Unbelievable? Four Simple Principles to Determine Ancient Historical Reliability

jwallace August 19, 2013 Biblical Reliability, Objections of Atheism, Writings 7,401 Views


Print Friendly Version of this pagePrint Get a PDF version of this webpagePDF

245Are you prepared to answer every challenge that might be offered about the historicity of the Gospels? Do you even know every challenge that might be offered? How do you respond when someone offers a challenge for which you don’t have immediate access to the all the pertinent data? There’s an important principle for all of us as Christian Case Makers: Historical challenges are often complicated, nuanced and detailed, and while it is nearly impossible to remember all the data related to every objection, there are four overarching principles of witness reliability appropriate to the task. These are the same four principles I’ve offered as a template in Cold Case Christianity. I used this template to evaluate the Gospels when I was an unbelieving skeptic, and these four principles will help you assess any challenge offered against the Gospel accounts:


Principle One: Make Sure the Witnesses Were Present in the First Place

There are times in cold case investigations when a witness emerges with a story, even though he or she was not involved in the case when it occurred. Sometimes a person such as this is motivated by a desire to become “famous”, sometimes by a desire to harm the defendant or help the victim. It’s my job as an investigator to make sure the witness was truly present (and in a position to see anything) before the witness takes the stand in front of a jury. When it comes to the Gospel accounts, we have to ask a similar question: Were the gospels written early enough to have been written by true eyewitnesses? If the accounts were written and circulated early, the possibility of an errant or deceptive inclusion is greatly reduced. Early authorship allows the accounts to be fact-checked by those who were present and could expose the accounts as a lie. The gospels are the earliest ancient accounts describing the life of Jesus and the historical events surrounding His life. This must be considered when evaluating the gospels against any ancient account that follows them.


Principle Two: Try to Find Some Corroboration for the Claims of the Witnesses

Jurors are encouraged to evaluate witnesses in a trial on the basis of any evidence offered to verify or corroborate their testimony. Sometimes witness testimony can be corroborated with physical evidence, sometimes with the direct testimony of another witness. In either case, the witness becomes more reliable as different lines of corroborative evidence begin to support his or her testimony. In a similar way, the Gospel accounts can be evaluated on the basis of their corroboration. I wrote an entire chapter in Cold Case Christianity examining the “external” corroboration of archaeology and ancient non-Christian sources, and the “internal” corroboration between Gospel accounts (what I call, “unintentional eyewitness support”), the accurate referencing of regional 1st Century proper names, the correct description of governmental structure, the familiar description of geography and location, and the reasonable use of language.


Principle Three: Examine the Consistency and Accuracy of the Witnesses

If a witness has changed his or her story over time, there’s little reason to trust any version of that story along the way. Changes of this nature are often the result of an effort to deceive. As we assess the transmission of any ancient narrative, it’s important to determine whether or not the account has been altered over time. The Chain of Custody related to the document’s transmission is incredibly important. Do we have ancient copies of the document we can compare to one another or ancient references to the documents we can examine for content? The gospels are perhaps the best attested and collected ancient documents in history, and they are referenced early by church leaders such as Ignatius, Polycarp and Clement who attest to their content. Skeptics, when attacking the historical narratives of the gospels, typically rely on ancient records not nearly as well attested. The writings of Josephus, for example, were very poorly collected and referenced over time. There are no ancient copies of Josephus’ work prior to the 11th century, so we are unable to compare ancient Josephan texts to know if the documents have been changed over time. This is not the case when it comes to the gospels. We have thousands of copies dating over three times closer to the actual events than Josephus.


Principle Four: Examine the Presence of Bias on the Part of the Witnesses

The last area of consideration when it comes to evaluating witnesses is the issue of bias. It’s often argued the Gospels should not be trusted because they were written by Christians who loved Jesus and wanted to make a case for his Deity (whether true or not). But there’s a difference between bias prior to an experience and conviction following an experience. It can hardly be argued that the Gospel authors had a bias prior to their involvement with Jesus. In fact, the gospels fairly present the skepticism and slow understanding of the disciples as they sat under Jesus. We cannot fault the Gospel authors for their later conviction related to Jesus if they truly saw what they recorded in the Gospels, particularly the Resurrection. Bias comes down to motive, and motive always comes down to three driving desires: financial greed, sexual/relational lust, and the pursuit of power. Absent any of these driving motivations, ancient accounts ought to be received as unbiased.


Every time I encounter an historical objection related to the Gospels, I expect there to be a wealth of information on both sides of the issue; skeptics will have written volumes and Christian apologists will have responded in kind. How is anyone to know which side of the equation to trust? I typically use the four principles I’ve just described to evaluate both the objection and the response. Which side is referencing the account that was written earliest, is best corroborated, has been best documented over time and is least biased? Over the next few days, I’ll be applying this template to two specific objections offered by skeptics on the Unbelievable? radio program. I’ll also write about a third objection related to corroboration. We can rely on these four overarching principles to help us determine which position (held by the skeptic or the Christian) is most reasonable.



By the time the battle ended, 3,057 Japanese had died. Casualties aboard the four carriers were: Akagi: 267; Kaga: 811; Hiryu: 392; Soryu: 711 (including Captain Yanagimoto, who chose to remain on board); a total of 2,181.[135] The heavy cruisers Mikuma (sunk; 700 casualties) and Mogami (badly damaged; 92) accounted for another 792 deaths.[136]


All four of Japan's large aircraft carriers—Akagi, Kaga, Soryu and Hiryu, were sunk


In Japan, モグラ退治 (mogura taiji, "Mole Buster") is a popular arcade game invented in 1975 by Kazuo Yamada of TOGO, based on ten of the designer's pencil sketches from 1974, licensed to Bandai in 1977.[1] It can also be commonly found at Japanese festivals.


I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.



On the eastern seaboard of what became the United States, the four distinct British regions were: New England, the Middle Colonies, the Chesapeake Bay Colonies (Upper South), and the Lower South

Albion's Seed: Four British Folkways in America is a 1989 book by David Hackett Fischer that details the folkways of four groups of people who moved from distinct regions of Great Britain (Albion) to the United States. The argument is that the culture of each of the groups persisted, to provide the basis for the modern United States.[1] Fischer explains "the origins and stability of a social system which for two centuries has remained stubbornly democratic in its politics, capitalist in its economy, libertarian in its laws and individualist in its society and pluralistic in its culture."[2] Fischer describes Albion's Seed as a modified Teutonic germ theory within the framework of the Frontier Thesis and the migration model.


Contents [hide]

1 Four folkways

1.1 Origins

1.2 Key characteristics

2 See also

3 References

4 External links

Four folkways[edit]

The four migrations are discussed in the four main chapters of the book:


East Anglia to Massachusetts

The Exodus of the English Puritans (Pilgrims influenced the Northeastern United States' corporate and educational culture)[3]

The South of England to Virginia

The Cavaliers and Indentured Servants (Gentry influenced the Southern United States' plantation culture)[4]

North Midlands to the Delaware Valley

The Friends' Migration (Quakers influenced the Middle Atlantic and Midwestern United States' industrial culture)[5]

Borderlands to the Backcountry

The Flight from North Britain (Scotch-Irish, or border English, influenced the Western United States' ranch culture and the Southern United States' common agrarian culture)[6]

On March 23, 1820, Arraganta arrived at Cabinda, where it found Antelope and three ships flying the Portuguese flag, all loading African slaves. The crew of Arraganta captured the four ships, and loaded the Africans from the Portuguese ships onto Arraganta and Antelope.[4]


Germany is a federal republic consisting of sixteen federal states (German: Land, plural Länder; informally also Bundesland, plural Bundesländer)

However, his successor Perdicas II (r. 454–413 BC) led the Macedonians to war in four separate conflicts against Athens, leader of the Delian League, which encroached upon his coastal territories in Lower Macedonia as incursions by the Thracian ruler Sitalces of the Odrysian kingdom threatened Macedonia's territorial integrity in the northeast

Fourth Philippic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Fourth Philippic is a speech attributed to the Athenian statesman and orator, Demosthenes and given in 341 BC. It constitutes the last of the four philippics. Modern scholars, however, consider that the speech is not Demosthenes' work and may be attributed to Anaximenes of Lampsacus who frequently wrote imagined dialogues or speeches for real figures.[1] If it was a genuine Demosthenic speech, it is likely that it was issued in pamphlet form rather than actually delivered as a speech.[1]


Contents [hide]

1 Historical background

2 Content of the speech

3 See also

4 References

5 External links

Historical background[edit]

In 341 BC, when the embassy for which Demosthenes is calling in his fourth Philippic is sent to the Persians, Philip of Macedon is angry. Yet, the Persians reject the embassy.


Content of the speech[edit]

In the Fourth Philippic, Demosthenes asks that money be sent because of an upcoming war with Macedon. He calls for Athens to send an embassy to the Persians. It includes two significant passages copied from Demosthenes' earlier On the Chersonese and Second Philippic speeches, leading to further doubts about its authorship.[1]


Philip then went on campaign against the Illyrians, particularly Pleuratus, whose kingdom probably lay along the Drin river in modern Albania.[131] During the campaign, Philip suffered a smashed shin-bone, and was only saved from death by the bravery of his Companion cavalry (150 of whom were wounded in the process). Philip did not campaign in 344 or 343 BC, which may have been due to the effects of this severe injury.[132] Instead, Philip contented himself with reorganising Thessaly in 344 BC, reinstating the ancient fourfold "Tetrarchic" administration system.[132]

Fourth Sacred War[edit]

Philip's campaign in Greece became linked with a new, fourth, Sacred War. The citizens of Amphissa in Ozolian Locris had begun cultivating land sacred to Apollo on the Crisaean plain south of Delphi; after some internal bickering the Amphictyonic council decided to declare a sacred war against Amphissa.[149] A Thessalian delegate proposed that Philip should be made leader of the Amphictyonic forces, which therefore gave Philip a pretext to campaign in Greece; it is, however, probable that Philip would have gone ahead with his campaign anyway.[149]


A silver octadrachm of Alexander I of Macedon (r. 498–454 BC), minted c. 465–460 BC, showing an equestrian figure wearing a chlamys (short cloak) and petasos (head cap) while holding two spears and leading a horse

Sacred War may refer to:

a series of wars carried out by members of the Amphictyonic League:

First Sacred War (595–585 BC)

Second Sacred War (449–448 BC)

Third Sacred War (356–346 BC)

Fourth Sacred War (339–338 BC)

I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.,_Washington

Four Lakes is an unincorporated community and census-designated place in Spokane County, Washington, United States, just southwest of the city of Spokane, and north of Cheney. As of the 2010 census, its population was 512.[2] Both Interstate 90 and SR 904 run through Four Lakes and the junction of the two is located near the center of town. Four Lakes was founded in 1879 by G.H. Morgan.[4] The community was so named on account of there being four lakes near the original town site.[5]


The Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780–1784) was a conflict between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Dutch Republic. The war, contemporary with the War of the American Independence, broke out over British and Dutch disagreements on the legality and conduct of Dutch trade with Britain's enemies in that war.


The Fourth Anglo–Mysore War (1798–1799) was a conflict in South India between the Kingdom of Mysore and the British East India Company.


This was the final conflict of the four Anglo–Mysore Wars. The British captured the capital of Mysore. The ruler Tipu Sultan was killed in the battle. Britain took indirect control of Mysore, restoring the Wodeyar Dynasty to the Mysore throne (with a British commissioner to advise him on all issues). Tipu Sultan's young heir, Fateh Ali, was sent into exile. The Kingdom of Mysore became a princely state in a subsidiary alliance with British occupied India and ceded Coimbatore, Dakshina Kannada and Uttara Kannada to the British.


Four Days' Battle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Four Days Battle)


This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (March 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

Four Days' Battle

Part of the Second Anglo–Dutch War

Van Soest, Four Days Battle.jpg

The Four Days' Battle, 1–4 June 1666 (Pieter Cornelisz van Soest), c. 1666.

Date 1–4 June 1666

Location near North Foreland, England

Result Dutch victory


England England Dutch Republic

Commanders and leaders

England George Monck

England Christopher Myngs †


England William Berkeley †

Dutch Republic Michiel de Ruyter

Dutch Republic Cornelis Evertsen †


Dutch Republic Abraham Hulst †


79 ships 84 ships

Casualties and losses

17 ships sunk,

6 ships captured,[1]

~1,500 killed,

1,450 wounded,

1,800 captured 4 ships lost,

~1,500 killed,

1,300 wounded

[hide] v t e


Anglo-Dutch War


Lowestoft Vågen Four Days' Battle St. James's Day Holmes's Bonfire Dungeness Medway Landguard

Caribbean & North America

Nevis Martinique Cayenne Zeelandia

The Four Days' Battle was a naval battle of the Second Anglo–Dutch War. Fought from 1 June to 4 June 1666 in the Julian or Old Style calendar then used in England (11 June to 14 June New Style) off the Flemish and English coast, it remains one of the longest naval engagements in history.


The Dutch inflicted significant damage on the English fleet. The English had gambled that the crews of the many new Dutch ships of the line would not have been fully trained yet but were deceived in their hopes: they lost 23 ships in total (17 sunk and 6 captured), with around 1,500 men killed including two Vice-Admirals, Sir Christopher Myngs and Sir William Berkeley, while about 2000 English were taken prisoner. Dutch losses were four ships destroyed by fire and over 1,550 men killed, including Lieut-Admiral Cornelis Evertsen, Vice-Admiral Abraham van der Hulst and Rear-Admiral Frederik Stachouwer.


Contents [hide]

1 Background

2 Battle

2.1 First Day

2.2 Second Day

2.3 Third Day

2.4 Fourth Day

3 Aftermath

4 References

5 Further reading

6 Film


In June 1665 the English had soundly defeated the Dutch in the Battle of Lowestoft, but failed to take advantage of it. The Dutch Spice Fleet, loaded with fabulous riches, managed to return home safely after the Battle of Vågen. The Dutch navy was enormously expanded through the largest building programme in its history. In August 1665 already the English fleet was again challenged, though no large battles resulted. In 1666, the English became anxious to destroy the Dutch navy completely before it could grow too strong and were desperate to end the activity of Dutch raiders as a collapse of English trade threatened.


On learning that the French fleet intended to join the Dutch at Dunkirk, the English decided to prevent this by splitting their fleet. Their main force would try to destroy the Dutch fleet first, while a squadron under Prince Rupert was sent to block the Strait of Dover against the French – who did not appear.


At the start of the battle the English fleet of 56 ships commanded by George Monck, 1st Duke of Albemarle who also commanded the Red Squadron, was outnumbered by the 84-strong Dutch fleet commanded by Lieutenant-Admiral Michiel de Ruyter. The battle ended with an English flight into a fog bank after both fleets had expended most of their ammunition.



