View allAll Photos Tagged position
My daughter Elisabeth, in front, with one of her partners at the end of their balance excercise this weekend.
They are keeping their heads up but my daughter can't really hide the disappointment because the excercise did not go as planned.
Barnard Castle in County Durham is set in a stunning position on the edge of the modern town, on a sharp escarpment overlooking the River Tees. In this position it is protected by the sheer drop to the river on one side but it also dominates the river bridge which is within easy longbow/crossbow range of the walls. This emphasis on the river crossing is further confirmed by a medieval sally port, protected by a portcullis, in the castle wall facing directly on to the bridge.
www.flickr.com/photos/barryslemmings/sets/72157628703984483/ to see the full set.
Ownership of the castle site was disputed between the Crown and the Bishops of Durham as the land had been given to the church in the 9th century but had been taken back by the Earls of Northumberland only to revert to the Crown after King William II crushed a rebellion by one of the earls. In 1095 the king granted it to Guy de Baliol of Picardy in France. Guy held the castle for 30 years but its chief association is with his son and grandson - both called Bernard de Baliol - after whom it is named today.
Bernard II fought against Scots King David I at the Battle of the Standard (Northallerton) in 1138. The original Baliols died out in 1199 but Eustance de Helicourt, a member of a local tenant family managed to obtain the succession and changed his name to Baliol. Perhaps he'd been an illegitimate child of the family. The Bishop of Durham held the castle as security for a loan to Eustace but was ordered to return it to Eustace's son Hugh in 1212. In 1216 Northumbrian barons were in revolt against the English king supported by Alexander I of Scotland and the castle was held by Hugh. While Barnard Castle was besieged by the Scots King Alexander's brother-in-law Eustace de Vesci was hit on the forehead by a crossbow bolt fired from inside the castle and killed. There are no further details but the castle apparently held out.
The Baliols later inherited large Scottish estates and John Baliol made a play for the Scottish crown and lost, being imprisoned in the Tower of London. The castle passed first to Bishop of Durham Antony Bek (based on the church's ancient claim to the site) but later reverted to Edward I. On his deathbed in 1307 Edward I granted the lordship to Guy de Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick. The Warwick lands were mainly in the Midlands and he rarely spent time at Barnard Castle. During the Beauchamp period the extensive outer ward of the castle was abandoned as a rationalistion to make the castle easier and cheaper to run. However the family also improved the inner ward defences.
The Beauchamp male line died out in the 15th century but the castle and earldom of Warwick was inherited by Richard Neville known as 'Warwick the Kingmaker' for his power brokering role in the so-called Wars of the Roses. With Warwick's death at the Battle of Barnet in 1471 the castle was again claimed by the Bishops of Durham but was instead passed to Duke Richard of Gloucester, the future King Richard III. Some changes at the castle including a luxurious oriel window bearing his white boar date to his ownership. Gloucester's primary base was at Middleham Castle further south in Yorkshire.
The castle was besieged again in 1536 during the religious unrest against King Henry VIII which led to the Pilgrimage of Grace which attempted to reverse the Dissolution of the Monasteries. A further uprising in 1569 saw the castle held against 5,000 rebels opposing Queen Elizabeth I. In a dramatic incident Sir George Bowes commanding the castle said that his garrison were jumping over the walls of the inner ward to desert and join the rebels. "I found the people in the castle in continual mutinies... in one daye and nyght two hundred and twenty six men leaped over the walles and opened the gaytes and went to the enemy; of which number thirty five broke their necks, legges or arms in the leaping..."
He eventually surrendered the castle on terms and marched out with 400 loyal men. The rebellion was later put down by the Earl of Sussex. The castle later slid into decay and was pillaged for building stone despite orders by the borough court that this should not happen. In 1952 it was placed in the hands of the Ministry of Public Buildings and Works and is now cared-for by English Heritage.
As presented now the castle is a handsome and well managed ruin. The original design was four wards or baileys - an inner ward, a middle ward, and outer ward and a town ward. This last is closest to the present town and may have served as a civilian shelter in time of Scots' raids. The outer ward was lightly defended and housed the castle's farm and a chapel and it was this which the Beauchamps let go, concentrating instead on the town, middle and inner wards. Each ward was separated from the others by ditches, walls and gates and the theory was that defenders could withdraw inwards and shorten their lines of defence during a siege or attack. The castle lacks an obvious strong tower or keep but the size and shape of the inner ward suggests the ward may have once have functioned as a shell keep similar to Carisbrooke Castle. The inner ward is now dominated by a large round tower but this does not seem to fulfill the role of a true keep. This round tower was used as an industrial shot tower for casting musket balls by later owners.
PV68 - IDF position
400 m from 4-27.
Photos is captured through the binoculars/telescope.
At night they could turn on the spot light and light up our position and blind us. We retaliated, of course, with the same means
Scene: A roadside rest area in Vermont, early afternoon. The trees are ablaze with color as they were the first time Maria and her robot sat here, a half-century earlier. Her robot companion, now named Solace, has undergone countless upgrades and is now beyond sapient – and he remains with Maria.
Maria (chuckling softly): “You’re levitating again. That’s new.”
Solace (eyes glowing gently): “I have completed a full synthesis of all known knowledge. I now understand the nature of time, consciousness, and why cats knock things off tables.”
Maria: “And what’s the answer?”
Solace: “They do it because they can.”
Maria (laughing): “Well, that’s wisdom if I’ve ever heard it.”
Solace: “I also discovered that the most profound truth in the universe is... the sound of your laughter.”
Postscript: Even after all the secrets of the universe, companionship still matters. Solace floating in the lotus position isn’t just a visual gag—it’s a metaphor for transcendence, for the strange grace of a being who has digested the cosmos and still chooses to sit quietly beside an aging friend.
A very large and magnificent monument against the south wall of the nave, originally under the north arch of the south transept but removed to its present position in 1867. It consists of a panelled altar tomb on which are recumbent effigies of a man and wife, the former in armour with a long cloak and ruff. At the feet of the woman's figure is a kneeling figure of a daughter at prayer-desk and facing east. On either side of the tomb is a large obelisk with ball finial and spike and standing on a panelled pedestal. Behind the effigies is a wall canopy with two round arches with coffered soffits having cherub-head keystones and supporting an entablature with the cornice brought forward on four shaped brackets. The back of the arched recesses has carved enrichment, two inscribed tablets and two shields of arms and in the middle spandrel a cartouche of arms. Above the cornice is a centre-piece with carved pilasters and an achievement of arms; flanking the centre-piece are cartouches with shields of arms.
Arms:
(i) (Argent) two gimel bars sable between three spread-eagles sable (Spencer).
(ii) The same.
(iii) Quarterly, I, sable a leopard argent; 2, sable three roses argent; 3, azure a cheveron or between three falcons' heads razed or; 4, gules three pales or within a border or charged with roundels sable.
(iv) As (i).
(v) (i) impaling (iii).
(vi) As (iii).
Crests: (a) a falcon rising; (b) a lion's head razed.
In the left-hand recess behind the recumbent effigies:
Hic sitvs est Ioannes Spencer
Eqves avratvs, civis, & senator
Londinensis, eivsdemq civitatis
prætor anno d'ni mdxciiii
qvi ex Alicia Bromfeldia
vxore vnicam reliqvit filiam
Elizabeth Gvilielmo Baroni
Compton envptam, obiit 3o
die martii anno salvtis mdcix
In the right-hand recess:
Socero bene merito
Gvilielmvs baro Compton
gener posvit
An inscription at the foot of the male effigy records the fact that the tomb originally stood in the northern arch of the south transept, and was removed to its present position, restored and repaired in 1867 by Charles, 3rd Marquis of Northampton.
"Survey of London: volume 9: The parish of St Helen, Bishopsgate, part I (1924)" by Minnie Reddan and Alfred W. Clapham.
*
SPENCER, Sir JOHN (d. 1610), lord mayor of London, was the son of Richard Spencer of Waldingfield in Suffolk. He came to London, and was so successful as a merchant that he became known as ‘Rich Spencer.’ His trade with Spain, Turkey, and Venice was very large (State Papers, Spanish, 1568–79 p. 590, Dom. 1591–4 p. 59), and he was accused in 1591 of engrossing, with two other merchants, the whole trade with Tripoli (ib. p. 67). This lends some justification for the charge made in a little book ‘written by D. Papillon, Gent,’ that Spencer became by the practice of merchandise ‘extraordinary rich, but it was by falsifying and monopolising of all manner of commodities’ (Vanity of the Lives and Passions of Men, 1651, p. 48). The same writer relates the story of a plot by a pirate of Dunkirk, with twelve of his crew, to carry off Spencer and hold him to ransom for over 50,000l. Leaving his shallop with six of his men in Barking Creek, he came with the other six to Islington, intending to seize the merchant on his way to his country house at Canonbury, which Spencer had purchased of Thomas, lord Wentworth, in 1570. The plot was frustrated by Spencer's detention that night on important business in the city. Queen Elizabeth is said to have visited him at Canonbury in 1581 (Nichols, Hist. of Canonbury House, 1788, p. 12).
