and Saint Nicodemus. On Sundays and feast days it is furnished for the celebration of Mass. It is accessed from the Rotunda, by a door west of the Aedicule.

 

On the far side of the chapel is the low entrance to an almost complete first-century Jewish tomb, initially holding six kokh-type funeral shafts radiating from a central chamber, two of which are still exposed. Although this space was discovered relatively recently and contains no identifying marks, some believe that Joseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus were buried here. Since Jews always buried their dead outside the city, the presence of this tomb seems to prove that the Holy Sepulchre site was outside the city walls at the time of the crucifixion.

 

The Franciscan Chapel of St. Mary Magdalene – The chapel, an open area, indicates the place where Mary Magdalene met Jesus after his resurrection.

 

The Franciscan Chapel of the Apparition (Chapel of the Blessed Sacrament), directly north of the above – in memory of Jesus's meeting with his mother after the Resurrection, a non-scriptural tradition. Here stands a piece of an ancient column, allegedly part of the one Jesus was tied to during his scourging.

 

The Arches of the Virgin are seven arches (an arcade) at the northern end of the north transept, which is to the catholicon's north. Disputed by the Orthodox and the Latin, the area is used to store ladders.

 

In the northeast side of the complex, there is the Prison of Christ, alleged to be where Jesus was held. The Greek Orthodox are showing pilgrims yet another place where Jesus was allegedly held, the similarly named Prison of Christ in their Monastery of the Praetorium, located near the Church of Ecce Homo, between the Second and Third Stations of the Via Dolorosa. The Armenians regard a recess in the Monastery of the Flagellation at the Second Station of the Via Dolorosa as the Prison of Christ. A cistern among the ruins beneath the Church of St. Peter in Gallicantu on Mount Zion is also alleged to have been the Prison of Christ. To reconcile the traditions, some allege that Jesus was held in the Mount Zion cell in connection with his trial by the Jewish high priest, at the Praetorium in connection with his trial by the Roman governor Pilate, and near the Golgotha before crucifixion.

 

The chapels in the ambulatory are, from north to south: the Greek Chapel of Saint Longinus (named after Longinus), the Armenian Chapel of the Division of Robes, the entrance to the Chapel of Saint Helena, and the Greek Chapel of the Derision.

 

Chapel of Saint Helena – between the Chapel of the Division of Robes and the Greek Chapel of the Derision are stairs descending to the Chapel of Saint Helena. The Armenians, who own it, call it the Chapel of St. Gregory the Illuminator, after the saint who brought Christianity to the Armenians.

 

Chapel of St Vartan (or Vardan) Mamikonian – on the north side of the Chapel of Saint Helena is an ornate wrought iron door, beyond which a raised artificial platform affords views of the quarry, and which leads to the Chapel of Saint Vartan. The latter chapel contains archaeological remains from Hadrian's temple and Constantine's basilica. These areas are open only on request.

 

Chapel of the Invention of the Cross (named for the Invention (Finding) of the Holy Cross) – another set of 22 stairs from the Chapel of Saint Helena leads down to the Roman Catholic Chapel of the Invention of the Holy Cross, believed to be the place where the True Cross was found.

 

An Ottoman decree of 1757 helped establish a status quo upholding the state of affairs for various Holy Land sites. The status quo was upheld in Sultan Abdülmecid I's firman (decree) of 1852/3, which pinned down the now-permanent statutes of property and the regulations concerning the roles of the different denominations and other custodians.

 

The primary custodians are the Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic churches. The Greek Orthodox act through the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate as well as through the Brotherhood of the Holy Sepulchre. Roman Catholics act through the Franciscan Custody of the Holy Land. In the 19th century, the Coptic Orthodox, the Ethiopian Orthodox and the Syriac Orthodox also acquired lesser responsibilities, which include shrines and other structures in and around the building.