First Day[edit]

Four Days' Battle.svg


Battle council on the De Zeven Provinciën by Willem van de Velde the Elder, 1666


HMS Swiftsure, Seven Oaks and Loyal George captured and flying Dutch colours, by Willem van de Velde the Younger

On the first day Monck, sailing in the van with George Ayscue's white squadron behind him and Thomas Teddiman's blue squadron forming the rear, surprised the Dutch fleet at anchor near Dunkirk. Despite disadvantageous weather conditions Monck decided to attack the Dutch rear under Lieutenant-Admiral Cornelis Tromp hoping to cripple it before the Dutch centre and van could intervene. After sending a message to Rupert to join him if possible, Monck aggressively attacked Tromp who fled over the Flemish shoals. Monck then wore to the northwest, to meet the Dutch centre (under De Ruyter) and van (commanded by Lieutenant-Admiral Cornelis Evertsen the Elder). Tromp again turned, but his ship Liefde collided with Groot Hollandia. Vice-Admiral Sir William Berkeley saw this and closed in with HMS Swiftsure. Immediately Callantsoog and Reiger came to the rescue of their commander, destroying the rigging of the English ship with chain shot; the Reiger then managed to board the Swiftsure. Berkeley challenged the Dutch sea soldiers, shouting: You dogs, you rogues, have you the heart, so press on board! but was fatally wounded in the throat by a musket ball, after which the Swiftsure was captured. In the powder room the constable was found with his throat cut; he had tried to blow up the ship but his own crew killed him first and drenched the powder, claiming afterwards the man had cut his own throat from pure frustration. The damaged HMS Seven Oaks (the former Sevenwolden) was captured by the Beschermer while HMS Loyal George tried to assist the Swiftsure but this only resulted in the capture of both ships. The embalmed body of Berkeley, after being displayed in The Hague, was later returned to England under a truce, accompanied by a letter of the States General praising the Admiral for his courage. HMS Rainbow, one of the two scouts who had first spotted the Dutch fleet, got isolated and fled to neutral Ostend, chased by twelve ships from Tromp's squadron while the other, the Kent, left the battlefield in search of Rupert's squadron.


Both fleets bombarded each other in a line of battle. The Hof van Zeeland and the Duivenvoorde were hit by fire shot and burnt. The Dutch didn't know of the existence of this type of ammunition, consisting of hollow brass balls filled with a flammable substance, so they were greatly surprised. Luckily for them the English had only a small supply because of the high cost of production.


Monck retreated for the night, but the ship of Rear-Admiral Harman, HMS Henry, drifted to the Dutch lines and was set aflame by two fireships. The parson asked Harman what could save them; when the latter sarcastically replied that the good parson could always jump overboard, to his horror the panicked clergyman at once followed his advice together with a third of the crew. All drowned. Harman made an end to the panic by threatening with a drawn sword to run through anyone showing the slightest inclination to abandon ship. Evertsen now closed in and inquired whether Harman would perhaps like to surrender; it came as no surprise to him the renowned fighter respectfully declined, yelling "I'm not up to it yet!". Despite repeated Dutch attacks and the loss of two masts, one in its fall crushing Harman's leg, the fire was put out and the Henry escaped, with its last shot shooting Evertsen in two.


Second Day[edit]

On the morning of the second day Monck decided to destroy the Dutch by a direct attack and sailed to them from the southwest; but De Ruyter in the De Zeven Provinciën crossed his line sailing to the southeast, heavily damaging the English fleet and gaining the weather gauge. HMS Anne, HMS Bristol and HMS Baltimore had to return to the Thames. After a calm used for repairs he turned to attack the English from the south with the red flag raised, the sign for an all-out attack, but just when he approached the enemy line he noticed to his dismay that part of the rear squadron under Tromp had got separated and now was positioned to the other side of the English line who had surrounded Tromp and were giving him his belly full. Often this is explained by assuming Tromp had not followed orders, but although he is indeed infamous for his usual insubordination, this time he simply had not seen the sign flags and the look-out of the centre mistakenly reported a confirmation sign. De Ruyter took in the red flag and broke through the enemy line with Vice Admiral Johan de Liefde, while the rest of the Dutch fleet under Aert van Nes headed south. He secured all of Tromp's ships except the burnt Liefde and the sinking Spieghel on which Vice-Admiral Abraham van der Hulst had just been killed by a musket shot in the breast and returned to join van Nes and the main force by again breaking through, noticing with satisfaction the second time the English ships quickly gave way.


Tromp, switching to his fourth ship already, then visited De Ruyter to thank him for the rescue. Both men were in a dark mood. Rear-Admiral Frederick Stachouwer had also been killed. The previous day the damaged Hollandia had been sent home together with the Gelderland, Delft, Reiger, Asperen and Beschermer to guard the three captured English vessels; now also the damaged Pacificatie, Vrijheid, Provincie Utrecht and Calantsoog had to return and only a handful of the rear squadron remained. Besides, the enemy had again gained the weather gauge, the dangers of which became immediately clear as George Ayscue, seeing the two Admirals together in a vulnerable position, tried to isolate them; with great difficulty they managed to return to their main force.


Both fleets now passed three times in opposite tack; on the second pass De Zeven Provinciën got damaged and De Ruyter retreated from the fight to repair his ship. Later some historians would accuse him of cowardice, but he had strict detailed written orders from the States General to act exactly so, to prevent a repeat of the events of the Battle of Lowestoft when the loss of the supreme commander had wrecked the Dutch command structure. Lieutenant-Admiral Aert van Nes led the third pass.


As the Dutch were in a leeward position their guns had a superior range and some English ships now took dreadful damage. HMS Loyal Subject turned for the home port and had to be written off on arrival. HMS Black Eagle (the former Groningen) raised the distress flag but simply disintegrated before any ships could assist.


Then, at three in the afternoon, a Dutch flotilla of twelve ships appeared on the horizon. Monck was shocked, not because the event was totally unexpected but because his worst fear seemed to come true. The English had learned from their excellent intelligence network that the Dutch planned to keep a strong fourth squadron behind as a tactical reserve. Surely these new ships must be the avantguard of a fresh force. Monck ordered to check for the number of operational English ships. When only 29 ships reported to have any fight left in them, and Rupert was still nowhere to be seen, he decided to withdraw. In fact De Ruyter had just before the battle been convinced by the other admirals to use only three squadrons. Monck had never noticed that the Rainbow had disappeared - indeed he couldn't understand where Berkeley had gone either. The dozen ships were those of Tromp's squadron giving chase and now rejoining the fight after the intended prey had escaped to Ostend. The entire English fleet tacked to the southwest at four. The straggling St Paul (the former Sint Paulus) was captured in the evening.


Third Day[edit]


Willem van de Velde: The surrender of the Prince Royal

On the third day the English continued to retreat to the west. The Dutch advanced on a broad front, Van Nes still in command, both to catch any more stragglers and to avoid the enormous 32-pounder stern cannons of the big ships. In the evening Rupert, having already on the first day been ordered to join Monck, at last appeared with twenty ships. He had been unable to reach Monck earlier because he had sailed as far as Wight in search of the imaginary French fleet. Monck ordered his fleet to set a straight course for the green squadron despite warnings that this would take them over the infamous Galloper Shoal at low tide. HMS Royal Charles and HMS Royal Katherine indeed were grounded but managed to get free in time, HMS Prince Royal got stuck however. Vice-Admiral George Ayscue, commander of the white squadron, pleaded with his men to stay calm until flood would lift the ship; but when two fire ships approached the crew panicked. A certain Lambeth struck the flag and Ayscue had to surrender to Tromp on the Gouda, the first and last time in history an English admiral of so high a rank would be captured at sea. De Ruyter had clear orders to destroy any prize; as the English fleet was still close he couldn't disobey in the matter of such a capital vessel and ordered the Prince burnt. Tromp didn't dare to make any objections because he had already sent home some prizes against orders; but later he would freely express his discontent, in 1681 still trying to get compensation from the admiralty of Amsterdam for this perceived wrong.


Van Nes now tried to prevent both English fleets from joining. But when they both sailed behind the back of his blocking squadron, De Ruyter took over operational command and ordered to wait. This way he regained the weather gauge.


Fourth Day[edit]

Early next morning five more ships (the Convertine, Sancta Maria, Centurion, Kent and Hampshire) and another fireship (Happy Entrance), joined the English fleet; as against these, six of the most damaged ships were sent home for repair. Thus enforced with 23 'fresh' ships and so numbering in between 60 and 65 men-of-war and 6 fireships, the English attacked in line on the fourth day with Sir Christopher Myngs now in charge of the van, Rupert of the center, and Monk of the rear squadron. But the Dutch, now to the southwest and reduced to 68 ships (and some 6 or 7 fireships), had the weather gauge and also attacked aggressively.


De Ruyter had tried to impress on his flag officers that the fight of that day would be decisive for the entire war. The English attack, vulnerable from a leeward position, faltered. De Ruyter had planned to disrupt the English line by breaking it in three places, cutting off parts of the English fleet before dealing with the rest. Vice admiral Johan de Liefde on the Ridderschap and Myngs on the Victory began a close quarters duel; two musket balls hit Myngs, fatally wounding him; he died on his return to London. The English regrouped trying to break free to the south by executing four passes in opposite tack, but Tromp and Van Nes surrounded them. Monck then wore to the north. Tromp's squadron was routed, the Landman burnt by a fireship. Van Nes was forced to withdraw. De Ruyter, more anxious than at any other moment in the battle and fearing the fight lost, raised the red flag and sailed past Rupert to attack Monck from behind. When Rupert tried to do the same to him, three shots in quick succession dismasted his HMS Royal James and the entire squadron of the green withdrew from the battle to the south, protecting and towing the flagship. Nothing now prevented De Ruyter from attacking Monck as the English main force was routed, many of the English ships were short on powder after three days of fighting. The Dutch boarded and captured four stragglers: Wassenaar captured HMS Clove Tree (the former VOC-ship Nagelboom), and the Frisian Rear-Admiral Hendrik Brunsvelt captured HMS Convertine, the entangled HMS Essex and HMS Black Bull; Black Bull later sank.


De Ruyter seeing the English fleet escape in a dense fog decided to break off the pursuit. His own fleet was heavily damaged too; his logbook only speaks of a fear for the English shoals. The deeply religious De Ruyter interpreted the sudden unseasonal fog bank as a sign from God, "that He merely wanted the enemy humbled for his pride but preserved from utter destruction".




Abraham Storck: "The Four Days' Battle" Greenwich, National Maritime Museum

The biggest sea battle of the Second Anglo-Dutch War and in the age of sail was a Dutch victory. However, the outcome is sometimes described as inconclusive, because both sides initially claimed victory. Immediately after the battle the English captains of Rupert's squadron, not having seen the final outcome, claimed De Ruyter had retreated first, then normally seen as an acknowledgement of the superiority of the enemy fleet. Though the Dutch fleet was eventually forced to end the pursuit, they had managed to cripple the English fleet, and lost but four smaller ships themselves, for the Spieghel refused to sink and was repaired. The contemporaneous Dutch view on this matter is expressed in a famous epigram by the poet Constantijn Huygens:


Two fight — and for their lives

The one that caused the row

is beaten — but survives

And boasts: "I've won it now!

As master of the field!"

And did he win? For sure!

Face-down he couldn't yield:

His victory was pure

The other took his hat,

his rapier and his gold

And left him lying flat,

The glorious field to hold

So master he has been:

Our Neighbours are the same:

If thus they like to win,

we wish them lasting fame

Around 1,800 English sailors were taken prisoner and transported to Holland. Many subsequently took service in the Dutch fleet against England. Those that refused to do so remained in Dutch prisons for the following two years.[2]


Two months later the recuperated English fleet challenged the Dutch fleet again, now much more successfully at North Foreland in the St. James's Day Battle. This proved to be a partial victory as the Dutch fleet wasn't destroyed. The enormous costs of repair after both battles depleted the English treasury, so the Four Days' Battle is usually seen as both a tactical and important strategic victory for the Dutch.


The Second Anglo-Dutch War (4 March 1665 – 31 July 1667) was a conflict fought between England and the United Provinces for control over the seas and trade routes, where England tried to end the Dutch domination of world trade during a period of intense European commercial rivalry. After initial English successes, the war ended in a Dutch victory. It was part of a series of four Anglo-Dutch Wars fought between the English (later British) and the Dutch in the 17th and 18th centuries.[4]

The War of the Quadruple Alliance (1718–1720) was a result of the ambitions of King Philip V of Spain, his wife, Elisabeth Farnese, and his chief minister Giulio Alberoni to retake territories in Italy and to claim the French throne. It saw the defeat of Spain by an alliance of Britain, France, Austria (then a state of the Holy Roman Empire), and the Dutch Republic. Savoy later joined the coalition as the fifth ally. Although fighting began as early as 1717, war was not formally declared until December 1718. It was brought to an end by the Treaty of The Hague in 1720.


The Franco-Dutch War (1672–78), often called simply the Dutch War (French: Guerre de Hollande; Dutch: Hollandse Oorlog), was a war fought by France, Sweden, Münster, Cologne and England against the Dutch Republic, which was later joined by the Austrian Habsburg lands, Brandenburg-Prussia and Spain to form a Quadruple Alliance.

China and the Big Three were referred as a "trusteeship of the powerful",[2] then were recognized as the Allied "Big Four" in Declaration by United Nations[3] and later the "Four Policemen" of the United Nations.
The Four-Power Treaty (四ヵ国条約 Yonkakoku Jōyaku?) was a treaty signed by the United States, Great Britain, France and Japan at the Washington Naval Conference on 13 December 1921. It was partly a follow-on to the Lansing-Ishii Treaty, signed between the U.S. and Japan.

By the Four-Power Treaty, all parties agreed to maintain the status quo in the Pacific, by respecting the Pacific holdings of the other countries signing the agreement, not seeking further territorial expansion, and mutual consultation with each other in the event of a dispute over territorial possessions. However, the main result of the Four-Power Treaty was the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance of 1902.

The Big Four or The Four Nations refer to the four top Allied powers[1] and their leaders who met at the Paris Peace Conference in January 1919. The Big Four is also known as the Council of Four. It was composed of Woodrow Wilson of the United States, David Lloyd George of Britain, Vittorio Emanuele Orlando of Italy, and Georges Clemenceau of France.[2]


The Central Powers consisted of the German Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the beginning of the war. The Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers later in 1914. In 1915, the Kingdom of Bulgaria joined the alliance. The name "Central Powers" is derived from the location of these countries; all four (including the other groups that supported them except for Finland and Lithuania) were located between the Russian Empire in the east and France and the United Kingdom in the west. Finland, Azerbaijan, and Lithuania joined them in 1918 before the war ended and after the Russian Empire collapsed.