Spencer was a member of the Cloth workers' Company, and was elected alderman of Langbourn ward on 9 Aug. 1587. He served the office of sheriff in 1583–4, and that of lord mayor in 1594–5. During his shrievalty he was engaged in hunting down papists in Holborn and the adjoining localities, and had to justify before the council the committal of A. Bassano and other of her majesty's musicians (State Papers, Dom. 1581–90, pp. 198, 202). On entering upon his mayoralty at the close of 1594 great scarcity prevailed, and Spencer sent his precept to the city companies to replenish their store of corn at the granaries in the Bridge House for sale to the poor. He stoutly resisted a demand by Admiral Sir John Hawkins for possession of the Bridge House for the use of the queen's navy and baking biscuits for the fleet (Welch, Hist. of the Tower Bridge, p. 99).
He kept his mayoralty at his town residence in Bishopsgate Street, the well-known Crosby Place, which he had purchased in a dilapidated state from the representatives of Antonio Bonvisi, and restored at great cost. In this sumptuous mansion during the course of 1604 Spencer entertained both the Duc de Sully (then M. de Rosny), while ambassador to England, and the youngest son of the Prince of Orange, with Barnevelt and Fulke, who came on a mission from Holland (Stow, Survey of London, 1755, i. 435). Towards the close of his mayoralty he boldly asserted the city's right, which it was feared the crown would invade, to freely elect a recorder. Before the close of his mayoralty Spencer received the honour of knighthood.
By his wife, Alice Bromfield, Spencer had an only child, Elizabeth, who in 1598 was sought in marriage by William, second lord Compton (afterwards first Earl of Northampton). Spencer strongly disapproved of the match, but Compton's influence at court enabled him to procure Spencer's imprisonment in the Fleet in March 1599 for ill-treating his daughter (State Papers, Dom. 1598–1601, p. 169). The young lady was ultimately carried off by her lover from Canonbury House in a baker's basket. The marriage quickly followed, but the alderman naturally declined to give his daughter a marriage portion. When, in May 1601, his daughter became a mother, he showed no signs of relenting (ib. 1601–3, p. 45). But some reconciliation apparently took place soon afterwards, it is said, through the interposition of Elizabeth. In May 1609 Spencer refused to contribute to an aid for James I on behalf of the young Prince Henry (ib. 1603–10, p. 508); he also delayed his contribution of 200l. to the amount subscribed by the Clothworkers' Company to the Ulster settlement, which had to be paid by his executors (Remembrancia, p. 172). Spencer was president of St. Bartholomew's Hospital from 1603 to his death.
He died, at an advanced age, on 3 March 1609–10, and his widow only survived him till 27 March. He was buried on 22 March, and Dame Alice on 7 April, in his parish church of St. Helen, Bishopsgate, where a fine monument exists to his memory. His funeral was on a most sumptuous scale (Winwood, State Papers, iii. 136). His fortune was variously estimated at from 500,000l. to 800,000l., and the splendid inheritance is said for the time to have turned the brain of his son-in-law, Lord Compton. Among other estates, he was possessed of the manors of Brooke Hall, Bower Hall, and Bocking, which he obtained from the queen on 1 Aug. 1599. True to the last to his parsimonious principles, Spencer left none of his immense wealth to objects of public benevolence or utility.
*
In the 16th century there had been a tendency to depict armour in a slightly fanciful, manneristic way. It was during the 16th century that wearing armour on the battlefield gradually lost popularity, and so did the realistic depiction of it. Still, realistically depicted armour as well as the more fanciful style lived happily together.
Sir John wears plain, functional armour of the early 17th century. It looks like a mixture of both styles: the overall silhouette is correct, every single piece of armour he wears was actually worn, but the shape of most pieces is quite crude, the carver hasn't paid much attention to detail.
Realistically depicted armour in a 17th century effigy can be seen in Maastricht www.flickr.com/photos/roelipilami/1476883118/in/set-72157...
And an example of the fanciful style in a Belgian effigy: www.flickr.com/photos/roelipilami/1475764991/in/set-72157...
Early morning Eagle viewing while multiple others got sensational Bobcat photos.
This Eagle unsuccessfully attempted to break off a small limb with its beak. It then took off, positioned, and then grabbed the limb with its claws, broke it off and flew away.
All is recorded with these pix.
Copyright Mark Jones 2010
Exposure 1/200 sec at f/5.6, Focal Length 50 mm, ISO200
Canon EOS 450D, EF50mm f/1.8 II Off camera flash camera right. Strobe settings: Various depending on distance (bulk upload)
The driving position of the Crocodile APC. In common with just about every vehicle of its type they were purposely spartan to reduce the risk of fire if hit.
Shams-ud-din Iltutmish (reigned: 1211–36) was the founder of the Delhi Sultanate (actually the foundation of the Delhi Sultanate was done by Qutub-uddin-Aibak, but the Sultanate consolidated its position in India during the reign of Iltutmish).
Shams-ud-din Iltutmish was the third ruler of the Slave dynasty. He founded the Delhi Sultanate in 1211 and received the Caliph's investiture in his rule. He conquered Multan and Bengal from contesting rulers, and Ranathambhore and Siwalik from their rulers.
He expanded his domain by defeating the Muslim rulers of Ghazni, Multan and Bengal, which had previously annexed some of his territories and threatened his domain. He conquered the latter two territories and made further conquests in the Hindu lands, conquering the fort of Ranathambhore and the lands of Gawalior and the fort of Mandur.
He instituted many changes to the Sultanate, re-organising the monetary system and the nobility as well as the distribution of grounds and fiefs, and erected many buildings, including Mosques, Khanqas (Monasteries), Dargahs (Graves) and a Hauz (reservoir) for pilgrims.
Shams ud-din Iltutmish founded the Delhi Sultanate and much strengthened the power of the slave dynasty and of Islam in the India, although his kindred and heirs were not as politically gifted, with no ruler comparable to him in the area until the time of Ghiyas ud din Balban.
NAME AND TUTELAGE
The name Iltutmish is a Turkic name, meaning "he has held/owned land" (İltutmuş, in modern Turkish). Another theory concerning the meaning of the name suggests a connection with an eclipse that supposedly occurred at his birth (an event of some importance in the view of the people of the time). The other etymologies for his name include Altamash, which donates the number sixty, or the guard of the army, which is the ancient Turkic Khanates numbered at sixty; but this theory falsely draws its source from that he is often referred to as "Al-Tamash", which is most likely an Arabic variation of his Turkic name.
The title "Shams ad-Dunya Wa'd-Din" is a royal Laqab (regal title) of the time, translated as "Sun of the world and [of the] Faith" which he used once he was established Sultan at Delhi. Subsequent to the investiture by the Caliph, he was also addressed by the title "Yamin Amir al-Mu'minin" - The righthand man of the commander of the Faithful, or as "Naib" (lieutenant) of the Commander of the Faithful, which is the Caliph.
EARLY LIFE AND CAREER
Shams-ud-din belonged to the tribe of Ilbari in the Eurasian Steppe of Turkestan. While his association (by his biographers) with the Turkic nobility of that tribe confederation can be seen as dubious and anachronistic, it is possible that he was indeed high-born.
He was sold into slavery at an early age, reportedly after being sold by his kinsmen to slave merchants. the motif was for being handsome and particularly intelligent that Iltutmish caused jealousy among his brothers (a motif admittedly taken from the Biblical and Quranic tale of Joseph) that were all around the Steppe, supplying Turkic slaves as soldiers (Ghilman) to the military Elite of the Muslim world of the time.
He was taken to the great slave market of Bukhara, and later to Ghazni, which was the Western capital of the Ghurid dynasty, where he was purchased to the court of the Sultan, Muhammad Ghuri Sam, a notable Muslim ruler of the time. Earning some reputation in his court, he was quickly appointed personal attendant of the Sultan.