 

None of these controls the main entrance. In 1192, Saladin assigned door-keeping responsibilities to the Muslim Nusaybah family. The wooden doors that compose the main entrance are the original, highly carved doors. The Joudeh al-Goudia (al-Ghodayya) family were entrusted as custodian to the keys of the Holy Sepulchre by Saladin in 1187. Despite occasional disagreements, religious services take place in the Church with regularity and coexistence is generally peaceful. An example of concord between the Church custodians is the full restoration of the Aedicule from 2016 to 2017.

 

The establishment of the modern Status Quo in 1853 did not halt controversy and occasional violence. In 1902, 18 friars were hospitalized and some monks were jailed after the Franciscans and Greeks disagreed over who could clean the lowest step of the Chapel of the Franks. In the aftermath, the Greek patriarch, Franciscan custos, Ottoman governor and French consul general signed a convention that both denominations could sweep it. On a hot summer day in 2002, a Coptic monk moved his chair from its agreed spot into the shade. This was interpreted as a hostile move by the Ethiopians and eleven were hospitalized after the resulting fight. In another incident in 2004, during Orthodox celebrations of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross, a door to the Franciscan chapel was left open. This was taken as a sign of disrespect by the Orthodox and a fistfight broke out. Some people were arrested, but no one was seriously injured.

 

On Palm Sunday, in April 2008, a brawl broke out when a Greek monk was ejected from the building by a rival faction. Police were called to the scene but were also attacked by the enraged brawlers. On Sunday, 9 November 2008, a clash erupted between Armenian and Greek monks during celebrations for the Feast of the Cross.

 

In February 2018, the church was closed following a tax dispute over 152 million euros of uncollected taxes on church properties. The city hall stressed that the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and all other churches are exempt from the taxes, with the changes only affecting establishments like "hotels, halls and businesses" owned by the churches. NPR had reported that the Greek Orthodox Church calls itself the second-largest landowner in Israel, after the Israeli government.

 

There was a lock-in protest against an Israeli legislative proposal which would expropriate church lands that had been sold to private companies since 2010, a measure which church leaders assert constitutes a serious violation of their property rights and the Status Quo. In a joint official statement the church authorities protested what they considered to be the peak of a systematic campaign in:

 

a discriminatory and racist bill that targets solely the properties of the Christian community in the Holy Land ... This reminds us all of laws of a similar nature which were enacted against the Jews during dark periods in Europe.

 

The 2018 taxation affair does not cover any church buildings or religious related facilities (because they are exempt by law), but commercial facilities such as the Notre Dame Hotel which was not paying the municipal property tax, and any land which is owned and used as a commercial land. The church holds the rights to land where private homes have been constructed, and some of the disagreement had been raised after the Knesset had proposed a bill that will make it harder for a private company not to extend a lease for land used by homeowners. The church leaders have said that such a bill will make it harder for them to sell church-owned lands. According to The Jerusalem Post:

 

The stated aim of the bill is to protect homeowners against the possibility that private companies will not extend their leases of land on which their houses or apartments stand.

 

In June 2019, a number of Christian denominations in Jerusalem raised their voice against the Supreme Court's decision to uphold the sale of three properties by the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate to Ateret Cohanim – an organization that seeks to increase the number of Jews living in the Old City and East Jerusalem. The church leaders warned that if the organization gets to control the sites, Christians could lose access to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. In June 2022, the Supreme Court upheld the sale and ended the legal battle.

 

The site of the church had been a temple to Jupiter or Venus built by Hadrian before Constantine's edifice was built. Hadrian's temple had been located there because it was the junction of the main north–south road with one of the two main east–west roads and directly adjacent to the forum (now the location of the Muristan, which is smaller than the former forum). The forum itself had been placed, as is traditional in Roman towns, at the junction of the main north–south road with the other main east–west road (which is now El-Bazar/David Street). The temple and forum together took up the entire space between the two main east–west roads (a few above-ground remains of the east end of the temple precinct still survive in the Alexander Nevsky Church complex of the Russian Mission in Exile).