Allied and Central Powers during World War I

Allied Powers

Allied colonies, dominions, territories or occupations

Central Powers

Central Powers' colonies or occupations

Neutral countries


Europe in 1914.

The Central Powers were composed of the following nations:[2]


Nation Entered WWI

Austria-Hungary 28 July 1914

German Empire 1 August 1914

Ottoman Empire 2 August 1914 (secret)

29 October 1914 (public)

Kingdom of Bulgaria 14 October 1915


On 23 October 1932, Mussolini declared support for a Four Power Directorate that included Britain, France, Germany, and Italy, to bring about an orderly treaty revision outside of what he considered the outmoded League of Nations.[12] The proposed Directorate was pragmatically designed to reduce French hegemony in continental Europe, in order to reduce tensions between the great powers in the short term to buy Italy relief from being pressured into a specific war alliance while at the same time allowing them to benefit from diplomatic deals on treaty revisions.[12]

After Hitler's rise to power, the Four Power Directorate proposal by Italy had been looked at with interest by Britain, but Hitler was not committed to it, resulting in Mussolini urging Hitler to consider the diplomatic advantages Germany would gain by breaking out of isolation by entering the Directorate and avoiding an immediate armed conflict.[16] The Four Power Directorate proposal stipulated that Germany would no longer be required to have limited arms and would be granted the right to re-armament under foreign supervision in stages.[17] Hitler completely rejected the idea of controlled rearmament under foreign supervision.[17]

There was substantial internal opposition within the German military to the Nazi regime's aggressive strategy of rearmament and foreign policy in the 1930s.[71] From 1936 to 1938, Germany's top four military leaders, Ludwig Beck, Werner von Blomberg, Werner von Fritsch, Walther von Reichenau, were all in opposition to the rearmament strategy and foreign policy.[72] They criticized the hurried nature of rearmament, the lack of planning, Germany's insufficient resources to carry out a war, the dangerous implications of Hitler's foreign policy, and the increasing subordination of the army to the Nazi Party's rules.[72] These four military leaders were outspoken and public in their opposition to these tendencies.[72] The Nazi regime responded with contempt to the four military leaders' opposition, and Nazi members brewed a false crass scandal that alleged that the two top army leaders von Blomberg and von Fritsch were homosexual lovers, in order to pressure them to resign.[72] Though started by lower-ranking Nazi members, Hitler took advantage of the scandal by forcing von Blomberg and von Fritsch to resign and replaced them with opportunists who were subservient to him.[72] Shortly afterwards Hitler announced on 4 February 1938 that he was taking personal command over Germany's military with the new High Command of the Armed Forces with the Führer as its head.[72]ád_Group

The Visegrad Group, also called the Visegrad Four, or V4 is a cultural and political alliance of four Central European states – Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia – for the purposes of furthering their European integration, as well as for advancing military, economic and energy cooperation with one another.[1] The group used to be occasionally referred to as the Visegrád Triangle, due to the fact that it was originally an alliance of three states – the term has not been valid since 1993, but does continue to appear sometimes.


The Group traces its origins to the summit meeting of leaders from Czechoslovakia, Hungary and Poland held in the Hungarian castle town of Visegrád[2] on 15 February 1991 (not to be confused with Vyšehrad, a castle in Prague, or with the town of Višegrad in Bosnia and Herzegovina). After the dissolution of Czechoslovakia in 1993, the Czech Republic and Slovakia became independent members of the group, thus increasing the total number of members to four. All four members of the Visegrád Group joined the European Union on 1 May 2004.


The Group's name in the languages of the four countries is Visegrádská čtyřka or Visegrádská skupina (Czech); Visegrádi Együttműködés or Visegrádi négyek (Hungarian); Grupa Wyszehradzka (Polish); and Vyšehradská skupina or Vyšehradská štvorka (Slovak).

The Pacific Alliance (Spanish: Alianza del Pacífico) is a Latin American trade bloc, with some features of further integration. It currently has four member states — Chile, Colombia, Mexico and Peru, which all border the Pacific Ocean.


The earliest known object with swastika-motifs is a bird made from the tusk of a mammoth from the paleolithic settlement of Mezine, Ukraine dated to 10,000 BCE.[15]

Among the earliest cultures utilizing swastika is the neolithic Vinča culture of South-East Europe (see Vinča symbols). More extensive use of the Swastika can be traced to Ancient India, during the Indus Valley Civilization.

The swastika is a repeating design, created by the edges of the reeds in a square basket-weave. Other theories attempt to establish a connection via cultural diffusion or an explanation along the lines of Carl Jung's collective unconscious.

The genesis of the swastika symbol is often treated in conjunction with cross symbols in general, such as the sun cross of pagan Bronze Age religion. Beyond its certain presence in the "proto-writing" symbol systems emerging in the Neolithic,[16] nothing certain is known about the symbol's origin. There are nevertheless a number of speculative hypotheses. One hypothesis is that the cross symbols and the swastika share a common origin in simply symbolizing the sun. Another hypothesis is that the 4 arms of the cross represent 4 aspects of nature - the sun, wind, water, soil. Some have said the 4 arms of cross are four seasons, where the division for 90-degree sections correspond to the solstices and equinoxes. The Hindus represent it as the Universe in our own spiral galaxy in the fore finger of Lord Vishnu. This carries most significance in establishing the creation of the Universe and the arms as 'kal' or time, a calendar that is seen to be more advanced than the lunar calendar where the seasons drift from calendar year to calendar year. The luni-solar solution for correcting season drift was to intercalate an extra month in certain years to restore the lunar cycle to the solar-season cycle. The Star of David is thought to originate as a symbol of that calendar system, where the two overlapping triangles are seen to form a partition of 12 sections around the perimeter with a 13th section in the middle, representing the 12 and sometimes 13 months to a year. As such, the Christian cross, Jewish hexagram star and the Muslim crescent moon are seen to have their origins in different views regarding which calendar system is preferred for marking holy days. Groups in higher latitudes experience the seasons more strongly, offering more advantage to the calendar represented by the swastika/cross. (Note relation to the sun cross.)


The Catiline Orations, or Catilinarian Orations, were speeches given in 63 BC by Marcus Tullius Cicero, the consul of Rome to expose to the Roman Senate the plot to overthrow the Roman government, purportedly led by Lucius Sergius Catilina (Catiline) and his allies.

Oratio in Catilinam Quarta in Senatu Habita[edit]


End of the 4th Catiliniarian Oration, in a manuscript written by Poggio Bracciolini. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 48,22, fol. 121r.

In his fourth and final argument, which took place in the Temple of Concordia, Cicero establishes a basis for other orators (primarily Cato the Younger) to argue for the execution of the conspirators. As consul, Cicero was formally not allowed to voice any opinion in the matter, but he circumvented the rule with subtle oratory. Although very little is known about the actual debate (except for Cicero's argument, which has probably been altered from its original), the Senate majority probably opposed the death sentence for various reasons, one of which was the nobility of the accused. For example, Julius Caesar argued that exile and disenfranchisement would be sufficient punishment for the conspirators, and one of the accused, Lentulus, was a praetor. However, after the combined efforts of Cicero and Cato, the vote shifted in favor of execution, with the sentence carried out shortly afterwards.


The Dido class was a class of sixteen (including five in the Bellona sub-class) light cruisers built for the Royal Navy.



Königsberg class (1905)[edit]

Königsberg in German East Africa

Main article: Königsberg-class cruiser (1905)

The Königsberg class continued the general trend of slightly larger and faster German light cruiser designs. Like the Bremens, one member of the new class—Stettin—was equipped with turbines for testing purposes. They retained the same armament and armor protection of the Bremen class.[15][25] All four ships were employed with the High Seas Fleet after they were commissioned, though Nürnberg was deployed to Asia in 1910,[26] and Königsberg was sent to East African waters in 1914.[27]


All four ships saw major action during the war. Königsberg, based in Dar es Salaam at the outbreak of war, began a short and unsuccessful commerce raiding career in the region,[28] though she did destroy the British cruiser HMS Pegasus.[29] She eventually became trapped in the Rufiji River and was later destroyed by a pair of British monitors in 1915.[30] The war was not over for the vessel, however, as her guns were removed and used extensively in Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck's East African Campaign.[31] Nürnberg participated in the battles at Coronel and the Falkland Islands, where she was sunk.[32] Stettin saw action at the Battle of Heligoland Bight in August 1914.[33] Both she and Stuttgart also participated in the Battle of Jutland.[34] Stettin was used as a training ship after 1917, and Stuttgart was converted into a seaplane tender in 1918. Both were seized by Britain as war prizes and scrapped in the early 1920s.[35]


Ship Armament Armor Displacement Propulsion Service

Laid down Commissioned Fate

Königsberg 10 × 10.5 cm SK L/40 guns[25] 80 mm[36] 3,814 t (3,754 long tons)[36] 2 shafts, 2 reciprocating engines, 13,200 ihp (9,843 kW), 23 kn (43 km/h; 26 mph)[36] 1905[25] 6 April 1907[25] Scuttled, 11 July 1915[25]

Nürnberg 3,902 t (3,840 long tons)[36] 1906[25] 10 April 1908[25] Sunk, Battle of the Falkland Islands, 8 December 1914[25]

Stuttgart 4,002 t (3,939 long tons)[36] 1905[25] 1 February 1908[25] Scrapped, 1920[25]

Stettin 3,822 t (3,762 long tons)[36] 2 shafts, 2 steam turbines, 13,500 shp (10,067 kW), 24 kn (44 km/h; 28 mph)[36] 1906[25] 29 October 1907[25] Scrapped, 1921–1923[25]


Kolberg class[edit]


Illustration of Augsburg before the war

Main article: Kolberg-class cruiser

The Kolberg class represented the first major improvement in combat power for German light cruisers, both qualitatively and quantitatively. They were armed with the longer-barrel 10.5 cm SK L/45 gun,[48] which had a higher muzzle velocity and thus greater range than the earlier L/40 weapon.[49] In addition, they carried an extra pair of guns, which strengthened their broadside.[48] This was on a displacement of over a thousand tons greater than the preceding Dresden class. All four ships were also powered by turbines, which granted them a significant increase in speed over the earlier vessels.[50]


All four ships saw major action during the war. Augsburg fired the first shots of the war against Russia on 2 August.[51] Mainz and Cöln were sunk at the Battle of Heligoland Bight in the first month of the war.[52] Kolberg saw action at the Battle of Dogger Bank in January 1915 and scored the first hits of the engagement.[53] Both Kolberg and Augsburg participated in the Battle of the Gulf of Riga in August 1915,[54] and Operation Albion in October 1917.[55] After the end of the war, Kolberg was seized by France as a war prize and commissioned into the French Navy as Colmar;[56] she served for only a few years and was scrapped in 1929.[57] Augsburg was surrendered to Japan, which broke her up for scrap in 1922.[56]


Ship Armament Armor Displacement Propulsion Service

Laid down Commissioned Fate

Kolberg 12 × 10.5 cm SK L/45 guns[58] 40 mm (1.6 in)[58] 5,418 t (5,332 long tons)[58] 4 shafts, 4 steam turbines, 19,000 ihp (14,168 kW), 25.5 kn (47.2 km/h; 29.3 mph)[58] 1908[48] 21 June 1910[48] Scrapped, 1929[57]

Mainz 4,889 t (4,812 long tons)[58] 2 shafts, 2 steam turbines, 20,200 shp (15,063 kW), 26 kn (48 km/h; 30 mph) 1907[48] 1 October 1909[48] Sunk, Battle of Heligoland Bight, 28 August 1914[48]

Cöln 4,864 t (4,787 long tons)[58] 4 shafts, 4 steam turbines, 19,000 ihp (14,168 kW), 25.5 kn (47.2 km/h; 29.3 mph)[58] 1908[48] 16 June 1911[48] Sunk, Battle of Heligoland Bight, 28 August 1914[48]

Augsburg 4,882 t (4,805 long tons)[58] 1908[48] 1 October 1910[48] Scrapped, 1922[48]


Magdeburg class[edit]


Magdeburg in 1912

Main article: Magdeburg-class cruiser

The Magdeburg class introduced several significant improvements over earlier designs, including a more effective bow shape that improved seakeeping and a cut-down quarterdeck that allowed for more efficient handling of the ships' mines. Perhaps most importantly, a waterline armored belt was added to improve the defensive capabilities of the new ships. They also had much more powerful turbines, and as a result, a higher top speed. All following light cruisers adopted these innovations.[48]


Magdeburg's career was cut short on 26 August 1914, when she ran aground while operating against Russian forces in the Baltic. The Russians seized code books from the wreck and gave copies to the British; this was to have a major effect on the outcome of the naval war in the North Sea.[59] Breslau was assigned to the Mediterranean Division along with the battlecruiser Goeben;[60] at the outbreak of war, they steamed to Constantinople where they were sold to the Ottoman Navy. They were instrumental in bringing the Ottoman Empire into the war on the side of Germany.[61] Breslau, renamed Midilli, was eventually sunk by British mines during the Battle of Imbros in January 1918.[62]


The other two ships, Strassburg and Stralsund, remained with the High Seas Fleet for the duration of their careers. They saw action at the major engagements, including Heligoland Bight and Dogger Bank, though neither ship was present at Jutland.[63][64] Both ships survived the war; Strassburg was surrendered to Italy and renamed Taranto. She served through World War II and was sunk by Allied bombers in 1944.[65] Stralsund became the French Mulhouse, though she served for only a few years and was withdrawn from service by 1925 and scrapped a decade later.[57]


Ship Armament Armor Displacement Propulsion Service

Laid down Commissioned Fate

Magdeburg 12 × 10.5 cm SK L/45 guns[56] 60 mm (2.4 in)[56] 4,570 t (4,498 long tons)[56] 3 shafts, 3 steam turbines, 25,000 ihp (18,642 kW), 27.5 kn (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph)[66] 1910[25] 20 August 1912[25] Grounded, 26 August 1914[25]

Breslau 5,281 t (5,198 long tons)[56] 4 shafts, 2 steam turbines, 25,000 ihp (18,642 kW), 27.5 kn (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph)[66] 1910[25] 10 May 1912[25] Sunk, Battle of Imbros, 20 January 1918[25]

Strassburg 5,281 t (5,198 long tons)[56] 2 shafts, 2 steam turbines, 25,000 ihp (18,642 kW), 27.5 kn (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph)[66] 1910[25] 9 October 1912[25] Sunk, 23 September 1944[65]

Stralsund 5,587 t (5,499 long tons)[56] 3 shafts, 3 steam turbines, 25,000 ihp (18,642 kW), 27.5 kn (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph)[66] 1910[25] 10 December 1912[25] Scrapped, 1935[57]