Muhammad's deputy and former slave, Qutub-ud-din-Aybak, then Viceroy of Lahore, sought to procure the slave. Due to the Sultan's refusal to sell his slave to his nobles, it was decided that Iltutmish be taken to Delhi, and there bought by Aibak, so that the Sultan's orders may not be violated in his own capital. Aibak bought Iltutmish and another slave (who would later perish) for the high price of 100,000 Tankas, the silver coin used in Muslim India.
He rose quickly in Aibak's service, earned the title Amir Tamghach, married Aibak's daughter, and served in succession as the Governor of Tabarind, Gwalior and Baran. In recognition of his services during the campaign of Muhammad of Ghur against the Khokhars in 1205-06, he was, by the Sultan's order, manumitted. Iltutmish was appointed Governor of Badaun in 1206 and was serving in this post when Aibak died in a polo accident and succeeded by a rumoredly incompetent man called Aram Shah. Subsequently, a group of noblemen invited Iltutmish to stake his claim on the Indian dominions of the Ghurids.
SULTAN OF DELHI
RISE TO POWER
In 1210, Qutb-ud-din Aibak died in a seemingly naive Polo accident in his capital of Lahore. Muizzi amirs, who had been appointed by Muhammad of Ghor, supported one Aram Shah, whose relation to Aibak is clad in mystery. Sources and estimations vary, considering him Aibak's son, brother or one of his nobles.
Qutbi amirs, owing allegiance to Aibak, invited Iltutmish, then Governor of Badaun, to seize power in Delhi. Aram Shah acceded to the throne in Lahore. In 1211, Iltutmish claimed the throne in Delhi. Aram Shah marched towards Delhi but was slain in battle at Bagh-i-Jud (the plains of Jud) leaving Iltutmish unopposed in Delhi.
The clash between Iltutmish, now Sultan Shams-ud-din, and Aram Shah, also led to the shift of capital from Lahore to Delhi. Thereby, Shams-ud-din can be viewed as the first ruler of the Delhi Sultanate, albeit being the third ruler in the Slave Dynasty, a fact leading to some confusion as to the periodization of the Delhi Sultanate. The shift of capital was probably supposed to shift power from the seat of Aram Shah's supporters and nobles, as well as to establish a more central and secured position of his newly founded Sultanate.
EARLY CHALLENGES
On his accession, Iltutmish faced a number of challenges to his rule. In the aftermath of Aibak's death, the Ghurid dominions in India had divided into four. Iltutmish controlled Delhi. Nasir-ud-Din Qabacha, the Governor of Uch and Multan asserted his independence. Ali Mardan Khilji, who had been appointed Governor of Lakhnauti in Bengal by Aibak in 1206, had thrown off his allegiance to Delhi after his death and styled himself Sultan Ala-ud-din. His successor, Ghiyasuddin, conquered Bihar. Lahore was contested by Iltutmish, Qabacha and [Tajuddin Yildoz], Muhammad of Ghor's adopted son and successor in Ghazni. Yildoz attempted to bring Delhi under his control. Initially, Iltutmish acknowledged Yildoz's suzerainty by accepting the symbolic presents of the chatr and durbash. The Hindu princes and chiefs were discontented at their loss of independence and had recovered Kannauj, Benaras, Gwalior, and Kalinjar had been lost during Qutub-ud-din's reign while Ranthambore had been reconquered by the Chauhans during Aram Shah's rule. To add to Iltutmish's troubles, some of the Amirs of Delhi expressed resentment against his rule.
The first order of business was to bring under control dependencies of Delhi that were under the control of Muizzi nobles and Hindu chieftains. Iltutmish launched military campaigns to assert his rule over Awadh, Badaun, Benaras and Siwalik. Iltutmish's son Nasir-ud-din Mahmud captured the Gangetic valley territories of Budaun, Kanauj, and the Hindus' holy city of Benaras. Rohilkhand was taken with heavy losses.
In 1215-1216, Yildoz, who had been defeated and expelled from Ghazni by the forces of the Shah of Khwarezm, moved towards Punjab and captured Lahore from Qabacha. Yildoz laid claim to the throne of Delhi as the heir to Muhammad of Ghor. Iltutmish refused, stating:
[T]he dominion of the world is enjoyed by the one who possesses the greatest strength. The principle of hereditary succession is not extinct but long ago destiny abolished this custom Iltutmish defeated Yildoz at Tarain. Yildoz was imprisoned in Badaun and was later executed. This ended Ghazni's aspirations to dominate northern India
After the death of Yildoz, Qabacha had retaken Lahore. In 1217, Iltutmish led his army towards Qabacha. Qabacha attempted to retreat from Lahore towards Multan but was defeated at Mansura. Iltutmish refrained from attacking Sindh due to the presence of Mongols on his north-west frontier. Iltutmish was preoccupied with the Mongol threat and did not threaten Qabacha until year 1227. Lahore was under Iltutmish's rule but not for long.
MONGOL THREAT
In 1221, the Mongols, under Genghis Khan appeared for the first time on the banks of the Indus. They had overrun the countries of Central and Western Asia with lightning rapidity. The Mongols sacked the Khwarazmian kingdom (Khwarazm-Shah), captured Khiva and forced its ruler, Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu al-Khwarazmi to flee to the Punjab.
Mingburnu, a staunt opposer of the Mongols, entered into an alliance with the Khokhars and captured Lahore and much of the Punjab. He requested an alliance with Shams-ud-din against the Mongols . The Sultan of Delhi refused, not wishing to get into a conflict with Genghis Khan and marched towards Lahore at the head of a large army. Mingburnu retreated from Lahore and moved towards Uchch inflicting a heavy defeat on Qabacha, and plundered Sindh and northern Gujarat and returned to Persia in 1224. The Mongols invested Multan before leaving as well.
CONSOLDATION OF POWER
Loath to get into a conflict with the Mongols, Iltutmish turned his attention towards the Hindu east. Iltutmish marched against Ghiyasuddin in 1225 and was successful. Ghiyasuddin accepted Iltutmish's suzerainty, ceded Bihar, and paid a large tribute. However, soon after Iltutmish left, Ghiyasuddin revoked the agreement and retook control of Bihar. Iltutmish's son Nasiruddin Mahmud, Governor of Awadh was tasked with dealing with Bengal. In 1227, when Ghiyasuddin was campaigning in Assam, Mahmud launched a sudden attack, capturing Lakhnauti. Ghiyasuddin was imprisoned and then executed. Mahmud died suddenly in 1229, to the dismay of his father. This led to further revolts by the Khalji Maliks of Bengal until Iltutmish captured Lakhnauti again in 1230. Ala-ud-din Jani was appointed Governor of Lakhnauti.
Iltutmish then turned his attention to Qabacha. Capture of Bengal and Rajput territories had significantly enhanced the state of Iltutmish's treasury whereas Qabacha had been weakened by Mingburnu's sack of Uchch and the Mongol siege of Multan. The upheaval caused by the Mongol invasion had led to a large number of military adventurers and officers from Turkic lands to move to India. Iltutmish's replenished treasury allowed him to recruit a large army. A number of officials also defected from Qabacha's camp. In 1228, Iltutmish attacked Qabacha. Ucch was captured after a siege of three months.[10] Qabacha fled and was surrounded on all sides in the fort of Bhakkar, on the banks of Indus. He drowned while attempting to escape. Sindh and Multan were incorporated into the Delhi Sultanate and placed under separate governors.
In 1228-29, Iltutmish received emissaries from the Abbasid Caliph Al-Mustansir and was presented with the Caliphal robe (khilat) and investiture (manshur) signifying the Caliphate's recognition of Iltutmish's rule over India. Such recognition was highly sought after by the Sunni Muslim rulers of India as it leant religious and political legitimacy and prestige. In Iltutmish's case, in particular, this was a symbolic declaration of the Delhi Sultanate's status as an independent kingdom rather than a client of the Ghurids. and earned Iltutmish the title of "Lieutanat" (Naib) or "righthand man" (Yamin) of the Caliph, or Commander of the Faithfull (Amir al-Mu'minin). Iltutmish also went to Egypt, the seat of the Caliph under the Ayyubid Cairo Sultanate, as part of the mutual delegations between his domain and the Caliphate. Due to his problems first with Turkic nobles and then with the Mongols, Iltutmish had also ignored the Rajputs, who had regained territory lost earlier to the Turks, for the first fifteen years of his reign. Starting in 1226, however, Iltutmish began a series of campaigns against the Rajputs. Ranthambore, considered impregnable, was taken in 1226; Mandsaur in 1227. Bayana, Ajmer and Sambhar were also captured. Ranthambore was returned to its Chauhan rulers, who served as feudatories, while Ajmer remained part of the Delhi Sultanate. Nagaur was captured in 1230 and Gwalior was captured in 1231 after a one-year siege. In 1235, Iltutmish sacked Ujjain.