 

From the archaeological excavations in the 1970s, it is clear that construction took over most of the site of the earlier temple enclosure and that the Triportico and Rotunda roughly overlapped with the temple building itself; the excavations indicate that the temple extended at least as far back as the Aedicule, and the temple enclosure would have reached back slightly further. Virgilio Canio Corbo, a Franciscan priest and archaeologist, who was present at the excavations, estimated from the archaeological evidence that the western retaining wall of the temple itself would have passed extremely close to the east side of the supposed tomb; if the wall had been any further west any tomb would have been crushed under the weight of the wall (which would be immediately above it) if it had not already been destroyed when foundations for the wall were made.

 

Other archaeologists have criticized Corbo's reconstructions. Dan Bahat, the former city archaeologist of Jerusalem, regards them as unsatisfactory, as there is no known temple of Aphrodite (Venus) matching Corbo's design, and no archaeological evidence for Corbo's suggestion that the temple building was on a platform raised high enough to avoid including anything sited where the Aedicule is now; indeed Bahat notes that many temples to Aphrodite have a rotunda-like design, and argues that there is no archaeological reason to assume that the present rotunda was not based on a rotunda in the temple previously on the site.

 

The New Testament describes Jesus's tomb as being outside the city wall,[l] as was normal for burials across the ancient world, which were regarded as unclean. Today, the site of the Church is within the current walls of the old city of Jerusalem. It has been well documented by archaeologists that in the time of Jesus, the walled city was smaller and the wall then was to the east of the current site of the Church. In other words, the city had been much narrower in Jesus's time, with the site then having been outside the walls; since Herod Agrippa (41–44) is recorded by history as extending the city to the north (beyond the present northern walls), the required repositioning of the western wall is traditionally attributed to him as well.

 

The area immediately to the south and east of the sepulchre was a quarry and outside the city during the early first century as excavations under the Lutheran Church of the Redeemer across the street demonstrated.[citation needed]

 

The church is a part of the UNESCO World Heritage Site Old City of Jerusalem.

 

The Christian Quarter and the (also Christian) Armenian Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem are both located in the northwestern and western part of the Old City, due to the fact that the Holy Sepulchre is located close to the northwestern corner of the walled city. The adjacent neighbourhood within the Christian Quarter is called the Muristan, a term derived from the Persian word for hospital – Christian pilgrim hospices have been maintained in this area near the Holy Sepulchre since at least the time of Charlemagne.

 

From the ninth century onward, the construction of churches inspired by the Anastasis was extended across Europe. One example is Santo Stefano in Bologna, Italy, an agglomeration of seven churches recreating shrines of Jerusalem.

 

Several churches and monasteries in Europe, for instance, in Germany and Russia, and at least one church in the United States have been wholly or partially modeled on the Church of the Resurrection, some even reproducing other holy places for the benefit of pilgrims who could not travel to the Holy Land. They include the Heiliges Grab ("Holy Tomb") of Görlitz, constructed between 1481 and 1504, the New Jerusalem Monastery in Moscow Oblast, constructed by Patriarch Nikon between 1656 and 1666, and Mount St. Sepulchre Franciscan Monastery built by the Franciscans in Washington, DC in 1898.

 

Author Andrew Holt writes that the church is the most important in all Christendom.

 

Jerusalem is an ancient city in West Asia, on a plateau in the Judaean Mountains between the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea. It is one of the oldest cities in the world, and is considered holy to the three major Abrahamic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Both Israel and Palestine claim Jerusalem as their capital; Israel maintains its primary governmental institutions there, and the State of Palestine ultimately foresees it as its seat of power. Neither claim, however, is widely recognized internationally.