Königsberg class (1915)[edit]


Karlsruhe in Scapa Flow in 1919

Main article: Königsberg-class cruiser (1915)

The second Königsberg class was authorized in 1913 and laid down starting in 1914. They were named for cruisers that had been sunk in the early months of the war. They were an incremental improvement over the Wiesbaden class, being some five hundred tons heavier. They carried the standard eight 15 cm guns, the forward wing mounts were placed a deck higher to improve their firing arc. They were otherwise identical to the preceding light cruiser designs.[89]


Königsberg and Nürnberg both saw action at the Second Battle of Heligoland Bight, where the former was slightly damaged.[99] All four members of the class participated in Operation Albion in the Baltic.[100] The cruisers, save Emden, were also assigned to the planned final fleet action in October 1918,[101] but mutiny among the German capital ships forced the cancellation of the plan.[102] Karlsruhe, Emden, and Nürnberg were interned with the fleet in Scapa Flow, while Königsberg remained in Germany. The three cruisers were scuttled, though only Karlsruhe actually sank. Emden and Nürnberg were beached by British sailors and were seized as war prizes by France and Britain, respectively. Emden was scrapped in 1926 and Nürnberg was sunk as a target in 1922. Königsberg, meanwhile, was surrendered to France in 1920 and renamed Metz;[103] she was ultimately scrapped in 1936.[57]


Ship Armament Armor Displacement Propulsion Service

Laid down Commissioned Fate

Königsberg 8 × 15 cm SK L/45 guns[89] 60 mm[103] 7,125 t (7,012 long tons)[103] 2 shafts, 2 steam turbines, 31,000 shp (23,000 kW), 28 kn (52 km/h; 32 mph)[103] 1914[103] 12 August 1916[103] Scrapped, 1936[103]

Karlsruhe 1915[103] 15 November 1916[103] Scuttled, 21 June 1919[103]

Emden 1914[103] 16 December 1916[103] Scrapped, 1926[103]

Nürnberg 1915[103] 15 February 1917[103] Sunk as a target ship, 1922[103]

16 squares qmr

Breslau's hull was divided into sixteen watertight compartments. All four vessels had a double bottom that extended for forty-five percent of the length of the hull.[1]

The ships' turbines were powered by sixteen coal-fired Marine-type water-tube boilers, although they were later altered to use fuel oil that was sprayed on the coal to increase its burn rate

The Magdeburg class of light cruisers was a group of four ships built for the Imperial German Navy. The class comprised SMS Magdeburg, the lead ship, Breslau, Strassburg, and Stralsund. All four ships were laid down in 1910 and were completed by the end of 1912. They were armed with a main battery of twelve 10.5 cm guns, though over the course of their careers, Breslau, Strassburg, and Stralsund were rearmed with more powerful 15 cm guns. They displaced 4,570 t (4,500 long tons) at full load and were rated at a top speed of 27.5 knots (50.9 km/h; 31.6 mph), though all four vessels exceeded that figure on trials.önigsberg-class_cruiser_(1905)

The Königsberg class was a group of four light cruisers built for the German Imperial Navy. The class comprised four vessels: SMS Königsberg, the lead ship, SMS Nürnberg, SMS Stuttgart, and SMS Stettin. The ships were an improvement on the preceding Bremen class, being slightly larger and faster, and mounting the same armament of ten 10.5 cm SK L/40 guns and two 45 cm (18 in) torpedo tubes.


The four ships saw extensive service during World War I. Königsberg conducted commerce warfare in the Indian Ocean before being trapped in the Rufiji River and sunk by British warships. Her guns nevertheless continued to see action as converted artillery pieces for the German Army in German East Africa. Nürnberg was part of the German East Asia Squadron, and participated in the Battles of Coronel and Falkland Islands. At the former, she sank the British armored cruiser HMS Monmouth, and at the latter, she was in turn sunk by the cruiser HMS Kent.


The Great White Fleet was the popular nickname for the powerful United States Navy battle fleet that completed a journey around the globe from December 16, 1907, to February 22, 1909, by order of United States President Theodore Roosevelt.[1][2]


It consisted of 16 battleships divided into two squadrons, along with various escorts.[1][2] Roosevelt sought to demonstrate growing American martial power and blue-water navy capability. Hoping to enforce treaties and protect overseas holdings, the United States Congress appropriated funds to build American sea power. Beginning with just 90 small ships, over one-third of them wooden, the navy quickly grew to include new modern steel fighting vessels. The hulls of these ships were painted a stark white, giving the armada the nickname "Great White Fleet".[3]


The galleon was powered entirely by wind, using sails carried on three or four masts, with a lateen sail continuing to be used on the last (usually third and fourth) masts


Model of English galleon sporting four mast types: (left to right)

• a 'shorter & second' Bonaventure mizzen: the fourth mast on larger sixteenth century galleons, typically lateen-rigged and shorter than the main mizzen,

• a short Mizzen-mast (the mast immediately aft of the main-mast; the third mast, also typically shorter than the fore-mast), but on Galleons were Lanteen Rigged.

• Main-mast: typically, the tallest mast (and on vessels with more than three masts the most centrally located).

• Fore-mast: typically, the second tallest mast (and on vessels with more than three masts the second most tall) located first after the ships bow.

The Glasgow School was a circle of influential artists and designers that began to coalesce in Glasgow, Scotland in the 1870s, and flourished from the 1890s to around 1910. Representative groups included The Four (also known as the Spook School), the Glasgow Girls[1] and the Glasgow Boys.[2] They were responsible for creating the distinctive Glasgow Style.

Glasgow experienced an economic boom at the end of the 19th century, resulting in an increase in distinctive contributions to the Art Nouveau movement, particularly in the fields of architecture, interior design and painting.


Contents [hide]

1 The Four (Spook School)

2 The Glasgow Girls

3 The Glasgow Boys

3.1 Collections and exhibitions

4 See also

5 References

6 External links

The Four (Spook School)[edit]


Glasgow School of Art

Among the most prominent definers of the Glasgow School collective were The Four. They were the painter and glass artist Margaret MacDonald, acclaimed architect Charles Rennie Mackintosh (MacDonald's husband), MacDonald's sister Frances and Herbert MacNair. Together, The Four defined the Glasgow Style's fusion of influences including the Celtic Revival, the Arts and Crafts Movement, and Japonisme, which found favour throughout the modern art world of continental Europe. The Four, otherwise known as the Spook School, ultimately made a significant impact on the definition of Art Nouveau. The name, Spook School, or Spooky or Ghoul School, was originally a "derisive epithet" given to their work which "distorted and conventionalized human... form."[3]


The Republic of Croatia is administratively organised into twenty counties, and is also traditionally divided into four historical and cultural regions: Croatia proper, Dalmatia, Slavonia, and Istria.[1] These are further divided into other, smaller regions.


Census Bureau-designated regions and divisions[edit]


U.S. Census Bureau Regions and Divisions.

The United States Census Bureau defines four statistical regions, with nine divisions.[1] The Census Bureau region definition is "widely used … for data collection and analysis,"[2] and is the most commonly used classification system.[3][4][5]


Regional divisions used by the United States Census Bureau:[6]


Region 1: Northeast

Division 1: New England (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont)

Division 2: Mid-Atlantic (New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania)

Region 2: Midwest (Prior to June 1984, the Midwest Region was designated as the North Central Region.)[6]

Division 3: East North Central (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin)

Division 4: West North Central (Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota)

Region 3: South

Division 5: South Atlantic (Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia, District of Columbia, and West Virginia)

Division 6: East South Central (Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Tennessee)

Division 7: West South Central (Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas)

Region 4: West

Division 8: Mountain (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming)

Division 9: Pacific (Alaska, California, Hawaii, Oregon, and Washington)


The four regions of Papua New Guinea are its broadest scale administrative divisions. While the twenty two province-level divisions are the primary administrative divisions of the country, the regions are quite significant in daily life, as they are often the basis for organisation of government services (such as police), corporate operations, sporting competitions, and even the machinations of politics.



For instance, there has been much discussion over the years of how many Prime Ministers have come from each region, and whether a particular region is due to provide the next one. Ministers and departmental heads are often appointed with an eye to maintaining an overall balance between the regions.



People generally identify quite strongly with their region, and inter-region rivalries can be intense. The four regions are:


Highlands Region: Chimbu (Simbu), Eastern Highlands, Enga, Hela, Jiwaka, Southern Highlands, and Western Highlands.

Islands Region: Bougainville (North Solomons), East New Britain, Manus, New Ireland, and West New Britain.

Momase Region: East Sepik, Madang, Morobe, and Sandaun (West Sepik).

Papua Region: Central, Gulf, Milne Bay, Oro (Northern), Western (Fly River), and the National Capital District (Port Moresby).

Momase Region is one of four regions of Papua New Guinea. Its largest city is Lae, the second city of the nation.



The Region is administratively divided into four provinces:


East Sepik



Sandaun (West Sepik)

By residents, the state is generally divided into North Texas, East Texas, Central Texas, South Texas, West Texas (and sometimes the Panhandle), but according to the Texas Almanac, Texas has four major physical regions: Gulf Coastal Plains, Interior Lowlands, Great Plains, and Basin and Range Province


Scotland was traditionally divided into four regions: The Highlands, The Lowlands, The Isle of Islay, and Campbeltown


Seats in the Senate are equally divided among four regions: Maritimes, Quebec, Ontario, and the West, with special status for Newfoundland and Labrador, and Northern Canada ("the North").


Cultural regions of Latvia are several areas within Latvia formally recognised as distinct from the rest of the country. While some of these regions are seen purely as culturally distinct, others have historically been parts of different countries and have been used to divide the country for administrative and other purposes. The Constitution of Latvia recognises four distinct regions: Kurzeme, Zemgale, Latgale and Vidzeme.[1]



Courland (Latvian: Kurzeme, Livonian: Kurāmō), the westernmost part of Latvia, consisting of the cities of Liepāja and Ventspils and the municipalities of Aizpute, Alsunga, Brocēni, Dundaga, Durbe, Grobiņa, Kandava, Kuldīga, Nīca, Pāvilosta, Priekule, Roja, Rucava, Saldus, Skrunda, Talsi, Vaiņode and Ventspils.

Semigallia (Latvian: Zemgale) is the central part of Latvia. Zemgale is bounded by Kurzeme in the west, the Gulf of Riga, the Daugava river and Vidzeme in the north, Selonia in the east and the Lithuanian border in the south. It consists of the city of Jelgava and the municipalities of Auce, Baldone, Bauska, Dobele, Engure, Iecava, Jaunpils, Jelgava, Ozolnieki, Rundāle, Tērvete, Tukums and Vecumnieki. Traditional Semigallia also includes the northern part of Šiauliai County in Lithuania.

Selonia (Latvian: Sēlija, Augšzeme) is often considered a part of Semigallia. Selonia comprises the eastern part of the 1939 province of Semigallia, roughly corresponding to parts of the former Aizkraukle, Daugavpils and Jēkabpils districts south of Daugava river. Traditional Selonia also includes a portion of north east Lithuania. Named after the Selonians.

Vidzeme (Livonian: Vidūmō), meaning "Middle land", is also known as Livland, though it comprises only a small part of traditional Livland. Present Vidzeme is the Latvian part of Swedish Livonia and City of Riga. It roughly corresponds to the former Alūksne, Cēsis, Gulbene, Limbaži, Madona, Valka, Valmiera districts and parts of Aizkraukle, Ogre and Riga districts north of Daugava river.

Latgallia (Latvian: Latgale, Latgalian: Latgola), the part of Livonia still in hands of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth after the Treaty of Altmark in 1629, so called Inflanty Voivodeship. It roughly corresponds to Balvi, Krāslava, Ludza, Preiļi, Rēzekne districts and parts of Daugavpils and Jēkabpils districts north of Daugava river.

Catalonia is divided administratively into four provinces, the governing body of which is the Provincial Deputation (Catalan: Diputació Provincial, Spanish: Diputación Provincial). The four provinces and their populations are:[65]

Province of Barcelona: 5,507,813 population.

Province of Girona: 752,026 population.

Province of Lleida: 439,253 population.

Province of Tarragona: 805,789 population.


The Vanguard class is a class of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) in service with the Royal Navy. The class was introduced in 1994 as part of the Trident nuclear programme, and includes four boats: Vanguard, Victorious, Vigilant and Vengeance. They were built between 1986 and 1999 at Barrow-in-Furness by Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering, which is now owned by BAE Systems.[3] All four boats are based at HM Naval Base Clyde (HMS Neptune), 40 km (25 mi) west of Glasgow, Scotland.


Since the decommissioning of the Royal Air Force WE.177 free-fall thermonuclear weapons in 1998, the four Vanguard submarines are the sole platforms for the United Kingdom's nuclear weapons.[3][4] Each submarine is armed with up to 16 UGM-133 Trident II missiles. The class is scheduled to be replaced starting 2028,[5] though its replacement would not enter service until early 2030s.[6]


1992 saw a debate over whether the fourth vessel, Vengeance, should be cancelled, however the Ministry of Defence ultimately ordered it in July 1992.[13] Vengeance was commissioned in 1999.

The Resolution class was a class of four nuclear ballistic missile submarines (SSBN) built for the Royal Navy as part of the UK Polaris programme. Each submarine was armed with up to 16 UGM-27 Polaris A-3 nuclear missiles.

The class comprised Resolution, Repulse, Renown and Revenge. They were built by Vickers Armstrong in Barrow-in-Furness and Cammell Laird in Birkenhead between 1964 and 1968. All four boats were based at HM Naval Base Clyde (HMS Neptune), 40 km (25 mi) west of Glasgow, Scotland.


Two letters attributed to Vespucci were published during his lifetime. Mundus Novus (New World) was a Latin translation of a lost Italian letter sent from Lisbon to Lorenzo di Pierfrancesco de' Medici. It describes a voyage to South America in 1501–1502. Mundus Novus was published in late 1502 or early 1503 and soon reprinted and distributed in numerous European countries.[6] Lettera di Amerigo Vespucci delle isole nuovamente trovate in quattro suoi viaggi (Letter of Amerigo Vespucci concerning the isles newly discovered on his four voyages), known as Lettera al Soderini or just Lettera, was a letter in Italian addressed to Piero Soderini. Printed in 1504 or 1505, it claimed to be an account of four voyages to the Americas made by Vespucci between 1497 and 1504. A Latin translation was published by the German Martin Waldseemüller in 1507 in Cosmographiae Introductio, a book on cosmography and geography, as Quattuor Americi Vespucij navigationes (Four Voyages of Amerigo Vespucci).[6]


On March 22, 1508, King Ferdinand made Vespucci chief navigator of Spain at a huge salary[7] and commissioned him to found a school of navigation, in order to standardize and modernize navigation techniques used by Iberian sea captains then exploring the world. Vespucci even developed a rudimentary, but fairly accurate method of determining longitude (which only more accurate chronometers would later improve upon).