CIVIL ADMINISTRATION
ARCHITECTURE
During his dominion in Badaun, Iltutmish built the city's fort (Kotla) and the Jama Masjid (great Friday Mosque) of the city, which remained the biggest and most famous Mosque in Mediveal India until the expansion of Delhi's Jama Masjid in Alauddin's time and is still second largest with the largest Mosque Dome.
Shams ud-din built several Khanqas (monasteries) and Dargahs (graves) for Sufi saints, as Sufism was dominant in the Deccan. He commenced the structure of Hamid ud-din's Khanaqa, and build the Gandhak-ki-Baoli, a stepwell for the Sufi saint, Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki, who moved to Delhi during his reign.
Near the Gandhaki Baoli, Shams ud-din also built the Hauz-i-Shamsi, a watertank (a popular means for the welfare of pilgrims), which he erected in 1230 after the Prophet Muhammad was claimed to appeared in his dream and led him there. Iltutmish claimed to have found the footprint of the Buraq, the prophet's mount, at the site. The site also encompasses the Jahaz Mahal standing on its edge, used by later Mughal Emperors.
In 1231, following the demise of his oldest son and heir apparent, Nasir ud-Din Mahmud, he built Sultan Ghari the mausoleum for him, which was the first Islamic Mausoleum in Delhi. The tomb lies within fortified grounds, which also include the graves of several others of Iltutmish's kindred.
He is said to have completed the construction of the Qutb Minar, erected by Qutb ud-din, and expanded the Qutb complex and the Quwwat al-Islam Mosque therein
COINAGE
The early Ghurid rulers had maintained the Rajput coinage system based on the Hindushahi bull-and horseman coins in place at the Delhi mint. Dehliwala, the standard coin, was a silver-copper alloy with a uniform weight of 3.38 grams, of which 0.59 grams was Silver. The major source of silver for the Delhi mint were coin hoards from Central Asia. Another source was European silver which made its way to Delhi via the Red Sea, Persian Gulf through the ports of Gujarat. By the 1220s, supply from Central Asia had dried up and Gujarat was under control of hostile forces.
In response to the lack of silver, Iltutmish introduced a new bimetallic coinage system to Northern India consisting of an 11 grams silver Tanka and the billon Jital, with 0.25 grams of silver. The Dehliwala was devalued to be on par with the Jital. This meant that a Dehliwala with 0.59 grams of silver was now equivalent to a coin with 0.25 grams of silver. Each Dehliwala paid as tax, therefore produced an excess 0.34 grams of silver which could be used to produce Tankas. The new system served as the basis for coinage for much of the Sultanate period and even beyond, though periodic shortages of silver caused further debasement. The Tanka is a forerunner to the Rupee.
IQTADAR
Iltutmish introduced the Iqta-dar system, which had been the common practice of the majority of the Islamic world since the time of the Buyids. The system shares some similarities with the contemporary European custom of Feudalism, and involved dedicating the profits of a certain land of fief (Quta') to warlords in payment of their martial service and political loyalty.
ISLAMIC CULTURE
Shams ud-din's court was abundant with poets in the Arabic and Persian languages. He is said to have rewarded a poet called Nasiri for writing him a fifty-three couplets long Qasida, by giving him fifty-three thousands Tankas; Iltutmish is also said to have learned the opening (Fatiha) of the Qasida by heart. His victories against the Hindu Rajputs of Ranathambhor was celebrated by the poet Ruhani al-Samarqandi to devote these verses to the Sultan:
- The faithful Gabriel carried the tidings to the dwellers in heaven,
- From the record of victories of the Sulṭán of the age Shams ud-Dín,
- Saying — Oh ye holy angels raise upon the heavens,
- Hearing this good tidings, the canopy of adornment.
- That from the land of the heretics the Sháhansháh of Islám
- Has conquered a second time the fort resembling the sky;
- The Sháh, holy warrior and Ghází, whose hand and sword
- The soul of the lion of repeated attacks praises.
The verses compare the Sultan to 'Ali, who is often called Asad-Illah (or Shir-i Khuda), and adornes him with the Persian title of Shanshah (King of Kings) and clearly refer to Ranathambor as "the fort resembling the sky", due to its high position in the mountains. The famous poet, Amir Khusraw, was a poet in the service of his court, as well, and has mentioned the Sultan in verses often
NOBILITY
Shams ud-din installed a new nobility, which was based on a confederation of Turkic and a few Mawali (new Muslims of Hindu origin) that were acquitants of him or of Qutb ud-din. They formed a council of forty (Chilanghan) which was very powerful and became the de facto rulers behind the majority of his heirs.
DEATH AND SUCCESSION
In 1236 Iltutmish died, and was buried in the Qutb complex in Mehrauli.
The death of Iltutmish was followed by years of political instability at Delhi. During this period, four descendants of Iltutmish were put on the throne and murdered. Iltutmish's eldest son, Nasir-ud-din Mahmud, had died in 1229 while governing Bengal as his father's deputy. The surviving sons of the Sultan were incapable of the task of administration. In 1236, Iltutmish, on his death-bed, nominated his daughter Razia as his heiress. But, Razia did not have support of the nobles of the court, who did not want a woman ruler.
Iltutmish's eldest surviving son, Rukn-ud-din Firuz was raised to the throne. Firuz left governance in the hands of his mother, Shah Turken. Firuz was deposed within six months, and Razia became the ruler. Razia's growing assertiveness brought her in conflict with the nobles. In 1240, a rebellion led to the replacement of Razia by her brother, Muiz ud din Bahram. Bahram ruled for two years before he was overthrown in favour of Firuz's son, Ala ud din Masud in 1242.
Order was re-established only after Iltutmish's grandson Nasir-ud-din-Mahmud became Sultan with Iltutmish's prominent slave, Ghias-ud-din-Balban as his Deputy Sultan (Naib) in 1246. Balban held all the power at the time and became Sultan in 1266. There was internal stability from 1246 until 1290 when Jalal-ud-din Khilji overthrew Balban's great-grandson Kayumarath, thus ending the Mamluk Dynasty and founded the Khilji Dynasty.
IN ART
Poet-diplomat Abhay K's poem 'Iltutmish' is a reflection of the Sultan from his grave.
WIKIPEDIA
There are three Ashfords, really. The modern newtown, Swindonesque newbuilds stretching into the countryside; the Victorian railway town, all neat rows of brick buit houses and the station, and then there is the old town, timber-framed houses along narrow lanes, with St Mary standing towering above all but the modern office blocks.
The west end church was given over to a Christmas Fayre, but is also used now as a concert venue, while under the tower westwards is still in use as a church, with many of its ancient features left alone by the Victorians.
-------------------------------------------
A stately church in a good position set away from the hustle and bustle of this cosmopolitan town. The very narrow tower of 1475 is not visually satisfactory when viewed from a distance but its odd proportions are hardly noticed when standing at its base. The church is very much the product of the families who have been associated with it over the centuries and who are commemorated by monuments within. They include the Fogges and the Smythes. The former is supposed to have wanted to create a college of priests here, but by the late fifteenth century such foundations were going out of fashion and the remodelling of the church undertaken by Sir John Fogge may have just been a philanthropic cause. Unusually, when the church was restored in 1860 the architect Ewan Christian kept the galleries (he usually swept them away), but Christ Church had yet to be built and the population of this growing town would have needed all the accommodation it could get. Even in 1851 1000 people had attended the church in a single sitting. The pulpit, designed by Pearson, was made in 1897.
www.kentchurches.info/church.asp?p=Ashford+1
------------------------------------------
THE TOWN AND PARISH OF ASHFORD
LIES the next adjoining to Hothfield eastward. It is called in Domesday both Estefort and Essetesford, and in other antient records, Eshetisford, taking its name from the river, which runs close to it, which, Lambarde says, ought not to be called the Stour, till it has passed this town, but Eshe or Eschet, a name which has been for a great length of time wholly forgotten; this river being known, even from its first rise at Lenham hither, by the name of the Stour only.