 

Throughout its long history, Jerusalem has been destroyed at least twice, besieged 23 times, captured and recaptured 44 times, and attacked 52 times. The part of Jerusalem called the City of David shows first signs of settlement in the 4th millennium BCE, in the shape of encampments of nomadic shepherds. During the Canaanite period (14th century BCE), Jerusalem was named as Urusalim on ancient Egyptian tablets, probably meaning "City of Shalem" after a Canaanite deity. During the Israelite period, significant construction activity in Jerusalem began in the 10th century BCE (Iron Age II), and by the 9th century BCE, the city had developed into the religious and administrative centre of the Kingdom of Judah. In 1538, the city walls were rebuilt for a last time around Jerusalem under Suleiman the Magnificent of the Ottoman Empire. Today those walls define the Old City, which since the 19th century has been divided into four quarters – the Armenian, Christian, Jewish, and Muslim quarters. The Old City became a World Heritage Site in 1981, and is on the List of World Heritage in Danger. Since 1860, Jerusalem has grown far beyond the Old City's boundaries. In 2022, Jerusalem had a population of some 971,800 residents, of which almost 60% were Jews and almost 40% Palestinians. In 2020, the population was 951,100, of which Jews comprised 570,100 (59.9%), Muslims 353,800 (37.2%), Christians 16,300 (1.7%), and 10,800 unclassified (1.1%).

 

According to the Hebrew Bible, King David conquered the city from the Jebusites and established it as the capital of the United Kingdom of Israel, and his son, King Solomon, commissioned the building of the First Temple. Modern scholars argue that Jews branched out of the Canaanite peoples and culture through the development of a distinct monolatrous—and later monotheistic—religion centred on El/Yahweh. These foundational events, straddling the dawn of the 1st millennium BCE, assumed central symbolic importance for the Jewish people. The sobriquet of holy city (Hebrew: עיר הקודש, romanized: 'Ir ha-Qodesh) was probably attached to Jerusalem in post-exilic times. The holiness of Jerusalem in Christianity, conserved in the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, which Christians adopted as their own "Old Testament", was reinforced by the New Testament account of Jesus's crucifixion and resurrection there. In Sunni Islam, Jerusalem is the third-holiest city, after Mecca and Medina. The city was the first qibla, the standard direction for Muslim prayers (salah), and in Islamic tradition, Muhammad made his Night Journey there in 621, ascending to heaven where he speaks to God, according to the Quran. As a result, despite having an area of only 0.9 km2 (3⁄8 sq mi), the Old City is home to many sites of seminal religious importance, among them the Temple Mount with its Western Wall, Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque, and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.

 

Today, the status of Jerusalem remains one of the core issues in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. During the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, West Jerusalem was among the areas captured and later annexed by Israel while East Jerusalem, including the Old City, was captured and later annexed by Jordan. Israel captured East Jerusalem from Jordan during the 1967 Six-Day War and subsequently effectively annexed it into Jerusalem, together with additional surrounding territory.[note 6] One of Israel's Basic Laws, the 1980 Jerusalem Law, refers to Jerusalem as the country's undivided capital. All branches of the Israeli government are located in Jerusalem, including the Knesset (Israel's parliament), the residences of the Prime Minister (Beit Aghion) and President (Beit HaNassi), and the Supreme Court. The international community rejects the annexation as illegal and regards East Jerusalem as Palestinian territory occupied by Israel.

 

Etymology

The name "Jerusalem" is variously etymologized to mean "foundation (Semitic yry' 'to found, to lay a cornerstone') of the pagan god Shalem"; the god Shalem was thus the original tutelary deity of the Bronze Age city.

 

Shalim or Shalem was the name of the god of dusk in the Canaanite religion, whose name is based on the same root S-L-M from which the Hebrew word for "peace" is derived (Shalom in Hebrew, cognate with Arabic Salam). The name thus offered itself to etymologizations such as "The City of Peace", "Abode of Peace", "Dwelling of Peace" ("founded in safety"), or "Vision of Peace" in some Christian authors.

 

The ending -ayim indicates the dual, thus leading to the suggestion that the name Yerushalayim refers to the fact that the city initially sat on two hills.

 

Ancient Egyptian sources

The Execration Texts of the Middle Kingdom of Egypt (c. 19th century BCE), which refer to a city called rwšꜣlmm or ꜣwšꜣmm, variously transcribed as Rušalimum, or Urušalimum, may indicate Jerusalem. Alternatively, the Amarna letters of Abdi-Heba (1330s BCE), which reference an Úrušalim, may be the earliest mention of the city.