The first known depiction of cannibalism in the New World. Engraving by Johann Froschauer for an edition of Amerigo Vespucci's Mundus Novus, published in Augsburg in 1505

In the 18th century, three unpublished familiar letters from Vespucci to Lorenzo de' Medici were rediscovered. One describes a voyage made in 1499–1500 which corresponds with the second of the "four voyages". Another was written from Cape Verde in 1501 in the early part of the third of the four voyages, before crossing the Atlantic. The third letter was sent from Lisbon after the completion of that voyage.[6]


The term "NEW WORLD" was coined by Florentine explorer Amerigo Vespucci. The Americas were also referred to as the "FOURTH part of the world".[1]

Benjamin Morrell (July 5, 1795 – 1838 or 1839?) was an American sea captain, explorer and trader who made a number of voyages, mainly to the Atlantic, the Southern Ocean and the Pacific Islands. In a ghost-written memoir, A Narrative of Four Voyages, which describes his sea-going life between 1823 and 1832, Morrell included numerous claims of discovery and achievement, many of which have been disputed by geographers and historians, and in some cases have been proved false. He ended his career as a fugitive, having wrecked his ship and misappropriated parts of the salvaged cargo.


The book, first printed in the city of Saint-Dié-des-Vosges, includes in its second part, a translation to Latin of the Quattuor Americi Vespuccij navigationes (Four Voyages of Americo Vespucci), which is apparently a letter written by Amerigo Vespucci, although some historians consider it to have been a forgery written by its supposed recipient in Italy.[citation needed]


In the seventh chapter of the Cosmographiæ Introduction, written by Matthias Ringmann, it is explained why the name America was proposed for the then New World, or the Fourth Part of the World:


Atque in sexto climate Antarcticum versus et pars extrema Africæ nuper reperta. . . . et quarta orbis pars (quam quia Americus invenit Amerigen, quasi Americi terram, sive American nuncupare licet) sitae sunt




And in the sixth climate toward the Antarctic, the recently discovered farther part of Africa . . . and a fourth part of the world (which may be called Amerige, as if meaning "Americus' land", or America) are situated


Robert Bylot was a 17th-century explorer who made four voyages to the Arctic.[1] He was uneducated and from a working-class background, but was able to rise to rank of Master in the British Royal Navy.[2]


A History of the Life and Voyages of Christopher Columbus is a biographical account of Christopher Columbus, one of the first examples of American historical fiction and one of several attempts at national myth-making undertaken by American writers and poets of the 19th century,[4] written by Washington Irving in 1828 and published in four volumes in Britain and in three volumes in the United States.[1][2][3] The work was the most popular biographical account of Columbus in the English-speaking world until the publication of Samuel Eliot Morison's biography Admiral of the Ocean Sea in 1942.[3]



In 1787, Franklin served as a delegate to the Philadelphia Convention. He held an honorary position and seldom engaged in debate. He is the only Founding Father who is a signatory of all four of the major documents of the founding of the United States: the Declaration of Independence, the Treaty of Alliance with France, the Treaty of Paris and the United States Constitution.


The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin is the traditional name for the unfinished record of his own life written by Benjamin Franklin from 1771 to 1790; however, Franklin himself appears to have called the work his Memoirs. Although it had a tortuous publication history after Franklin's death, this work has become one of the most famous and influential examples of an autobiography ever written.


Franklin's account of his life is divided into four parts, reflecting the different periods at which he wrote them. There are actual breaks in the narrative between the first three parts, but Part Three's narrative continues into Part Four without an authorial break (only an editorial one).


Adriaen (Aerjan) Block (c. 1567 – buried April 27, 1627) was a Dutch private trader and navigator who is best known for exploring the coastal and river valley areas between present-day New Jersey and Massachusetts during four voyages from 1611 to 1614, following the 1609 expedition by Henry Hudson. He is noted for possibly having named Block Island, Rhode Island, and establishing early trade with the Native Americans, and for the 1614 map of his last voyage on which many features of the mid-Atlantic region appear for the first time, and on which the term New Netherland is first applied to the region. He is credited with being the first European to enter Long Island Sound and the Connecticut River and to determine that Manhattan and Long Island are islands.[1]

First voyage

The route followed in Vasco da Gama's first voyage (1497–1499)

On 8 July 1497 Vasco da Gama led a fleet of four ships with a crew of 170 men from Lisbon. The distance traveled in the journey around Africa to India and back was greater than around the equator.[11][12] The navigators included Portugal's most experienced, Pero de Alenquer, Pedro Escobar, João de Coimbra, and Afonso Gonçalves. It is not known for certain how many people were in each ship's crew but approximately 55 returned, and two ships were lost. Two of the vessels were as naus or newly built for the voyage, possibly a caravel and a supply boat.[11]


The four ships were:


São Gabriel, commanded by Vasco da Gama; a carrack of 178 tons, length 27 m, width 8.5 m, draft 2.3 m, sails of 372 m²

São Rafael, commanded by his brother Paulo da Gama; similar dimensions to the São Gabriel

The caravel Berrio, slightly smaller than the former two (later renamed São Miguel), commanded by Nicolau Coelho

A storage ship of unknown name, commanded by Gonçalo Nunes, later lost near the Bay of São Brás, along the east coast of Africa[5]

Laurence Bergreen (born February 4, 1950) is an American historian and biographer. His most recent book is Columbus: The Four Voyages, a New York Times Best Seller.[when?]

The First Four Ships refers to the four sailing vessels chartered by the Canterbury Association which left Plymouth, England, in September 1850 to transport the first English settlers to new homes in Canterbury, New Zealand.
The First Four Ships refers to the four sailing vessels chartered by the Canterbury Association which left Plymouth, England, in September 1850 to transport the first English settlers to new homes in Canterbury, New Zealand.

Disney Cruise Line currently operates four ships: Disney Magic, Disney Wonder, Disney Dream, and Disney Fantasy


In 1853 Commodore Matthew Perry led the Perry Expedition, a squadron of four ships which sailed to Japan to establish normal relations with Japan. Perry's two technologically advanced steam-powered ships and calm, firm diplomacy convinced Japan to end three centuries of isolation and sign Treaty of Kanagawa with the U.S. in 1854. Nominally a treaty of friendship, the agreement soon paved the way for the opening of Japan and normal trade relations with the United States and Europe.[58]

The Amphitrite class monitors were a class of four U.S. Navy monitors ordered in the aftermath of the Virginius affair with Spain in 1873.[3] A fifth ship originally of the same design, Puritan, was later fitted with extra armor and designated as a unique class.

Torn apart by four ships[edit]

According to Olfert Dapper, a 17th-century Dutchman who meticulously collected reports from faraway countries from seamen and other travelers, a fairly frequent maritime death penalty among the corsairs on the Barbary coast was to affix the hands and feet to chains on four different ships. When the ships then sailed off in different directions, the chains grew taut, and the man in between was torn apart after a while.[20]


4 World Trade Center (also known by its street address, 150 Greenwich Street) is a skyscraper that is part of the new World Trade Center complex in New York City. It opened to tenants and the public on November 13, 2013.[8] It is located on the southeast corner of the 16-acre (6.5 ha) World Trade Center site, where the original nine-story 4 World Trade Center stood. Pritzker Prize-winning architect Fumihiko Maki was awarded the contract to design the 978-foot-tall (298 m) building.[9] As of 2013 it is the second tallest skyscraper at the rebuilt World Trade Center, behind One World Trade Center, although 2 World Trade Center and 3 World Trade Center are planned to surpass the building's height upon completion.[10] The total floor space of the building includes 1.8 million square feet (167,000 square meters) of office and retail space.[11] The building's groundbreaking took place in January 2008.


The September 11 attacks (also referred to as 9/11)[nb 1] were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda on the United States on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The attacks killed 2,996 people, injured over 6,000 others, and caused at least $10 billion in property and infrastructure damage[2][3] and $3 trillion in total costs.[4]


Four passenger airliners operated by two major U.S. passenger air carriers (United Airlines and American Airlines)—all of which departed from airports in the northeastern United States bound for California—were hijacked by 19 al-Qaeda terrorists. Two of the planes, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, were crashed into the North and South towers, respectively, of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Within an hour and 42 minutes, both 110-story towers collapsed, with debris and the resulting fires causing partial or complete collapse of all other buildings in the World Trade Center complex, including the 47-story 7 World Trade Center tower, as well as significant damage to ten other large surrounding structures. A third plane, American Airlines Flight 77, was crashed into the Pentagon (the headquarters of the United States Department of Defense) in Arlington County, Virginia, leading to a partial collapse of the building's western side. The fourth plane, United Airlines Flight 93, initially was steered toward Washington, D.C., but crashed into a field in Stonycreek Township near Shanksville, Pennsylvania, after its passengers tried to overcome the hijackers. It was the deadliest incident for firefighters and law enforcement officers[5] in the history of the United States, with 343 and 72 killed respectively.


According to the 9/11 Commission Report, both black boxes from Flight 77 and both black boxes from Flight 93 were recovered. However, the CVR from Flight 77 was said to be too damaged to yield any data. On April 18, 2002, the FBI allowed the families of victims from Flight 93 to listen to the voice recordings.[159] In April 2006, a transcript of the CVR was released as part of the Zacarias Moussaoui trial.[160]


Two men, Michael Bellone and Nicholas DeMasi, who worked extensively in the wreckage of the World Trade Center, said in the book Behind-The-Scenes: Ground Zero that they helped federal agents find three of the four "black boxes" from the jetliners:[161]


At one point, I was assigned to take Federal Agents around the site to search for the black boxes from the planes. We were getting ready to go out. My ATV was parked at the top of the stairs at the Brooks Brothers entrance area. We loaded up about a million dollars worth of equipment and strapped it into the ATV. There were a total of four black boxes. We found three.[162]

Depending on the dialect, Latvian has a two-, three- or four-tone system

The Year of the Four Emperors was a year in the history of the Roman Empire, AD 69, in which four emperors ruled in succession: Galba, Otho, Vitellius, and Vespasian.


Archeologically, Sparta itself begins to show signs of settlement only around 1000 BC, some 200 years after the collapse of Mycenaean civilization.[8] Of the four villages that made up the Spartan Polis, Forrest suggests that the two closest to the Acropolis were the originals, and the two more far flung settlements were of later foundation. The dual kingship may originate in the fusion of the first two villages.[9] One of the effects of the Mycenaean collapse had been a sharp drop in population. Following that, there was a significant recovery, and this growth in population is likely to have been more marked in Sparta, as it was situated in the most fertile part of the plain.[10]


J. F. Lazenby suggests, that the dual monarchy may date from this period as a result of a fusion of the four villages of Sparta which had, up until then, formed two factions of the villages of Pitana-Mesoa against the villages of Limnai-Konoura. According to this view, the Kings, who tradition says ruled before this time, were either totally mythical or at best factional chieftains.[15] Lazenby further hypothesizes that other reforms such as the introduction of the Ephors were later innovations that were attributed to Lycurgus.[16]

THEY USED QUADRANT NUMBER FOUR 128- 32 AND 576 WHICH IS 16 TIMES 36---- 4 times 18 is 72

The changes that occurred between the Persian and the Peloponnesian Wars are not documented, but according to Thucydides, at Mantinea in 418 BC there were 7 lochoi present, each subdivided into four pentekostyes of 128 men, which were further subdivided into four enōmotiai of 32 men, giving a total of 3,584 men for the main Spartan army.[18] By the end of the Peloponnesian War, the structure had evolved further, both to address the shortages in manpower and to create a more flexible system that allowed the Spartans to send smaller detachments on campaign or to garrisons outside their homeland.[19] According to Xenophon, the basic Spartan unit remained the enōmotia, with 36 men in three files of twelve under an enōmotarches.[20] Two enōmotiai formed a pentēkostys of 72 men under a pentēkontēr, and two pentēkostyai were grouped into a lochos of 144 men under a lochagos. Four lochoi formed a mora of 576 men under a polemarchos, the largest single tactical unit of the Spartan army.[21] Six morai composed the Spartan army on campaign, to which were added the Skiritai and the contingents of allied states.


Fourth invasion of the Peloponnesus (362 BC)[edit]

Main article: Battle of Mantinea (362 BC)

In the face of this increasing opposition to Theban dominance, Epaminondas launched his final expedition into the Peloponnese in 362 BC. The immediate goal of the expedition was to subdue Mantinea, which had been opposing Theban influence in the region. Epaminondas brought an army drawn from Boeotia, Thessaly and Euboea. He was joined by Tegea, which was the center of local opposition to Mantinea, Argos, Messenia, and some of the Arcadians. Mantinea, on the other hand, had requested assistance from Sparta, Athens, Achaea and the rest of Arcadia, so that almost all of Greece was represented on one side or the other.[71]


The painting depicts as its subject matter two groups of older children, four girls and five boys, with the girls apparently taunting or beckoning the boys. The girls are positioned to the left of the painting, the boys to the right, while in-between the two groups in the background appear a third group watching them; their appearance striking as they are fully dressed while the youth in the foreground stand naked or topless. Behind the onlookers, identified as Lycurgus and the mothers of the children,[2] lies the city of Sparta, dominated by Mount Taygetus, from which the bodies of the society's "unfit" children were supposedly thrown into a ravine, to die from trauma or exposure.


Ancient Greece, in its early period, was a loose collection of independent city states called poleis. Many of these poleis were oligarchies.[17] The most prominent Greek oligarchy, and the state with which democratic Athens is most often and most fruitfully compared, was Sparta. Yet Sparta, in its rejection of private wealth as a primary social differentiator, was a peculiar kind of oligarchy[18] and some scholars note its resemblance to democracy.[19][20][21] In Spartan government, the political power was divided between four bodies: two Spartan Kings (diarchy), gerousia (Council of Gerontes (Elders), including the two kings), the ephors (representatives of the citizens who oversaw the Kings) and the apella (assembly of Spartans).


On the eastern seaboard of what became the United States, the four distinct British regions were: New England, the Middle Colonies, the Chesapeake Bay Colonies (Upper South), and the Lower South. Some historians add a fifth region of the Frontier which was never separately organized.[1] By the time that European settlers arrived around 1600–1650, a significant percentage of the Native Americans living in the eastern United States had been ravaged by new diseases, possibly introduced to them decades before by explorers and sailors.[3]


Castillo de San Marcos was twice besieged: first by English colonial forces led by Carolina Colony Governor James Moore in 1702, and then by Georgia colonial Governor James Oglethorpe in 1740. Possession of the fort has changed six times, all peaceful, amongst four different governments: the Spanish Empire, the Kingdom of Great Britain, the Confederate States of America and the United States of America (Spain and the United States having possession two times each).