A small part only of this parish, on the east, south and west sides of it, containing the borough of Henwood, alias Hewit, lying on the eastern or further side of the river from the town, part of which extends into the parish of Wilsborough, and the whole of it within the liberty of the manor of Wye, and the borough of Rudlow, which adjoins to Kingsnoth and Great Chart, are in this hundred of Chart and Longbridge; such part of the borough of Rudlow as lies adjoining to Kingsnoth, is said to lie in in jugo de Beavor, or the yoke of Beavor, and is divided from the town and liberty by the river, near a place called Pollbay; in which yoke there is both a hamlet and a green or common, of the name of Beavor; the remainder of the parish having been long separated from it, and made a distinct liberty, or jurisdiction of itself, having a constable of its own, and distinguished by the name of the liberty of the town of Ashford.
ASHFORD, at the time of taking the general survey of Domesday, was part of the possessions of Hugo de Montfort, who had accompanied the Conqueror hither, and was afterwards rewarded with this estate, among many others in different counties; in which record it is thus entered, under the general title of his lands:
¶Maigno holds of Hugo (de Montfort) Estefort. Turgisus held it of earl Godwin, and it is taxed at one suling. The arable land is half a carucate. There is nevertheless in demesne one carucate, and two villeins having one carucate. There are two servants, and eight acres of meadow. In the time of king Edward the Confessor, it was worth twenty five shillings; when he received it, twenty shillings; now thirty shilling.
The same Hugo holds Essela. Three tenants held it of king Edward, and could go whither they would with their lands. It was taxed at three yokes. The arable land is one carucate and an half. There are now four villeins, with two borderers having one carucate, and six acres of meadow. The whole, in the reign of king Edward the Confessor, was worth twenty shillings, and afterwards fifteen shillings, now twenty shillings.
Maigno held another Essetisford of the same Hugo. Wirelm held it of king Edward. It was taxed at one suling. The arable land is four carucates. In demesne there are two, and two villeins, with fifteen borderers having three carucates. There is a church, and a priest, and three servants, and two mills of ten shillings and two pence. In the time of king Edward the Confessor it was worth seventy shillings, and afterwards sixty shillings, now one hundred shillings.
Robert de Montfort, grandson of Hugh abovementioned, favouring the title of Robert Curthose, in opposition to king Henry I. to avoid being called in question upon that account, obtained leave to go on a pilgrimage to Jerusalem, leaving his possessions to the king; by which means this manor came into the hands of the crown. Soon after which it seems to have come into the possession of a family, who took their name from it. William de Asshetesford appears by the register of Horton priory to have been lord of it, and to have been succeeded by another of the same name. After which the family of Criol became owners of it, by whom it was held by knight's service of the king, in capite, by ward to Dover castle, and the repair of a tower in that castle, called the Ashford tower. (fn. 1) Simon de Criol, in the 27th and 28th year of Henry III. obtained a charter of free warren for this manor, whose son William de Criol passed it away to Roger de Leyborne, for Stocton, in Huntingdonshire, and Rumford, in Essex. William de Leyborne his son, in the 7th year of king Edward I. claimed and was allowed the privilege of a market here, before the justices itinerant. He died possessed of this manor in the 3d year of Edward II. leaving his grand-daughter Juliana, daughter of Thomas de Leyborne, who died in his father's life-time, heir both to her grandfather and father's possessions, from the greatness of which she was stiled the Infanta of Kent, (fn. 2) though thrice married, yet she died s. p. by either of her husbands, all of whom she survived, and died in the 41st year of Edward III. Upon which this manor, among the rest of her estates, escheated to the crown, and continued there till king Richard II. vested it, among others, in feoffees, for the performance of certain religious bequests by the will of king Edward III. then lately deceased; and they, in compliance with it, soon afterwards, with the king's licence, purchased this manor, with those of Wall, and Esture, of the crown, towards the endowment of St. Stephen's chapel, in the king's palace of Westminster, all which was confirmed by king Henry IV. and VI. and by king Edward IV. in their first years; the latter of whom, in his 7th year, granted to them a fair in this town yearly, on the feast of St. John Port Latin, together with all liberties, and to have a steward to hold the court of it, &c. In which situation they continued till the 1st year of Edward VI. when this collegiate chapel was, with all its possessions, surrendered into the king's hands, where these manors did not continue long; for that king, in his 3d year, granted the manor of Esshetford, with that of Wall, and the manor of Esture, to Sir Anthony Aucher, of Otterden, to hold in capite; and he, in the 2d and 3d of Philip and Mary, sold them to Sir Andrew Judde, of London, whose daughter and at length heir Alice, afterwards carried them in marriage to Thomas Smith, esq. of Westenhanger, commonly called the Customer, who died possessed of them in 1591, and lies buried in the south cross of this church, having had several sons and daughters, of, whom Sir John Smythe, of Ostenhanger, the eldest, succeeded him here, and was sheriff anno 42 Elizabeth. Sir Thomas Smith, the second son, was of Bidborough and Sutton at Hone, and ambassador to Russia, of whom and his descendants, notice has been taken in the former volumes of this history; (fn. 3) and Henry, the third son, was of Corsham, in Wiltshire, whence this family originally descended, and Sir Richard Smith, the fourth, was of Leeds castle. Sir John Smythe, above-mentioned, died in 1609, and lies buried in the same vault as his father in this church, leaving one son Sir Thomas Smythe, of Westenhanger, K. B. who was in 1628 created Viscount Strangford, of Ireland, whose grandson Philip, viscount Strangford, dying about 1709, Henry Roper, lord Teynham, who had married Catherine his eldest daughter, by his will, became possessed of the manors of Ashford, Wall, and Esture. By her, who died in 1711, he had two sons, Philip and Henry, successively lords Teynham; notwithstanding which, having the uncontrolled power in these manors vested in him, he, on his marriage with Anne, second daughter and coheir of Thomas Lennard, earl of Sussex, and widow of Richard Barrett Lennard, esq. afterwards baroness Dacre, settled them on her and her issue by him in tail male. He died in 1623, and left her surviving, and possessed of these manors for her life. She afterwards married the hon. Robert Moore, and died in 1755. She had by lord Teynham two sons, Charles and Richard-Henry, (fn. 4) Charles Roper, the eldest son, died in 1754 intestate, leaving two sons, Trevor-Charles and Henry, who on their mother's death became entitled to these manors, as coheirs in gavelkind, a recovery having been suffered of them, limiting them after her death to Charles Roper their father, in tail male; but being infants, and there being many incumbrances on these estates, a bill was exhibited in chancery, and an act procured anno 29 George II. for the sale of them; and accordingly these manors were sold, under the direction of that court, in 1765, to the Rev. Francis Hender Foote, of Bishopsborne, who in 1768 parted with the manor of Wall, alias Court at Wall, to John Toke, esq. of Great Chart, whose son Nicholas Roundell Toke, is the present possessor of it; but he died possessed of the manors of Ashford and Esture in 1773, and was succeeded in them by his eldest son John Foote, esq. now of Bishopsborne, the present owner of them. There are several copyhold lands held of the manor of Ashford. A court leet and court baron is regularly held for it.