 

Hebrew Bible and Jewish sources

The form Yerushalem or Yerushalayim first appears in the Bible, in the Book of Joshua. According to a Midrash, the name is a combination of two names united by God, Yireh ("the abiding place", the name given by Abraham to the place where he planned to sacrifice his son) and Shalem ("Place of Peace", the name given by high priest Shem).

 

Oldest written mention of Jerusalem

One of the earliest extra-biblical Hebrew writing of the word Jerusalem is dated to the sixth or seventh century BCE and was discovered in Khirbet Beit Lei near Beit Guvrin in 1961. The inscription states: "I am Yahweh thy God, I will accept the cities of Judah and I will redeem Jerusalem", or as other scholars suggest: "Yahweh is the God of the whole earth. The mountains of Judah belong to him, to the God of Jerusalem". An older example on papyrus is known from the previous century.

 

In extra-biblical inscriptions, the earliest known example of the -ayim ending was discovered on a column about 3 km west of ancient Jerusalem, dated to the first century BCE.

 

Jebus, Zion, City of David

An ancient settlement of Jerusalem, founded as early as the Bronze Age on the hill above the Gihon Spring, was, according to the Bible, named Jebus. Called the "Fortress of Zion" (metsudat Zion), it was renamed as the "City of David", and was known by this name in antiquity. Another name, "Zion", initially referred to a distinct part of the city, but later came to signify the city as a whole, and afterwards to represent the whole biblical Land of Israel.

 

Greek, Roman and Byzantine names

In Greek and Latin, the city's name was transliterated Hierosolyma (Greek: Ἱεροσόλυμα; in Greek hieròs, ἱερός, means holy), although the city was renamed Aelia Capitolina for part of the Roman period of its history.

 

Salem

The Aramaic Apocryphon of Genesis of the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QapGen 22:13) equates Jerusalem with the earlier "Salem" (שלם), said to be the kingdom of Melchizedek in Genesis 14. Other early Hebrew sources, early Christian renderings of the verse and targumim, however, put Salem in Northern Israel near Shechem (Sichem), now Nablus, a city of some importance in early sacred Hebrew writing. Possibly the redactor of the Apocryphon of Genesis wanted to dissociate Melchizedek from the area of Shechem, which at the time was in possession of the Samaritans. However that may be, later Rabbinic sources also equate Salem with Jerusalem, mainly to link Melchizedek to later Temple traditions.

 

Arabic names

In Arabic, Jerusalem is most commonly known as القُدس, transliterated as al-Quds and meaning "the holy" or "the holy sanctuary", cognate with Hebrew: הקדש, romanized: ha-qodesh. The name is possibly a shortened form of مدينة القُدس Madīnat al-Quds "city of the holy sanctuary" after the Hebrew nickname with the same meaning, Ir ha-Qodesh (עיר הקדש). The ق (Q) is pronounced either with a voiceless uvular plosive (/q/), as in Classical Arabic, or with a glottal stop (ʔ) as in Levantine Arabic. Official Israeli government policy mandates that أُورُشَلِيمَ, transliterated as Ūrušalīm, which is the name frequently used in Christian translations of the Bible into Arabic, be used as the Arabic language name for the city in conjunction with القُدس, giving أُورُشَلِيمَ-القُدس, Ūrušalīm-al-Quds. Palestinian Arab families who hail from this city are often called "Qudsi" (قُدسي) or "Maqdasi" (مقدسي), while Palestinian Muslim Jerusalemites may use these terms as a demonym.

 

Given the city's central position in both Jewish nationalism (Zionism) and Palestinian nationalism, the selectivity required to summarize some 5,000 years of inhabited history is often influenced by ideological bias or background. Israeli or Jewish nationalists claim a right to the city based on Jewish indigeneity to the land, particularly their origins in and descent from the Israelites, for whom Jerusalem is their capital, and their yearning for return. In contrast, Palestinian nationalists claim the right to the city based on modern Palestinians' longstanding presence and descent from many different peoples who have settled or lived in the region over the centuries. Both sides claim the history of the city has been politicized by the other in order to strengthen their relative claims to the city, and that this is borne out by the different focuses the different writers place on the various events and eras in the city's history.