The fort has four bastions named San Pedro, San Agustín, San Carlos and San Pablo with a ravelin protecting the sally port. On the two landward sides a large glacis was constructed which would force any attackers to advance upward toward the fort's cannon and allow the cannon shot to proceed downslope for greater efficiency in hitting multiple targets. Immediately surrounding the fort was a moat which could be flooded to a depth of a foot during high-tide with seawater from Matanzas Bay prior to an attack via the use of floodgates built into the seawall.


K–16 is a movement in the United States to bring together the various levels of education for younger students, namely between the K–12 and the post-secondary education systems, and create aligned policy and practice in examination practices, graduation requirements, admissions policies and other areas. The movement is so-named because of an insinuated continuum between the traditionally-distinct K–12 system and the two-to-four-year basic post-secondary education system that is in place in most colleges and universities (hence "13th grade", "14th grade", "15th grade" and "16th grade"). Community Colleges with Associate Degrees are equal to grades 12 to 14. Universities offer grades 14 to 16 with a Bachelor Degree. Master University degrees would then be grades 16 to 18. In Bangladesh, universities award degrees up to the 16th grade.

The Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QSD) was an informal strategic dialogue between the United States, Japan, Australia and India that was maintained by talks between member countries. The dialogue was initiated in 2007 by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe of Japan, with the support of Vice President Dick Cheney of the US, Prime Minister John Howard of Australia and Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of India. The dialogue was paralleled by joint military exercises of an unprecedented scale, titled Exercise Malabar. The diplomatic and military arrangement was widely viewed as a response to increased Chinese economic and military power, and the Chinese government responded to the Quadrilateral dialogue by issuing formal diplomatic protests to its members.

The Quadrilateral Treaty was a pact between the Argentine provinces of Buenos Aires, Santa Fe, Entre Ríos and Corrientes, signed on 25 January 1822. The treaty was intended to be an offensive-defensive pact between the signatories, in front of an attack by Luso-Brazilian invasion from the Banda Oriental (present-day Uruguay), which was seen as very probable. It also wanted to establish peace after the defeat of the caudillo from Entre Ríos, Francisco Ramírez, who in 1821 had invaded Santa Fe and Córdoba Provinces, without success.

The pact established:


Peace and union of the four provinces, and an alliance before a possible foreign invasion of Spaniards, Portuguese or Brazilians.

Free navigation rights in the rivers of the signatory provinces.

The retirement of the representatives from the small congress of Córdoba.

Any of the signatory provinces could convene a congress un congreso when it felt the opportunity and need arose.

The alliance of Buenos Aires with the provinces of the Argentine littoral, insured through government subsidies, gave an opportunity to Buenos Aires of neutralizing the Governor of Córdoba Juan Bautista Bustos, who awaited the country's reorganization in a National Constitution since 1825.


The Pleistocene is the first epoch of the Quaternary Period or sixth epoch of the Cenozoic Era.[2] In the ICS timescale, the Pleistocene is divided into four stages or ages, the Gelasian, Calabrian, Ionian and Tarantian. All of these stages were defined in southern Europe. In addition to this international subdivision, various regional subdivisions are often used.


The glacials in the following tables show historical usages, are a simplification of a much more complex cycle of variation in climate and terrain, and are generally no longer used. These names have been abandoned in favor of numeric data because many of the correlations were found to be either inexact or incorrect and more than four major glacials have been recognized since the historical terminology was established.[13][14][15]


Historical names of the "four major" glacials in four regions.

Region Glacial 1 Glacial 2 Glacial 3 Glacial 4

Alps Günz Mindel Riss Würm

North Europe Eburonian Elsterian Saalian Weichselian

British Isles Beestonian Anglian Wolstonian Devensian

Midwest U.S. Nebraskan Kansan Illinoian Wisconsinan


The term Tertiary was first used by Giovanni Arduino during the mid-18th century. He classified geologic time into primitive (or primary), secondary, and tertiary periods based on observations of geology in northern Italy.[5] Later a fourth period, the Quaternary, was applied.


In the early development of the study of geology, the periods were thought by scriptural geologists to correspond to the Biblical narrative, the rocks of the Tertiary being thought to be associated with the Great Flood.[6]


In 1828, Charles Lyell incorporated a Tertiary Period into his own, far more detailed system of classification. He subdivided the Tertiary Period into four epochs according to the percentage of fossil mollusks resembling modern species found in those strata. He used Greek names: Eocene, Miocene, Older Pliocene and Newer Pliocene.


First Stalin Note

2.1 West German reaction

2.2 East German reaction

2.3 The Western powers' response

3 Further Stalin notes

3.1 Second note

3.2 Third note

3.3 Fourth note



Fourth note[edit]

On August 23, 1952, the Soviet Union sent the last note. This note repeated their main positions and accusations. Additionally, although the Western Powers had conceded in allowing the occupying powers oversee the elections, the Soviet Union suddenly refused an international election commission entirely. Instead, both of the German states should be responsible for creating a commission with equal representation. However, this had already been refused by the West in 1951.


For this reason in their answer of September 23, 1952, the West limited themselves to repeating their previous views and to renewing the suggestion of forming a non-partisan commission of the four powers.


If after the first note of the West, the lack of success of the exchange of notes had already been internally determined, in the East as well as in the West, this view was also publicly expressed by the (rather polemic) contents of the last four notes. The signing of the two treaties with the West on May 26 and May 27, 1952, emphasized this even more.



KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 27 — A federal lawmaker today questioned whether the cross-shaped Kuala Lumpur International Airport must also be torn down over religious sensitivities, following controversy raised over air wells that resembled the Christian icon at a housing development in Langkawi.


DAP MP Lim Lip Eng was responding to questions on the Kedah government’s move to intervene over complaints against the developer over the offending air wells.


“I have read on Facebook that people say KLIA also is shaped like a cross. Will we be demolishing it?” he said during a press conference at his Segambut office here today.


He then suggested that the individuals who raised the issue were suffering from “eye problems”, after aerial angles of the offending homes showed that the air wells were square rather than cross-shaped.


The photo of the houses in Langkawi recently surfaced on social media, with viewers’ attention drawn to the juxtaposition of the air wells and fire breaks that combined to resemble a cross of the roofs of the buildings.


Yesterday, Kedah state executive councillor in charge of housing Datuk Tajul Urus Mat Zain told Malay Mail Online that the housing developer had been ordered to repaint the fire break walls to match the roof tiles to avoid further confusion.


Tajul Urus said that despite the problem not being a big one, and that the appearance of the cross was not the intention of the developer, the state had to step in because the images had gone viral on social media.


- See more at:

The Fourth Industrial Revolution, or 4IR, is the fourth major industrial era since the initial Industrial Revolution of the 18th century. The Fourth Industrial Revolution can be described as a range of new technologies that are fusing the physical, digital and biological worlds, and impacting all disciplines, economies and industries. Klaus Schwab has compared it to the Second Machine Age in terms of the effects of digitization and AI on the economy, but added a broader role for advances biological technologies.[1]

Industrial revolutions
1.1 First Industrial Revolution
1.2 Second Industrial Revolution
1.3 Third Industrial Revolution
1.4 Fourth Industrial Revolution

Some have compared Industry 4.0 with the Fourth Industrial Revolution. However, the latter refers to a systemic transformation that includes impact on civil society, governance structures, and human identity in addition to solely economic/manufacturing ramifications. The first industrial revolution mobilised the mechanization of production using water and steam power; the second industrial revolution then introduced mass production with the help of electric power, followed by the digital revolution and the use of electronics and IT to further automate production.[6] The term "fourth industrial revolution" has been applied to significant technological developments several times over the last 75 years, and is up for academic debate.[7][8][9] Industry 4.0, on the other hand, focuses on manufacturing specifically in the current context, and thus is separate from the fourth industrial revolution in terms of scope.

Construction work is a dangerous land-based job. Some construction site jobs include: building houses, roads, workplaces and repair and maintain infrastructures. This work includes many hazardous task and conditions such as working with height, excavation, noise, dust, power tools and equipment. The most common fatalities are caused by the fatal four: falls, struck by object, electrocutions and caught-in/between.[1][2] Construction work has been increasing in developing and undeveloped countries over the past few years. With an increase in this type of work occupational fatalities have increased. Occupational fatalities are individuals that pass way while on the job or performing work related tasks.[3] Within the field of construction it is important to have safe construction sites.

The leading safety hazards on construction sites include: falls, caught between objects, electrocutions, and struck by objects.[18] All four of those hazards have caused injuries and deaths throughout the world of construction sites. Failures in hazard identification are often due to limited or improper training and supervision of the construction site workers.[19] Examples of areas were there are limited training includes: tasks in design for safety, safety inspection, and monitoring safety.[19] Failure in any of these areas can result in an increased risk in exposing workers to harm in the construction environment.


The Anatomy of Revolution is a book by Crane Brinton outlining the "uniformities" of four major political revolutions: the English Revolution of the 1640s, the American, the French, and 1917 Russian Revolution. Brinton notes how the revolutions followed a life-cycle from the Old Order to a moderate regime to a radical regime, to Thermidorian reaction. The book has been called "classic,[1] "famous" and a "watershed in the study of revolution," [2] and has been influential enough to have inspired advice given to US President Jimmy Carter by his National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski during the Iranian Revolution. [3]

According to Brinton, while "we must not expect our revolutions to be identical" (p. 226), three of the four (the English, French and Russian) began "in hope and moderation", reached "a crisis in a reign of terror," and ended "in something like dictatorship — Cromwell, Bonaparte, Stalin". The exception is the American Revolution, which "does not quite follow this pattern". (p. 24)

Financial problems play an important role, as "three of our four revolutions started among people who objected to certain taxes, who organized to protest them .... even in Russia in 1917 the financial problems were real and important." (p. 78)

The Fourth Estate (or fourth power) is a societal or political force or institution whose influence is not consistently or officially recognized. "Fourth Estate" most commonly refers to the news media, especially print journalism or "the press". The term makes implicit reference to the earlier division of the three estates of the realm: the clergy, the nobility, and the commoners. The equivalent term "fourth power", used in many European languages (see: fr:Quatrième pouvoir), refers to the separation of powers into a legislature, an executive, and a judiciary.

THE FOURTH ESTATE IS DIFFERENT…/Glossary_of_the_French_Revolution
The estates of the realm in ancien régime France were:

First Estate (Premièr État, le clergé ) – The clergy, both high (generally siding with the nobility, and it often was recruited amongst its younger sons) and low.
Second Estate (Second État, la noblesse ) – The nobility. Technically, but not usually of much relevance, the Second Estate also included the Royal Family.
Third Estate (Tiers État) – Everyone not included in the First or Second Estate. At times this term refers specifically to the bourgeoisie, the middle class, but the Third Estate also included the sans-culottes, the labouring class. Also included in the Third Estate were lawyers, merchants, and government officials.
See also: Fourth Estate, a term with two relevant meanings: on the one hand, the generally unrepresented poor, nominally part of the Third Estate; on the other, the press, as a fourth powerful entity in addition to the three estates of the realm.

2 hrs · 


Scholars of revolutions, like Jack Goldstone, differentiate four current 'generations' of scholarly research dealing with revolutions.[15] The scholars of the first generation such as Gustave Le Bon, Charles A. Ellwood or Pitirim Sorokin, were mainly descriptive in their approach, and their explanations of the phenomena of revolutions was usually related to social psychology, such as Le Bon's crowd psychology theory.[11]

John Foran, "Theories of Revolution Revisited: Toward a Fourth Generation", Sociological Theory 11, 1993:1-20
Jump up ^ Clifton B. Kroeber, Theory and History of Revolution, Journal of World History 7.1, 1996: 21-40
Jump up ^ Goodwin, p.9.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h Jack Goldstone, "Towards a Fourth Generation of Revolutionary Theory", Annual Review of Political Science 4, 2001:139-87
Jump up ^ Jeff Goodwin, No Other Way Out: States and Revolutionary Movements, 1945-1991. Cambridge University Press, 2001, p.5
Jump up ^

Many such early studies of revolutions tended to concentrate on four classic cases—famous and uncontroversial examples that fit virtually all definitions of revolutions, such as the Glorious Revolution (1688), the French Revolution (1789–1799), the Russian Revolution of 1917 and the Chinese Revolution (also known as the Chinese Civil War) (1927–1949).[15] In his The Anatomy of Revolution, however, the Harvard historian Crane Brinton focused on the English Civil War, the American Revolution, the French Revolution, and the Russian Revolution.[17]
A character based on Louis plays an important role in The Age of Unreason, a series of four alternate history novels written by American science fiction and fantasy author Gregory Keyes.



The sixteen overshot wheels at Barbegal, considered the biggest ancient mill complex. Their capacity was sufficient to feed the whole nearby city of Arles[1]


The sixteen overshot wheels at Barbega are considered the biggest ancient mill complex. Their capacity fed about 1/4 of the nearby city of Arles.


The sixteen overshot wheels at Barbega


It was, maybe due to the above described violent nature (of acquiring visibility), that the fourfold way of thinking was a relative late development in the Roman cultural period and took mainly place after the conquest of Greece (133 BC) and the subsequent robbing of its cultural and philosophical heritage. If the Roman cultural period is dated between 750 BC and 500 AD, this visibility-point (of the tetradic way of thinking) is about halfway in time, i.e. in the middle of the Third Quadrant.


However, it must be remembered that the first Greek influences on the Roman civilization already started around 480 BC. Therefore, it can be concluded, that the acquaintance with certain aspects of Greek thoughts (including the tetrad form) must have taken place from this earlier date onwards.


Attention is drawn here with regards to the anticipation of tetradic thinking, to the use of the term ‘Roma quadrata’. This description, as part of the history of the city of Rome, pointed to a four-fold division of Rome (Urbs quattuor regionum) and will be briefly described in its historical context.


In the pre-Etruscan times, there were two primary settlements of the embryonic ‘Rome’, one on the Palatine Hill and the other on the Quirinal, which were closely bonded. The Sabinic tribe extended towards the Viminal hill and the Latin tribe expanded to the Velia (east of the Forum), on the Subura and in the Etruscan times on the Janiculum, towards the right bank of the Tiber.


In Etruscan times the Quirinal became the central point of the emerging city, but after the autonomy of Rome in the fifth century BC, the eastern and southern suburbs were incorporated in the city, making up three different parts. After the invasion of the Gaul (in 390 BC), it became clear that the protection of the acropolis was insufficient. At the beginning of the fourth century and the establishment of the republic, the Palatine Hill was included in the still-expanding city, which now consisted of four parts (VON GERKAN, 1959). The ‘Urbs quattuor regionum’ became a historical entity (fig. 99). The characterization of Rome as a ‘city-on-seven-hills’ might have some topographic references, but was never used in an administrative sense. The ‘Septimontium‘, described by Varro (116 – 27 BC) in his ‘De Lingua Latina’ (6, 24), was the name for a celebration, which took place in Rome, but it cannot be shown that the ‘Septimontium‘ had any connection with the division of the town in any part of its development.