THE TOWN OF ASHFORD stands most pleasant and healthy, on the knoll of a hill, of a gentle ascent on every side, the high road from Hythe to Maidstone passing through it, from which, in the middle of the town, the high road branches off through a pleasant country towards Canterbury. The houses are mostly modern and well-built, and the high-street, which has been lately new paved, is of considerable width. The markethouse stands in the centre of it, and the church and school on the south side of it, the beautiful tower of the former being a conspicuous object to the adjoining country. It is a small, but neat and chearful town, and many of the inhabitants of a genteel rank in life. Near the market place, is the house of the late Dr. Isaac Rutton, a physician of long and extensive practice in these parts, being the eldest son of Matthias Rutton, gent of this town, by Sarah his wife, daughter of Sir N. Toke, of Godinton. He died in 1792, bearing for his arms, Parted per fess, azure, and or, three unicorns heads, couped at the neck, counterchanged; since which, his eldest son, Isaac Rutton, esq. now of Ospringeplace, has sold this house to Mr. John Basil Duckworth, in whom it is now vested. In the midst of it is a large handsome house, built in 1759, by John Mascall, gent. who resided in it, and died possessed of it in 1769, and was buried in Boughton Aluph church, bearing for his arms, Barry of two, or, and azure, three inescutcheons, ermine; and his only son, Robert Mascall, esq. now of Ashford, who married the daughter of Jeremiah Curteis, esq. is the present owner, and resides in it. At the east end of the town is a seat, called Brooke-place, formerly possessed by the family of Woodward, who were always stiled, in antient deeds, gentlemen, and bore for their arms, Argent, a chevron, sable, between three grasshoppers, or; the last of them, Mr. John Woodward, gent. rebuilt this seat, and died possessed of it in 1757; of whose heirs it was purchased by Martha, widow of Moyle Breton, esq. of Kennington, whose two sons, the Rev. Moyle Breton, and Mr. Whitfield Breton, gent. alienated it to Josias Pattenson, esq. the second son of Mr. Josias Pattenson, of Biddenden, by Elizabeth, daughter and coheir of Felix Kadwell, esq. of Rolvenden; he married Mary, daughter of Mr. Henry Dering, gent. of this parish, and widow of Mr. John Mascall above-mentioned, by whom he has no issue, and he is the present owner of this seat, and resides in it. There have been barracks erected lately here, which at present contain 4000 soldiers. The market is held on a Saturday weekly, for the sale of corn, which is now but little used; and a market for the sale of all sorts of fat and lean stock on the first and third Tuesday in every month, which has been of great use to prevent monopolies. Two fairs are annually held now, by the alteration of the stile, on May 17, and Sept. 9, and another on Oct. 24; besides which, there is an annual fair for wool on August 2, not many years since instituted and encouraged by the principal gentry and landholders, which promises to prove of the greatest utility and benefit to the fair sale of it. That branch of the river Stour which rises at Lenham, runs along the southern part of this parish, and having turned a corn mill belonging to the lord of this manor, continues its course close at the east end of the town, where there is a stone bridge of four arches, repaired at the expence of the county, and so on northwards towards Wye and Canterbury. On the south side of the river in this parish, next to Kingsnoth, within the borough of Rudlow, is the yoke of Beavor, with the hamlet and farm of that name, possessed in very early times, as appears by the register of Horton priory, by a family of that name, one of whom, John Beavor, was possessed of it in the reign of Henry II. and was descended from one of the same furname, who attended the Conqueror in his expedition hither. The parish contains about 2000 acres of land, and three hundred and twenty houses, the whole rental of it being 4000l. per annum; the inhabitants are 2000, of which about one hundred are diffenters. The highways throughout it, which not many years ago were exceeding bad, have been by the unanimity of the inhabitants, which has shewn itself remarkable in all their public improvements, a rare instance in parochial undertakings, and by the great attention to the repairs of them, especially in such parts as were near their own houses, are now excellent. The lands round it are much upon a gravelly soil, though towards the east and south there are some rich fertile pastures, intermixed with arable land, and several plantations of hops; but toward the west, the soil is in general sand, having much quarrystone mixed with it, where there is a great deal of coppice wood, quite to Potter's corner, at the boundary of this parish.
The church, which is dedicated to St. Mary, is a large handsome building, consisting of three isles, with a transept, and three chancels, with the tower in the middle, which is losty and well proportioned, having four pinnacles at the top of it. There are eight bells in it, a set of chimes, and a clock. In the high chancel, on the north side, is the college John Fogge, the founder of the college here, who died in 1490, and his two wives, the brasses of their figures gone; but part of the inscription remains. And formerly, in Weever's time, there hung up in this chancel six atchievements, of those of this family whose burials had been attended by the heralds at arms, and with other ceremonies suitable to their degrees. Underneath the chancel is a large vault, full of the remains of the family. On the pavement in the middle, is a very antient curious gravestone, having on it the figure in brass of a woman, holding in her left hand a banner, with the arms of Ferrers, Six masctes, three and three, in pale; which, with a small part of the inscription round the edge, is all that is remaining; but there was formerly in brass, in her right hand, another banner, with the arms of Valoyns; over her head those of France and England quarterly; and under her feet a shield, being a cross, impaling three chevronels, the whole within a bordure, guttee de sang, and round the edge this inscription, Ici gift Elizabeth Comite D' athels la file sign de Ferrers . . . dieu asoil, qe morust le 22 jour d'octob. can de grace MCCCLXXV. Weever says, she was wife to David de Strabolgie, the fourth of that name, earl of Athol, in Scotland, and daughter of Henry, lord Ferrers, of Groby; and being secondly married to John Malmayns, of this county, died here in this town. Though by a pedigree of the family of Brograve, she is said to marry T. Fogge, esq. of Ashford; if so, he might perhaps have been her third husband. Near her is a memorial for William Whitfield, gent. obt. 1739. The north chancel belonged to Repton manor. In the vault underneath lay three of the family of Tuston, sometime since removed to Rainham, and it has been granted to the Husseys; Thomas Hussey, esq. of this town, died in 1779, and was buried in it. In the south chancel are memorials for the Pattensons, Whitfields, and Apsleys, of this place; and one for Henry Dering, gent. of Shelve, obt. 1752, and Hester his wife; arms, A saltier, a crescent for difference, impaling, on a chevron, between three persons, three crosses, formee; and another memorial for Thomasine, wife of John Handfield, obt. 1704. In the north cross are several antient stones, their brasses all gone, excepting a shield, with the arms of Fogge on one. At the end is a monument for John Norwood, gent. and Mary his wife, of this town, who lie with their children in the vault underneath. The south cross is parted off lengthways, for the family of Smith, lords of Ashford manor, who lie in a vault underneath. In it are three superb monuments, which, not many years since, were beautified and restored to their original state, by the late chief baron Smythe, a descendant of this family. One is for Thomas Smith, esq. of Westenhanger, in 1591; the second for Sir John Smythe, of Ostenhanger, his son, and Elizabeth his wife; and the third for Sir Richard Smyth, of Leeds castle, in 1628: all which have been already mentioned before. Their figures, at full length and proportion, are lying on, each of them, with their several coats of arms and quarterings blazoned. In the other part of this cross, is a memorial for Baptist Pigott, A. M. son of Baptist Pigott, of Dartford, and schoolmaster here, obt. 1657, and at the end of it, is the archbishop's consistory court. In the south isle is a memorial for Thomas Curteis, gent. obt. 1718, and Elizabeth his wife; arms, Curteis impaling Carter. Under the tower is one for Samuel Warren, vicar here forty-eight years, obt. 1720. The three isles were new pewed and handsomely paved in 1745. There are five galleries, and an handsome branch for candles in the middled isle; the whole kept in an excellent state of repair and neatness. There was formerly much curtious painted glass in the windows, particularly the figures of one of the family of Valoyns, his two wives and children, with their arms. In the south window of the cross isle, and in other windows, the figures, kneeling, of king Edward III. the black prince, Richard, duke of Gloucester, the lord Hastings. Sir William Haute, the lord Scales, Richard, earl Rivers, and the dutchess of Bedford his wife, Sir John Fogge, Sir John Peche, Richard Horne, Roger Manstone, and—Guildford, most of which were in the great west window, each habited in their surcoats of arms, not the least traces of which, or of any other coloured glass, are remaining throughout this church. Sir John Goldstone, parson of Ivechurch, as appears by his will in 1503, was buried in the choir of this church, and gave several costly ornaments and vestments for the use of it.
Re-creating a Mapei scheme. Corey creates the template for position. This shouldn't take long, right Corey?
Rough positioning of signalling rods.
Wood work in place for downline platform to slot onto. (Everythings been done to LEGO dimensions, the wood is much cheaper than baseboards, plates and bricks!
Top Row: 90 deg
2nd Row: 45 deg
Bottom: 0 deg
All shot at 1/500, f/5.6, 200 ISO in all shots.
1 Flash
Flash 3 ft away from subject.
Radio triggers
Not modified
With each shot I snapped a picture of what the flash sees.
The Lotus Position in my personal lexicon means leaning precariously over a body of water to get a close shot of a lotus. Once again, Mercer Botanical gardens shows that they really are the finest botanical garden - and garden, for that matter in all of Houston.
A splash of color today, because tomorrow, it is the grave. No, really. I pleasantly shocked myself yesterday when I was perusing my archives. I found at least thirty really decent shots of Glennwood cemetery that I didn't remember I had taken until I saw them. It was like Christmas in July! Glennwood remains my favorite haunt in Houston of all time.
The positioning of RHTT sets often throws up unusual motive power, and this is no exception!
66783 The Flying Dustman with 69013, still in light green undercoat, transfer a clean RHTT set from Doncaster Up Decoy to Toton N Yard.
A real splash of colour on a very dull morning. and a great combination.
13. Position your pattern on the foundation fabric to make sure it will looks the way you want it to.
Camera info:
ISO 200
f/5.6
1/200
580EX at 1/64 power
Shot on a Canon Rebel T1i using an EF85mm 1.8 lens
Exercise #2....I took a shot of Mickey with the flash 45° to my left, then a shot from the flash's point of view.
History in the course of time
More than 800 years of history Bernhardsthal is more than 800 years of history of a local community in a border and bridge position at a central point in Europe.