 

Prehistory

The first archaeological evidence of human presence in the area comes in the form of flints dated to between 6000 and 7000 years ago, with ceramic remains appearing during the Chalcolithic period, and the first signs of permanent settlement appearing in the Early Bronze Age in 3000–2800 BCE.

 

Bronze and Iron Ages

The earliest evidence of city fortifications appear in the Mid to Late Bronze Age and could date to around the 18th century BCE. By around 1550–1200 BCE, Jerusalem was the capital of an Egyptian vassal city-state, a modest settlement governing a few outlying villages and pastoral areas, with a small Egyptian garrison and ruled by appointees such as king Abdi-Heba. At the time of Seti I (r. 1290–1279 BCE) and Ramesses II (r. 1279–1213 BCE), major construction took place as prosperity increased. The city's inhabitants at this time were Canaanites, who are believed by scholars to have evolved into the Israelites via the development of a distinct Yahweh-centric monotheistic belief system.

 

Archaeological remains from the ancient Israelite period include the Siloam Tunnel, an aqueduct built by Judahite king Hezekiah and once containing an ancient Hebrew inscription, known as the Siloam Inscription; the so-called Broad Wall, a defensive fortification built in the 8th century BCE, also by Hezekiah; the Silwan necropolis (9th–7th c. BCE) with the Monolith of Silwan and the Tomb of the Royal Steward, which were decorated with monumental Hebrew inscriptions; and the so-called Israelite Tower, remnants of ancient fortifications, built from large, sturdy rocks with carved cornerstones. A huge water reservoir dating from this period was discovered in 2012 near Robinson's Arch, indicating the existence of a densely built-up quarter across the area west of the Temple Mount during the Kingdom of Judah.

 

When the Assyrians conquered the Kingdom of Israel in 722 BCE, Jerusalem was strengthened by a great influx of refugees from the northern kingdom. When Hezekiah ruled, Jerusalem had no fewer than 25,000 inhabitants and covered 25 acres (10 hectares).

 

In 587–586 BCE, Nebuchadnezzar II of the Neo-Babylonian Empire conquered Jerusalem after a prolonged siege, and then systematically destroyed the city, including Solomon's Temple. The Kingdom of Judah was abolished and many were exiled to Babylon. These events mark the end of the First Temple period.

 

Biblical account

This period, when Canaan formed part of the Egyptian empire, corresponds in biblical accounts to Joshua's invasion, but almost all scholars agree that the Book of Joshua holds little historical value for early Israel.

 

In the Bible, Jerusalem is defined as lying within territory allocated to the tribe of Benjamin though still inhabited by Jebusites. David is said to have conquered these in the siege of Jebus, and transferred his capital from Hebron to Jerusalem which then became the capital of a United Kingdom of Israel, and one of its several religious centres. The choice was perhaps dictated by the fact that Jerusalem did not form part of Israel's tribal system, and was thus suited to serve as the centre of its confederation. Opinion is divided over whether the so-called Large Stone Structure and the nearby Stepped Stone Structure may be identified with King David's palace, or dates to a later period.

 

According to the Bible, King David reigned for 40 years and was succeeded by his son Solomon, who built the Holy Temple on Mount Moriah. Solomon's Temple (later known as the First Temple), went on to play a pivotal role in Jewish religion as the repository of the Ark of the Covenant. On Solomon's death, ten of the northern tribes of Israel broke with the United Monarchy to form their own nation, with its kings, prophets, priests, traditions relating to religion, capitals and temples in northern Israel. The southern tribes, together with the Aaronid priesthood, remained in Jerusalem, with the city becoming the capital of the Kingdom of Judah.