Fig. 99 – A map of the Rome in Servianian times, when the city was divided in four districts, the ‘Urbs quattuor regionum’. The main topographic features and the boundaries of the areas with the same name are indicated: I: Suburana; II: Esquilina; III. Collina; IV: Palatina. According to Von GERKAN (1959).


The actual character of the four-parted Rome and its precise boundaries are a matter of scientific debate. MÜLLER (1961) gives four types of division of the regions in Rome (fig. 100). After its initial two-part development the unity of Rome was moulded from four districts or sectors of which MÜLLER (1961) said: ‘Vier Sektoren: Der Gedanke an ‘Roma quadrata’ drängt sich auf, was richtigerweise wohl mit ‘viergeteiltes Rom’ anstelle von ‘quadratisches Rom’ übersetzt werden muss’.




Fig. 100 – The four regions in Rome, according to Kiepert (1837), Richter (1901), Hülsen (1901) and von Gerkan (1953).


Since the establishment of Rome on the Palatine Hill, there never was a square form in its (natural) design. The Greek biographer Plutarch (46? – 120? AD;) described – in his ‘Romulus‘ (11) – the genesis of Rome as a circle-shaped plan with four gates. Representations of the city of Rome in a square form were based on fantasy.


The Ravenna-born Fabio Calvo planned a pictorial reconstruction of ancient Rome together with the painter Raphael. The death of the latter (in 1520) prevented this plan. Calvo described in his book ‘Antiquae Urbis Romae cum regionibus simulacrum‘ (Rome, 1527) a whole series of (fantasy) drawings in which the city of Rome is respectively round, square (fig. 101) and with eighth- and sixteenth corners (BENEVOLO, 1980). The different geometrical forms relate, in Calvo’s view, to the subsequent periods of government in the history of the city. They were derived from a Renaissance mind, who tried to establish some preconceptual ideas about geometry and division thinking in the features of the past.


Fig. 101 – Fantasy representation of ‘Quadrata Roma’ at the time of the founding of the city by Romulus (eight century B.C.). Part of a series of different geometrical shapes of Rome in the ‘Antiquae Urbis Romae cum regionibus simulacrum’ by Fabio Calvo, published in Rome in 1527. In: BENEVOLO (1980).


EHRHARDT (1945, p. 182) pointed, in a most instructive article, to the cosmological implications of a city building plan: ‘The ideal city is built in a square, or at least its roads meet in right angles, in order to express the fact that the political system, likewise, derives its rules from the spiritual form of the cosmos’.


The square shape is associated with the Greek term ‘dikaiosyne‘, pointing to a divine justice, which in turn, is closely connected with the number four. The ‘dikaiosyne‘ is the first of the four cardinal virtues and generates the bond between the divine macro- and the human micro-cosmos (not unlike the quadralectic relation between First and Third Quadrant). There is a ‘quadrata iustitia’ and a healthy body is called a ‘quadratum corpus’. A good character is a ‘signum quadratum‘ (from the Greek ‘kallokagathos’).


In the Greek sculptural art these geometric implications were elaborated by Polykleitos in his ‘Canon’. This title means literally a ‘ruler’. It indicated a scheme of proportions, which had to be the base of every piece of art to comply with to the pursuit of beauty (to kallon). Beauty, in Polykleitos’ view, is the conscious perception of relations (s’ JACOB, 1987). The ideal proportions of the human body consist of four parts: from the feet to the knee, from the knee to the crutch, from the crutch to the armpits and from the armpits to the crown. A person built in this way is a ‘tetragonos aner’.


The Romans adopted these Greek notions in a practical sense in their town planning. They followed the fifth-century BC Greek architect Hippodamus, son of Euryphon of Miletus, who built cities according to the ‘Hippodamian principles’, i.e. as a grid. The cities of Olythus, southeast of Thessaloniki, and Priene, in the valley of the Meander, were outstanding examples of the Greek grid towns. The Roman town builders copied the grid system, but they started with a cross-shape, which was ‘filled up’ to a grid (fig. 102).


The same in dense formation; each file 1m. apart (16 ranks).


These soldiers fought in close-ranked rectangular or square formations, of which the smallest tactical unit was the 256 men strong syntagma or speira. This formation typically fought eight or sixteen men deep and in a frontage of thirty-two or sixteen men accordingly. Each file of 16 men, a lochos, was commanded by a lochagos who was in the front rank. Junior officers, one at the rear and one in the centre, were in place to steady the ranks and maintain the cohesion of the formation, similar to modern-day NCOs. The commander of the syntagma theoretically fought at the head of the extreme far-right file. According to Aelian, a syntagma was accompanied by five additional individuals to the rear: a herald (to act as a messenger), a trumpeter (to sound out commands), an ensign (to hold the unit's standard), an additional officer (called ouragos), and a servant. This array of both audial and visual communication methods helped to make sure that even in the dust and din of battle orders could still be received and given. Six syntagmata formed a taxis of 1,500 men commanded by a strategos, six taxeis formed a phalanx under a phalangiarch.[44]

16 squares qmr

16-line message format is the standard military radiogram format (in NATO allied nations) for the manner in which a paper message form is transcribed through voice, Morse code, or TTY transmission formats. Each format line contains pre-defined content.



A fourth formation, considered a specialty of the French Army, was l'ordre mixte, a mix of line and column used for pressing an attack against enemy infantry. It had some of the "weight" of the column formation for pushing through an opposing line, but some companies in line formation to offset some of the column formation's vulnerability to fire.[3] However this was rarely used, as it was thought of as an unnecessary compromise, as line formation or square formation often had better results.

four subfamilies Celtic

The distinction of Celtic into these four sub-families most likely occurred about 900 BC according to Gray and Atkinson[56][57] but, because of estimation uncertainty, it could be any time between 1200 and 800 BC. However, they only considered Gaelic and Brythonic. The controversial paper by Forster and Toth[58] included Gaulish and put the break-up much earlier at 3200 BC ± 1500 years. They support the Insular Celtic hypothesis. The early Celts were commonly associated with the archaeological Urnfield culture, the Hallstatt culture, and the La Tène culture, though the earlier assumption of association between language and culture is now considered to be less strong.[59][60]


The Chronicle recounts the following incidents:[3]


At the request of Saint James who appears to him in dream, Charlemagne embarks on four wars to wrest Spain from the Saracens. In the first war, he takes his army to Santiago de Compostela and conquers all of Spain. A second war is brought on to battle the African king Agolant who, briefly, reconquers the country. (During this war, several miracles occur, including flowers sprouting from the lances of the knights.) A third war has Agolant invading south-western France and besieging the city of Agen, but he is forced to retreat to Pamplona. In the fourth war, Charlemagne's great army besieges Pamplona. After the death of Agolant, Charlemagne's troops pursue the Saracens through Spain.


A person who is located in an open area outside human settlement, measures 2000 cubits outside the "four cubits" surrounding him which are considered his personal space.[3] If a person is located in an isolated house which is not part of a larger settlement, the techum is measured from outside the courtyard of his house. If he is within a settlement, the entire area of the settlement is considered his personal space.[4][5]

Croatia consists of four historical regions

Croatia (meaning Croatia proper, the Croatia region)




Quadroon balls[edit]- QUAD IS FOURçage

The term quadroon is a fractional one referring to a person with one white and one mulatto parent, some courts would have considered one-fourth Black. The quadroon balls were social events designed to encourage mixed-race women to form liaisons with wealthy white men through a system of concubinage known as plaçage. (Guillory 68-9). Monique Guillory writes about quadroon balls that took place in New Orleans, the city most strongly associated with these events. She approaches the balls in context of the history of a building the structure of which is now the Bourbon Orleans Hotel. Inside is the Orleans Ballroom, a legendary, if not entirely factual, location for the earliest quadroon balls.


In 1805, a man named Albert Tessier began renting a dance hall where he threw twice weekly dances for free quadroon women and white men only (80). These dances were elegant and elaborate, designed to appeal to wealthy white men. Although race mixing was prohibited by New Orleans law, it was common for white gentleman to attend the balls, sometimes stealing away from white balls to mingle with the city's quadroon female population. The principal desire of quadroon women attending these balls was to become placée as the mistress of a wealthy gentleman, usually a young white Creole or a visiting European (81). These arrangements were a common occurrence, Guillory suggests, because the highly educated, socially refined quadroons were prohibited from marrying white men and were unlikely to find Black men of their own status.


A quadroon's mother usually negotiated with an admirer the compensation that would be received for having the woman as his mistress. Typical terms included some financial payment to the parent, financial and/or housing arrangements for the quadroon herself, and, many times, paternal recognition of any children the union produced. Guillory points out that some of these matches were as enduring and exclusive as marriages. A beloved quadroon mistress had the power to destabilize white marriages and families, something she was much resented for.


According to Guillory, the system of plaçage had a basis in the economics of mixed race. The plaçage of black women with white lovers, Guillory writes, could take place only because of the socially determined value of their light skin, the same light skin that commanded a higher price on the slave block, where light skinned girls fetched much higher prices than did prime field hands (82). Guillory posits the quadroon balls as the best among severely limited options for these near-white women, a way for them to control their sexuality and decide the price of their own bodies. She contends, "The most a mulatto mother and a quadroon daughter could hope to attain in the rigid confines of the black/white world was some semblance of economic independence and social distinction from the slaves and other blacks" (83). She notes that many participants in the balls were successful in actual businesses when they could no longer rely on an income from the plaçage system. She speculates they developed business acumen from the process of marketing their own bodies.


In recent years, at least three historians (viz. Kenneth Aslakson, Emily Clark, and Carol Schlueter) have challenged the historicity of Quadroon balls and have referred to some of the features of the institution of Plaçage as "a myth".[11][12]


Terms for Partial-blacks


Mulatto technically referred to someone half-black and half-white [50% black]. Often it referred unspecifically to someone with any black and white ancestry.

Quadroon [25% black] usually referred to someone with three white grandparents and one black grandparent. A quadroon has a biracial (mulatto) parent (black and white) and one white parent.

Octoroon [12.5% black] referred to someone with one great-grandparent who is of full black-African descent and seven great-grandparents who are white.

Quintroon [6.25% black] is a rarely used term that refers to a person who is of one-sixteenth Black ancestry. A quintroon has one parent who is an octoroon and one white parent. Hexadecaroon, also meaning one-sixteenth Black, is a less common term for the same ethnic mix. Mestee was also used for a person with less than one-eighth Black ancestry.


Origin of Terms


The term “mulatto” is often derived from the Portuguese and Spanish word mulato, which itself is derived from mula, or mule (from Old Spanish; from Latin mūlus). This draws an analogy to the mule, which is the hybrid offspring of a horse and a donkey.

Some dictionaries and scholarly works trace the word's origins to the Arabic term muwallad which also has somewhat contested origins.

“Quadroon” is borrowed from Spanish cuarterón (ultimately from Latin quartus, “fourth”). “Octoroon” is modeled on this, from Latin octo, “eight” (or equivalently Greek ὀκτώ októ). Quintus is Latin “fifth”, but “quintroon” does not follow the same logic as the preceding: it refers to the number of generations-removed from the pure-black ancestor, rather than the racial proportion. The alternative “hexadecaroon”, from Greek hexadeka, “sixteen”, expresses this proportion directly.


Cicero was elected Consul for the year 63 BC, defeating patrician candidate Lucius Sergius Catilina (Catiline). During his year in office he thwarted a conspiracy to overthrow the Roman Republic, led by Catiline. Cicero procured a Senatus Consultum de Re Publica Defendenda (a declaration of martial law, also called the Senatus Consultum Ultimum), and he drove Catiline from the city with four vehement speeches which came to be known as the Catiline Orations


Hortensius or On Philosophy is a lost dialogue written by Marcus Tullius Cicero in the year 45 BC. The work had followed the conventional form of a protreptic,[1] and taught that genuine human happiness is to be found by using and embracing philosophy.[2] The dialogue is named after Cicero's friend, the speaker and politician Quintus Hortensius Hortalus. The two other discussants are Quintus Lutatius Catulus and Lucius Licinius Lucullus. This meeting takes place in Lucullus' villa. While the dialogue was extremely popular in the ancient world,[3] the dialogue only survived into the sixth century AD. Today, it is extant in the fragments preserved by Martianus Capella, Servius, Nonius Marcellus, and Augustine of Hippo. Out of the four, Augustine preserved the largest portion of text, although the work is still considered lost.


Thus, each of the four speakers defends a different branch of study: Catulus defends poetry, Lucullus argues in favor of history, the eponymous Hortensius defends rhetoric, and Cicero himself praises the virtues of philosophy.[9]


What little is known of the Hortensius was preserved by Martianus Capella, Servius, Nonius Marcellus, and Augustine of Hippo. Of the four, Nonius Marcellus and Augustine preserve the most, although the lines preserved by Nonius Marcellus have been called "extremely brief and very difficult to place in a context".[9] The lines preserved by Augustine, on the other hand, are of great quantity and "of considerable interest", according to John Hammond Taylor.[9] It is known that the Hortensius survived into the Christian era as a schoolbook.[23] At the age of 17, through the generosity of his fellow citizen Romanianus,[24] Augustine went to Carthage to continue his education in rhetoric. At the age of 19,[25] he read the Hortensius there. He later wrote in Confessions that it left a lasting impression on him and moved him to embrace philosophy.[13][26][27]


Karl Potrek of Königsberg, leader of a Volkssturm company present when the German Army took back the village, testified in a 1953 report:


In the farmyard stood a cart, to which more naked women were nailed through their hands in a cruciform position ... Near a large inn, the 'Roter Krug', stood a barn and to each of its two doors a naked woman was nailed through the hands, in a crucified posture....In the dwellings we found a total of 72 women, including children, and one old man, 74, all dead. ... Some babies had their heads bashed in.


Kingdom of Madagascar[edit]

Main article: Merina Kingdom


King Andrianampoinimerina (1787–1810)

Upon its emergence in the early 17th century, the highland kingdom of Imerina was initially a minor power relative to the larger coastal kingdoms[68] and grew even weaker in the early 18th century when King Andriamasinavalona divided it among his four sons.