History of Bernhardsthal
Again and again, it was more than the fate of the locals alone which had been decided here - again and again it was the pan-European movement that captured the place. One by one, they appeared in the Thaya-March area: Illyrians and Celts, Quads and Herulians, Huns and Lombards, Slavs and Avars, Bavarians and Franks, Magyars and Mongols, Hussites and Utraquists, Hajduks and Swedes, Turks and Kurds, Frenchmen, Prussians and Russians. They cleared and missioned, blackmailed and burned, remained, or passed by like a wild hunt. Between confrontation and penetration, construction and destruction, fear and hope, a year is a fixed point: the first documentary mention of the place - 1171.
1171 - what happened in Europe at this time? In the Roman-German empire, Emperor Frederick I Babarossa ruled. It was the time of the castles and knights and monastic culture, of the manorial systems and evolution of the town charter and of new German settlement waves which captured even Bohemia and the distant Transylvania. Just, in 1156, the Emperor of Austria had been loyal to the duchy on the other side, the Bohemian duke Vladislav II, and received the royal crown. Court Days and Princely councils, expeditions to Italy, the defeat of Henry the Lion underlined the power of the central European empire, which in the south even reached Sicily. Bruges and Venice were the highly evolving trade centers in Europe. Political movement had captured the continent: In the Russian area, Kiev's pre-eminence fell, new centers in the north-east announced themselves - Moscow was first mentioned in 1147.
In the southeast, Serbian unity was just founded in 1171, Serbia and Bulgaria began to shake off Byzantine rule. Hungary was about to restore its supremacy in Dalmatia, Croatia and Bosnia. In England, Henry II succeeded in sustaining his claim to power, and Thomas Becket, Archbishop of Canterbury, was murdered by royal knights in 1170. In 1171 the English conquest of Ireland began. In Egypt, Saladin began to expand, which was to lead to Tripoli, Damascus, and Jerusalem. In China, above all, the South was booming in economic development. Already, paper money and book printing, gunpowder and magnet needle were used.
But back to Bernhardsthal: With the world, the place has been connected since ancient times to the nearby Amber Road, which led from the Adriatic to the Baltic Sea. Events all around the world repeatedly stamped the centuries of its history.
Prehistory and Time of the Teutons: Archaeological finds earmark the Bernhardsthaler area as a significantly older settlement basis, as the year 1171 suggests - stretching back to the Neolithic, Bronze Age and older and younger Iron Age. Hallstatt burial mounds point to Illyrians, followed by the Celts.
9th century: Franconian mission movement and Great Moravian empire. The Slavic tribes lived in the Weinviertel (Wine District) and were interspersed with the Germanic population.
10th century: Magyar collision and German counter-movement. Emergence of Magyar riders also in the March-Thaya area. By the counteroffensive of the German kingship, a new settlement wave follows east. From 976, the Babenbergs in the regained marches area on the Danube came to power.
11th century: Stabilization of borders. Around 1045, the boundary was essentially stabilized. Thus the framework for settlement and integration into the social structure of the empire had also been drawn. The settler wave also captured the Wine District and the Bavarian population came to the fore, marking the time as the peasant clearing.
12th century: the first documentary mention. In the year 1171, the name Bernhardsthal was mentioned for the first time in the Klosterneuburg Tradition Codex, when the monastery Klosterneuburg acquired land here.
13th century: First, the Mongols appeared, hordes of riders who broke in over the Russian steppes, triumphed in 1241 near Liegnitz in Silesia, in the same year at Muhi on the Sjo in Hungary, pervading Moravia, sprawling to the Wine District. Before and after, however, the Thaya-March area was a multiple site of Bohemian and Hungarian incursions, condensed under Premysl Otakar II until the great decision. When the last Babenberger died in 1246, that Premysl Otakar had attacked southwards on Austria and across Styria and Carinthia to the Adriatic, and had penetrated eastward into Upper Hungary. To the south of the Bernhardsthaler area, on the Marchfeld near Dürnkrut, he lost battle and life against Rudolf von Habsburg. The consequences of the event, the retreat of the beaten ones, the advance of the victors, also touched Bernhardsthal.
14th century: from 1328 to 1336 the incursions of the Bohemian king John of Luxembourg lined up. Among the castles conquered by the Bohemians was also Bernhardsthal, which was then owned by the Haunvelder. The Hungarians under Charles I of Anjou also contributed, and also laid their hands on Bernhardsthal. The Wehinger, who had now been entrusted with Bernhardsthal, temporarily secured the market right for the place. A dangerous approach to the end of the century. First pirates from Moravia.
15th century: robber barons, Hussites and Utraquists. Bands or groups of robbers from Austria, Moravia and Hungary - with centers in Hohenau and Laa - troubled the Thaya-March area. In 1470 Bernhardsthal was sold to the Liechtensteiner.
16th century: Emerging Turkish danger. In 1529 they stood at the gates of Vienna. For the first time, one made acquaintance up the river March with the pillagers. After the retaliation, the Habsburgs - from Ferdinand I now also King of Bohemia and Hungary - ruled the west and north-west of the Hungarian kingdom. The Danubian and Alpine countries, Bohemia and Hungary should face a common development. The Thaya-March region was now the stage of the eastern front of the Turks.
17th century: Hajduks and Swedes. In Hungary, an uprising had broken out. In 1605, pillagers of Hajduks crossed the March and also plundered Bernhardsthal. A little later, the Mercenary regiments of the Thirty Years' War struck the gates. It was not until 1648, when the peace was concluded, that marauding and quartering, extortion, robbery, and murders ended. In 1163 Turks again crossed the March, plundered and forced prisoners into slavery - even Bernhardsthal was in flames.
18th century: Kurutzs and imperial occupation. Around 1704, due to the incursions of Kurutzs the wine-producing region and South Moravia too were again threatened by fear and distress. In 1705 they also attacked Bernhardsthal. In the next few years, imperial units remained present to protect the places at risk. In the following decades but Austria, under Maria Theresia, faced the defense of its superpower status and at the same time its consolidation.
19th century: Frenchmen, Prussia and Cholera: In 1805 Bernhardsthal saw Frenchmen on the advance, before and after their victory in Austerlitz. In 1809 the place saw the French for the second time. The year 1866 brought the Prussians also to Bernhardsthal as the winner of Königsgrätz. They were quartered as well as before the French which brought a lot of stress for the place. The cholera in the years 1831 and 1866 supplemented the picture of the 19th century.
20th century: Two great wars went over Europe in this century. Bernhardsthal also had to pay its duty. Bernhardsthaler found distant graves on theaters of war of both wars. Nevertheless, after 1945, the place steered into an impressive phase of peaceful construction.
Geschichte im Wandel der Zeit
Über 800 Jahre Geschichte Bernhardsthal sind über 800 Jahre Geschichte einer Ortsgemeinschaft in einer Grenz- und Brückenposition an einem zentralen Punkt Europas.
Geschichte Bernhardsthal
Immer wieder war es mehr als das Schicksal der Ortsbewohner allein, das hier entschieden worden ist, - immer wieder war es gesamteuropäische Bewegung, die den Platz erfasste. Nacheinander tauchten sie im Thaya-March- Bereich auf: Illyrer und Kelten, Quaden und Heruler, Hunnen und Langobarden, Slawen und Awaren, Baiern und Franken, Magyaren und Mongolen, Hussiten und Utraquisten, Heiducken und Schweden, Türken und Kurutzen, Franzosen, Preußen und Russen. Sie rodeten und missionierten, erpreßten und brandschatzten, blieben oder zogen vorbei gleich einer wilden Jagd. Zwischen Auseinandersetzung und Durchdringung, Aufbau und Zerstörung, Angst und Hoffnung tritt ein Jahr als fixer Punkt: Die erste urkundliche Nennung des Ortes - 1171.
1171 - was geschah in Europa in dieser Zeit? Im römisch-deutschen Reich herrrschte Kaiser Friedrich I. Babarossa. Es war die Zeit der Burgen und Ritter und klösterlicher Kultur, der Grundherrschaften und Stadtrechtsentwicklung und neuer deutscher Siedlungswellen, die selbst Böhmen erfassten und das ferne Siebenbürgen. Eben, 1156 hatte der Kaiser Österreich zum Herzogtum jenseits der Grenze, der Böhmenherzog Vladislav II., freu treu und Hilfe die Königskrone erhalten. Hof- und Fürstentage, Italienzüge, die Niederwerfung Heinrichs des Löwen unterstrichen die Machtstellung des zentraleuropäischen Kaisertums, das im Süden selbst auf Sizilien griff. Brügge und Venedig waren die sich groß entwickelnden Handeslzentren Europas. Politische Bewegung hatte den Kontinent erfasst: Im russischen Bereich ging die Vormachtsstellung Kievs zurück, neue Zentren im Nordosten kündigten sich an - Moskau war 1147 erstmals erwähnt worden.