 

Classical antiquity

In 538 BCE, the Achaemenid King Cyrus the Great invited the Jews of Babylon to return to Judah to rebuild the Temple. Construction of the Second Temple was completed in 516 BCE, during the reign of Darius the Great, 70 years after the destruction of the First Temple.

 

Sometime soon after 485 BCE Jerusalem was besieged, conquered and largely destroyed by a coalition of neighbouring states. In about 445 BCE, King Artaxerxes I of Persia issued a decree allowing the city (including its walls) to be rebuilt. Jerusalem resumed its role as capital of Judah and centre of Jewish worship.

 

Many Jewish tombs from the Second Temple period have been unearthed in Jerusalem. One example, discovered north of the Old City, contains human remains in a 1st-century CE ossuary decorated with the Aramaic inscription "Simon the Temple Builder". The Tomb of Abba, also located north of the Old City, bears an Aramaic inscription with Paleo-Hebrew letters reading: "I, Abba, son of the priest Eleaz(ar), son of Aaron the high (priest), Abba, the oppressed and the persecuted, who was born in Jerusalem, and went into exile into Babylonia and brought (back to Jerusalem) Mattathi(ah), son of Jud(ah), and buried him in a cave which I bought by deed." The Tomb of Benei Hezir located in Kidron Valley is decorated by monumental Doric columns and Hebrew inscription, identifying it as the burial site of Second Temple priests. The Tombs of the Sanhedrin, an underground complex of 63 rock-cut tombs, is located in a public park in the northern Jerusalem neighbourhood of Sanhedria. These tombs, probably reserved for members of the Sanhedrin and inscribed by ancient Hebrew and Aramaic writings, are dated to between 100 BCE and 100 CE.

 

When Alexander the Great conquered the Achaemenid Empire, Jerusalem and Judea came under Macedonian control, eventually falling to the Ptolemaic dynasty under Ptolemy I. In 198 BCE, Ptolemy V Epiphanes lost Jerusalem and Judea to the Seleucids under Antiochus III. The Seleucid attempt to recast Jerusalem as a Hellenized city-state came to a head in 168 BCE with the successful Maccabean revolt of Mattathias and his five sons against Antiochus IV Epiphanes, and their establishment of the Hasmonean Kingdom in 152 BCE with Jerusalem as its capital.

 

In 63 BCE, Pompey the Great intervened in a struggle for the Hasmonean throne and captured Jerusalem, extending the influence of the Roman Republic over Judea. Following a short invasion by Parthians, backing the rival Hasmonean rulers, Judea became a scene of struggle between pro-Roman and pro-Parthian forces, eventually leading to the emergence of an Edomite named Herod. As Rome became stronger, it installed Herod as a client king of the Jews. Herod the Great, as he was known, devoted himself to developing and beautifying the city. He built walls, towers and palaces, and expanded the Temple Mount, buttressing the courtyard with blocks of stone weighing up to 100 tons. Under Herod, the area of the Temple Mount doubled in size. Shortly after Herod's death, in 6 CE Judea came under direct Roman rule as the Iudaea Province, although the Herodian dynasty through Agrippa II remained client kings of neighbouring territories until 96 CE.

 

Roman rule over Jerusalem and Judea was challenged in the First Jewish–Roman War (66–73 CE), which ended with a Roman victory. Early on, the city was devastated by a brutal civil war between several Jewish factions fighting for control of the city. In 70 CE, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Second Temple. The contemporary Jewish historian Josephus wrote that the city "was so thoroughly razed to the ground by those that demolished it to its foundations, that nothing was left that could ever persuade visitors that it had once been a place of habitation." Of the 600,000 (Tacitus) or 1,000,000 (Josephus) Jews of Jerusalem, all of them either died of starvation, were killed or were sold into slavery. Roman rule was again challenged during the Bar Kokhba revolt, beginning in 132 CE and suppressed by the Romans in 135 CE. More recent research indicates that the Romans had founded Aelia Capitolina before the outbreak of the revolt, and found no evidence for Bar Kokhba ever managing to hold the city.