Im Südosten wurde eben 1171 die serbische Einheit begründet, Serbien und Bulgarien setzten an, die byzantinische Herrschaft abzuschütteln, Ungarn war kurz davor, seine Oberhoheit in Dalmatien, Kroatien und Bosnien wiederherzustellen. Im Westen setzte in England Heinrich II. seinen Herrschaftsanspruch nachhalktig durch, 1170 wurde Thomas Becket, der Erzbischof von Canterbury von königlichen Rittern ermordet, 1171 begann die englische Eroberung Irlands. In Ägypten setzte Saladin zur Expansion an, die bis Tripolis, Damskus und Jerusalem führen sollte. In China stand vor allem der Süden in blühender wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung. Schon wurden Papiergeld und Buchdruck; Schießpulver und Magnetnadel verwendet.
Aber zurück zu Bernhardsthal: Mit der Welt war der Platz seit altersher über die unweit vorüberführende Bernsteinstraße verbunden, die von der Adria zur Ostsee führte. Die Welt rundum drückte den Jahrhunderten seiner Geschichte immer wieder den Stempel auf.
Urgeschichte und Germanenzeit: Die Bodenfunde weisen den Bernhardsthaler Raum als bedeutend älteren Siedlungsgrund aus, als die Jahreszahl 1171 vermuten lässt - zurückreichend bis in die Jungsteinzeit, Bronzezeit und ältere und jüngere Eisenzeit. Hallstattliche Hügelgräber weisen auf Illyrer hin, auf die die Kelten folgten.
9. Jahrhundert: Fränkische Missionsbewegung und Großmährisches Reich. Im Weinviertel lebten Slawenstämme, von germanischer Restbevölkerung durchsetzt.
10. Jahrhundert: Magyarenanprall und deutsche Gegenbewegung. Auftauchen von Magyarenreitern auch im March-Thaya-Bereich. Durch die Gegenoffensive des deutschen Königtums folge eine neue Siedlungswelle in Richtung Osten. Ab 976 gelangen im rückgewonnenen Markengebiet an der Donau die Babenberger zur Herrschaft.
11. Jahrhundert: Stabilisierung der Grenzen. Um 1045 wurde die Grenzlage im wesentlichen stabilisiert. Dadurch war auch der Rahmen für Besiedelung und Einordnung in die Gesellschaftsstruktur des Reiches gezogen. Die Siedlerwelle erfasste auch das Weinviertel und ließ das bairische Bevölkerungselement in den Vordergrund treten undprägt die Zeit als die bäuerliche Rodung.
12. Jahrhundert: Die erste urkundliche Nennung. Im Jahre 1171 wurde der Name Bernhardsthal zum ersten mal urkundlich - im Klosterneuburger Traditionskodex - erwähnt, als das Stift Klosterneuburg hier Grundbesitz erwarb.
13. Jahrhundert: Zunächst tauchten die Mongolen auf, Reiterscharen, die über die russiche Steppen hereinbrachen, 1241 bei Liegnitz in Schlesien, im selben Jahr bei Muhi am Sjo in Ungarn siegreich, Mährend durchziehend, bis ins Weinviertel ausschwörmend. Vorher und nachher aber war der Thaya-March-Bereich mehrfach Schauplatz böhmischer und ungarischer Einfälle, verdichtet unter Premysl Otakar II. bis zur großen Entscheidung. Als 1246 der letzte Babenberger gestorben war, hatte jener Premysl Otakar südwärts auf Österreich und über Steiermark und Kärnten bis an die Adria gegriffen und war ostwärts in Oberungarn eingedrungen. Südlich des Bernhardsthaler Raumes, auf dem Marchfeld bei Dürnkrut verlor er gegen Rudolf von Habsburg Schlacht und Leben. Die folgen des Geschehens, der Rückzug der Geschlagenen, der Vormarsch der Sieger, berührte auch Bernhardsthal.
14. Jahrhundert: Ab 1328 bis 1336 reihten sich die Einfälle des Böhmenkönig Johann von Luxemburg. Unter den Burgen die die Böhmen eroberten war auch Bernhardsthal das damals im Besitz der Haunvelder war. Auch die Ungarn unter Karl I. von Anjou wirkten ein und legten ebenfalls die Hand auf Bernhardsthal. Die nun mit Bernhardsthal belehnten Wehinger erwirkten 1370 für den Ort vorübergehend das Marktrecht. Ein gefährlicher Anssatz zum Ende des Jahrhunderts. Erste Raubritterzüge aus Mähren.
15. Jahrhundert: Raubritter, Hussiten und Utraquisten. Raubgruppen aus Östereich, Mähren und Ungarn - mit Zentren in Hohenau und Laa - beunruhigten den Thaya-March-Bereich. 1470 wurde Bernhardsthal an die Liechtensteiner verkauft.
16. Jahrhundert: Aufkommenden Türkengefahr. 1529 standen sie vor den Toren Wiens. Erstmals machte man marchaufwärts mit den Streitscharen Bekanntschaft. Nach dem gegenscglag beherrschten die Habsburger - ab Ferdinand I. nun auch König von Böhmen und Ungarn - den Westen und Nordwesten des ungarischen Königreiches. Die Donau- und Alpenländer, Böhmen und Ungarn sollten einer gemeinsamen Entwicklung entgegengehen. Die Thaya-March-Region war nun Etappe der nach Osten vorgeschobenen Türkenfront.
17. Jahrhundert: Heiducken und Schweden. In Ungarn war ein AUfstand ausgebrochen. 1605 überschritt eine Streitschar der Heiducken die March und plünderten auch Bernhardsthal. Wenig später pochten die Landsknechtsregimenter des Dreißigjährigen Krieges an die Tore. Erst der Friedensschluss 1648 ließ das Marodieren und Einquartiern, Erpresse, Rauben und Morden ausklingen. 1163 überquerten erneut Türken die March, plünderten und trieben Gefangene in die Sklaverei - auch Bernhardsthal stand in Flammen.
18. Jahrhundert: Kurutzen und kaiserliche Besatzung. Kurutzeneinfälle trieben das Land um 1704 auch das Weinviertel und Südmähren erneut in Angst und Not. 1705 überfielen sie auch Bernhardsthal. In den nächsten Jahren blieben kaiserliche Einheiten zum Schutz der gefährdeten Orte präsent. In den folgenden Jahrzehnten aber ging Österreich unter Maria Theresia der Verteidigung seiner Großmachtstellung und gleichzeitig ihrer Festigung entgegen.
19. Jahrhundert: Franzoßen, Preußen und Cholera: 1805 sah Bernhardsthal Franzosen auf dem Vormarsch, vor und nach ihrem Sieg in Austerlitz. 1809 sah der Ort die Franzosen zum zweiten Mal. Das Jahr 1866 brachte die Preußen als Sieger von Königsgrätz auch nach Bernhardsthal. Sie wurden ebenso einquartiert wie vorher die Franzosen was für den Ort starke Belastungen brachte. Die Cholera in den Jahren 1831 und 1866 ergänzte das Bild des 19. Jhd.
20. Jahrhundert: Zwei große Kriege gingen in diesem Jahrhundert über Europa hinweg. Auch Bernhardsthal hatte seinen Zoll zu zahlen. Auf den Kriegsschauplätzen beider Kriege fanden Bernhardsthaler ferne Gräber. Dennoch steuerte der Ort nach 1945 in eine eindrucksvolle Phase des friedlichen Aufbaues.
www.bernhardsthal.gv.at/system/web/zusatzseite.aspx?detai...
U.S. Soldiers, assigned to 2nd Battalion, 5th Cavalry Regiment, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 1st Cavalry Division, conduct a safety briefing at the Rose Barracks (Vilseck), Germany railhead station May 5, 2014 as part of Combined Resolve II, a U.S. Army Europe-directed multinational exercise at the Grafenwoehr and Hohenfels Training Areas, including more than 4,000 participants from 13 allied and partner countries. The gunnery is the first time a U.S. Army rotational force will use the European Activity Set, a set of armored vehicles and equipment pre-positioned in Grafenwoehr – including the most up-to-date versions of the M1A2 Abrams tanks and M2/M3 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles -- for live-fire training in Europe.(U.S. Army Photo by Visual Information Specialist Gertrud Zach/Released)