 

Jerusalem reached a peak in size and population at the end of the Second Temple Period, when the city covered two km2 (3⁄4 sq mi) and had a population of 200,000.

 

Late Antiquity

Following the Bar Kokhba revolt, Emperor Hadrian combined Iudaea Province with neighbouring provinces under the new name of Syria Palaestina, replacing the name of Judea. The city was renamed Aelia Capitolina, and rebuilt it in the style of a typical Roman town. Jews were prohibited from entering the city on pain of death, except for one day each year, during the holiday of Tisha B'Av. Taken together, these measures (which also affected Jewish Christians) essentially "secularized" the city. Historical sources and archaeological evidence indicate that the rebuilt city was now inhabited by veterans of the Roman military and immigrants from the western parts of the empire.

 

The ban against Jews was maintained until the 7th century, though Christians would soon be granted an exemption: during the 4th century, the Roman emperor Constantine I ordered the construction of Christian holy sites in the city, including the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. Burial remains from the Byzantine period are exclusively Christian, suggesting that the population of Jerusalem in Byzantine times probably consisted only of Christians.

 

Jerusalem.

In the 5th century, the eastern continuation of the Roman Empire, ruled from the recently renamed Constantinople, maintained control of the city. Within the span of a few decades, Jerusalem shifted from Byzantine to Persian rule, then back to Roman-Byzantine dominion. Following Sassanid Khosrau II's early 7th century push through Syria, his generals Shahrbaraz and Shahin attacked Jerusalem (Persian: Dej Houdkh) aided by the Jews of Palaestina Prima, who had risen up against the Byzantines.

 

In the Siege of Jerusalem of 614, after 21 days of relentless siege warfare, Jerusalem was captured. Byzantine chronicles relate that the Sassanids and Jews slaughtered tens of thousands of Christians in the city, many at the Mamilla Pool, and destroyed their monuments and churches, including the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. This episode has been the subject of much debate between historians. The conquered city would remain in Sassanid hands for some fifteen years until the Byzantine emperor Heraclius reconquered it in 629.

 

Middle Ages

After the Muslim conquest of the Levant, Byzantine Jerusalem was taken by Umar ibn al-Khattab in 638 CE. Among the first Muslims, it was referred to as Madinat bayt al-Maqdis ("City of the Temple"), a name restricted to the Temple Mount. The rest of the city "was called Iliya, reflecting the Roman name given the city following the destruction of 70 CE: Aelia Capitolina". Later the Temple Mount became known as al-Haram al-Sharif, "The Noble Sanctuary", while the city around it became known as Bayt al-Maqdis, and later still, al-Quds al-Sharif "The Holy, Noble". The Islamization of Jerusalem began in the first year A.H. (623 CE), when Muslims were instructed to face the city while performing their daily prostrations and, according to Muslim religious tradition, Muhammad's night journey and ascension to heaven took place. After 13 years, the direction of prayer was changed to Mecca. In 638 CE the Islamic Caliphate extended its dominion to Jerusalem. With the Muslim conquest, Jews were allowed back into the city. The Rashidun caliph Umar ibn al-Khattab signed a treaty with Christian Patriarch of Jerusalem Sophronius, assuring him that Jerusalem's Christian holy places and population would be protected under Muslim rule. Christian-Arab tradition records that, when led to pray at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, one of the holiest sites for Christians, the caliph Umar refused to pray in the church so that Muslims would not request conversion of the church to a mosque. He prayed outside the church, where the Mosque of Umar (Omar) stands to this day, opposite the entrance to the Church of the Holy Sepulchre. According to the Gaullic bishop Arculf, who lived in Jerusalem from 679 to 688, the Mosque of Umar was a rectangular wooden structure built over ruins which could accommodate 3,000 worshipers.

 

When the Arab armies under Umar went to Bayt Al-Maq

Unlike a recent landscape, I haven't tilted the camera here - the street is really this steep. Picked it from the archive to say hello to my contact @AceObase who isn't entirely impartial to certain vehicles ;)

 

Thanks to @mary_pl for the suggested 'Yellow Sub' title :)