The Four Seasons

Spengler equated the four cycles in human civilizations to the seasons: Spring, Summer, Autumn, and WINTER

In Spengler’s model, each culture goes through a formative Culture Stage, followed by a decadent period known as Civilization. The culture period makes up the “organic” Spring and Summer of a civilization, and is when the civilization is inspired by its own art and religion. Autumn and Winter make up the Civilization phase, in which the society becomes inorganic and is based only on the organization created during the Culture phase. The creativity seen in the Culture period slowly fades away. The civilization stiffens, and becomes overpopulated, metropolitan, and uninspired. For the purpose of this article, we will focus mainly on Western Civilization and its expression of the four seasons


Spengler’s civilization model – as organic as the four seasons



“The Decline of the West”


Interested in the origin of civilized life, Spengler decided humanity is only about 100,000 years old. In the past humanity has had four ages, three before the historical High Cultures began. Most of human history was in the paleolithic, the remainder in the neolithic, precivilization—after the last ice age ended about 10,000 BC—and lastly the time of the High Cultures, which began in the Near East about 3,000 BC.


Spengler included the Ottoman Empire as one of four sample civilizations. Like Han China, the Roman Empire, and the Empire phase of Egyptian history, it lasted roughly 500 years and went through many of the same crises which these other empires also experienced. It was effectively a universal state when it conquered the Middle East. The question is whether it can really be said to represent the final form of a single, mature culture, or whether Islam will carry it further.


“Springtime” is the first of the four metaphoric seasons that cultures evolved through. It emphasized architectural novelty and ornamentation, with architecture initially dominant. Winter brings us to civilization and the decline and fall of the Empire. When Civilization sets in, true ornament and, with it, great art as a whole are extinguished: taste or fashion replaces architectural style, methods of painting and mannerisms of writing, with capricious choice.


Some writers maintain that in Caesar's armies the use of the quincunx and its gaps seems to have declined, and his legions generally deployed in three unbroken lines as shown above, with four cohorts in front, and three apiece in the echeloned order. Relief was provided by the second and third lines 'filtering' forward to relieve their comrades in small groups, while the exhausted and wounded eased back from the front.[28] The Romans still remained flexible however, using gaps and deploying four or sometimes two lines based on the tactical situation.[29


Hastati (singular: Hastatus) were a class of infantry employed in the armies of the early Roman Republic who originally fought as spearmen, and later as swordsmen.


Hastati were armed with short spears, or hastae, up to 1.8 metres (6 ft) long, from which the soldiers acquired their name.[6] They fought in a quincunx formation, usually carrying scuta, large rectangular shields, and wearing bronze helmets, often with a number of feathers fixed onto the top to increase stature. They wore light armour, the most common form being small breastplates, called "heart protectors".[5]


Principes (Singular: princeps) were spearmen, and later swordsmen, in the armies of the early Roman Republic.


"the Romans ... habitually enroll four legions each year, each consisting of about four thousand foot and two hundred horse; and when any unusual necessity arises, they raise the number of foot to five thousand and of the horse to three hundred. Of allies, the number in each legion is the same as that of the citizens, but of the horse three times as great"

Polybius, The Histories, 1:268–70


Within the top levels of both army and navy, structural changes occurred as a result of both positive military reform and organic structural evolution. These changes can be divided into four distinct phases.


Phase I

The army was derived from obligatory annual military service levied on the citizenry, as part of their duty to the state. During this period, the Roman army would wage seasonal campaigns against largely local adversaries.

Phase II

As the extent of the territories falling under Roman control expanded and the size of the forces increased, the soldiery gradually became salaried professionals. As a consequence, military service at the lower (non-salaried) levels became progressively longer-term. Roman military units of the period were largely homogeneous and highly regulated. The army consisted of units of citizen infantry known as legions (Latin: legiones) as well as non-legionary allied troops known as auxilia. The latter were most commonly called upon to provide light infantry, logistical, or cavalry support.

Phase III

At the height of the Roman Empire's power, forces were tasked with manning and securing the borders of the vast provinces which had been brought under Roman control. Serious strategic threats were less common in this period and emphasis was placed on preserving gained territory. The army underwent changes in response to these new needs and became more dependent on fixed garrisons than on march-camps and continuous field operations.

Phase IV

As Rome began to struggle to keep control over its sprawling territories, military service continued to be salaried and professional for Rome's regular troops. However, the trend of employing allied or mercenary elements was expanded to such an extent that these troops came to represent a substantial proportion of the armed forces. At the same time, the uniformity of structure found in Rome's earlier military disappeared. Soldiery of the era ranged from lightly armed mounted archers to heavy infantry, in regiments of varying size and quality. This was accompanied by a trend in the late empire of an increasing predominance of cavalry rather than infantry troops, as well as a requirement for more mobile operations. In this period there was more focus (on all frontiers but the east) on smaller units of independently-operating troops, engaging less in set-piece battles and more in low-intensity, guerilla actions.


A distinction between frontier guard troops and more mobile reserve forces had emerged with the use of certain troops to permanently man frontiers such as Hadrian's Wall in Britannia in the 2nd century AD. The competing demands of manned frontiers and strategic reserve forces had led to the division of the military into four types of troops by the early 4th century:


The limitanei or riparienses patrolled the border and defended the border fortifications. According to some older theories, the limitanei were "settled and hereditary"[81] militia that were "tied to their posts."[97] But according to most recent research, the limitanei were originally regular soldiers, including infantry, cavalry, and river flotillas,[98][99][100] although they eventually became settled militia.[101][102] According to Luttwak, the cunei of cavalry, and auxilia of infantry alone by this time, were local provincial reserves that may have evolved from earlier auxiliary units.[103][clarification needed] According to Pat Southern and Karen Dixon, the legiones, auxilia, and cunei of the border armies were part of the limitanei, but higher-status than the older cohortes and alae in the same armies.[102]

The comitatenses, and later the palatini were strategic reserves, usually in the rear.[104] After their division into palatini and comitatenses, the latter were usually associated with the praesental armies, and the former were usually associated with the regional armies, but both types could be moved between the two.

The emperor Constantine I created the scholae to replace the old praetorian guard. The scholae were his personal guard, and were mainly equipped as cavalry. Vogt suggests that the scholae formed two small central reserves (Latin: scholae) held to the strategic rear even of the comitatenses, one each in the presence of the emperors of West and East respectively.[105]

The permanent field armies of the palatini and comitatenses ultimately derived from the temporary field armies of the earlier sacer comitatus.


Created and expanded from the core troops of the Emperor's personal bodyguards,[clarification needed] the central field armies by 295 AD seem to have been too large to be accounted for as simple bodyguard forces, but were still too small to be able to campaign independently of legionary or vexillation support.[clarification needed][106]


Of the four troop types, the limitanei (border guards) were once considered to have been of the lowest quality,[107] consisting largely of peasant-soldiers that were both "grossly inferior" to the earlier legions and inferior also to their counterparts in the mobile field armies.[108] However, more recent work establishes that the limitanei were regular soldiers.[98][99][100]


In particular, that produced a division among Roman census classes (distinct from the usual plebeian/patrician divide) in which four standardized unit types (based on how much money the soldier could spend on his own arms and armor) comprised each legion:


The basic unit of the Macedonian Phalanx was the syntagma, a collection of 256 men in a 16x16 strong square. Each column of the syntagma was known as a lochos and contained 16 men, the man at the front was known as the lochagos (captain) and the man at the back who guarded the rank's rear was the ouragos


Assuming rank number one is the rank first to the right when looking directly forward into the formation the 2nd rank contained a dilocus who was in charge of the two ranks and was superior to the other lochagos, the next lochos was controlled by a lochagos and the line after controlled by a tetrairach. The tetrairach controlled the first 4 ranks (64 men) but directly controlled his own lochos. This pattern is repeated except in the 8th rank the tetrairach is known as a taxitairch, and he so forth controlled 128 men. The leader of the 2nd group of 8 ranks and therefore the leader of the whole syntagma was the syntagmatairch. He controlled the whole group of 256 men and was entrusted with their control during the intense difficulties of battle.


Strictly speaking, Thessaly refers primarily to the central plains inhabited by the Thessalians in antiquity. The plains were divided in antiquity into four administrative regions called tetrads: Pelasgiotis, Phthiotis, Thessaliotis, and Histiaeotis


For some time after the conquest, Thessaly seems to have been governed by kings of the race of Heracleidae, who may however have been only the heads of the great aristocratic families, invested with the supreme power for a certain time. Under one of these princes, named Aleuas, the country was divided into four districts – Phthiotis, Plistiaeotis, Thessaliotis and Pelasgiotis:[3] This division continued throughout Thessalian history, and it may therefore be concluded that it was not merely a nominal one. Each district may have regulated its affairs by some kind of provincial council, but we are almost entirely in the dark concerning the internal government of each district.[4]


When occasion required, a chief magistrate was elected under the name of tagus, whose commands were obeyed by all four districts


Phthiotis, Thessaliotis, Histiaeotis and Pelasgiotis comprised the Thessalian tetrarchy, governed under the title of tagus, when occasion required.


The Central Powers consisted of the German Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the beginning of the war. The Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers later in 1914. In 1915, the Kingdom of Bulgaria joined the alliance. The name "Central Powers" is derived from the location of these countries; all four (including the other groups that supported them except for Finland and Lithuania) were located between the Russian Empire in the east and France and the United Kingdom in the west. Finland, Azerbaijan, and Lithuania joined them in 1918 before the war ended and after the Russian Empire collapsed.


The other two cycles were supposed to be set at a later time. The Ulaid Cycle deal with the reigns of Conchobor of Ulaid and Medb of Connacht, particularly the warriors of the Red Branch and its greatest hero, Cú Chulainn. The Fenian Cycle (or the Ossianic Cycle), supposed to have set in a more peaceful time of the reign of Cormac the Airt, particularly the warriors of Fianna and its greatest hero, Finn Mac Cumhaill.


Some scholars say that there was a fourth cycle, called Cycle of Kings (or Book of Kings). This was supposed to be the history of early reign of the Milesian kings.


The earlier Irish did not divided their myths and literature into cycles. These cycles were intrepretations and usages of modern scholars. The uses of cycles in Irish literature were just a convenient mean of dividing into periods for the Irish myths. All the romances and sagas of the three (or four) cycles were added into each of main manuscript, without any logical orders.


The Children of Lir


The legend of the Children of Lir has long been told in Ireland, and this Irish myth forms the basis of the famous ballet; Swan Lake.


According to the story, long ago there was an Irish King called Lir with four beautiful children. Their mother died when the children were very young and King Lir eventually remarried. But the new Queen was a devious woman of witchcraft who wanted the throne to herself, and saw the children as a threat to her plans.


This allowed the Celts of Ireland to develop a Gaelic society of their own that even with the conversion to Christianity, held a certain autonomy from the rest of Christian Europe. Indeed, though they altered the religious significance of the mythologies, the religious clerics of the Dark Ages and Medieval Period transformed much of Ireland's ancient oral history into texts such as the Annals of the Four Masters and the Book of Leinster, which are found at Trinity College.


Irish mythology, folk tales and history is separated into four cycles - the Mythological Cycle, the Ulster Cycle, the Fenian Cycle and the Historical Cycle.


These waves are long cycles, lasting 50-60 years and consisting of various phases that are repetitive in nature. They are divided into four primary cycles:


Spring-Inflationary growth phase: The first wave starts after a depressed economic state. With growth comes inflation. This phase sees stable prices, stable interest rates and a rising stock market, which is led by strong corporate profits and technological innovations. This phase generally lasts for 25 years.

Summer-Stagflation (Recession): This phase witnesses wars such as the War of 1812, the Civil War, the World Wars and the Vietnam War. War leads to a shortage of resources, which leads to rising prices, rising interest rates and higher debt, and because of these factors, companies’ profits decline.

Autumn-Deflationary Growth (Plateau period): After the end of war, people want economic stability. While the economy sees growth in selective sectors, this period also witnesses social and technological innovations. Prices fall and interest rates are low, which leads to higher debt and consumption. At the same time, companies’ profits rise, resulting in a strong stock market. All of these excesses end with a major speculative bubble.

Winter-Depression: This is a period of correcting the excesses of the past and preparing the foundation for future growth. Prices fall, profits decline and stock markets correct to the downside. However, this period also refines the technologies of the past with innovation, making it cheaper and more available for the masses.

Cycles per Charles Hugh Smith (source)

He discusses four long-term cycles that bottom in the 2010 – 2020 period. They are: Credit expansion/contraction cycle, Price inflation/wage cycle, Generational cycle, and Peak oil extraction cycle.


Dude, We Are So Doomed (June 11, 2008)

What can you say when four long cycles of history all turn negative within the next 13 years? Dude, we are so doomed.



Here are the four profound cycles which intersect/converge within the next few years:


1. Peak oil, or the depletion end-game of the global economy's complete dependence on inexpensive, readily available petroleum/fossil fuels.


2. The cycle of credit expansion and contraction, which is now beginning the transition from unsustainable credit expansion (bubble) to renunciation of debt (credit collapse) and global depression.


3. The generational cycle (4 generations or approximately 80 years) of American history which leads to nation-changing social, political and economic upheaval. (The American Revolution: 1781 +80 years = Civil War, 1861 +80 years = 1941, World War II + 80 years = 2021)


4. The 100+ year cycle of price inflation and stagnation of wages' purchasing-power which began around 1901 is now reaching the final stage of widespread turmoil, shortages, famine, war, conflict and crisis.

The Fourth Turning: An American Prophecy - What the Cycles of History Tell Us About America's Next Rendezvous with Destiny Paperback – December 29, 1997


Why did Europe, a mere promontory on the huge landmass of Asia, come to dominate the world in the second millennium AD? Archeologist Barry Cunliffe’s answer, based on 10,000 years of prehistory, is Europe Between the Oceans: 9000 BC – AD 1000. To Cunliffe, Europe’s four “oceans” are the Mediterranean Sea, Black Sea, North Sea, and Atlantic Ocean. These four oceans and the many rivers crossing Europe are a key to understanding the history and impact of Europe. These major waterways connect Europe’s many ecological niches, allowing the movement of people and merchantable goods.


Cunliffe ends his story at 1000 AD, the threshold of the second millennium AD in which Europe would become dominant. The Mediterranean is divided into a Muslim south, a Byzantine Empire in the northeast, and a Frankish (“Holy Roman”) Empire in the northwest. Much trade among these powers is handled by the maritime traders of Venice and Pisa. Europe is divided among hundreds of small political entities, but all are connected by Europe’s four “oceans” and many navigable rivers. This allows a huge amount of trade as well as constant conflict and warfare. (Cunliffe refers to the 400-year Roman Empire as “an interlude of stability.”) At the start of the second millennium, trade and warfare drive intense competition in Europe’s pursuit of wealth and power.


The rising of the seas occurred sometime after humans got to the Americas, creating three separate world zones. The fourth world zone, the Pacific Islands, did not emerge until humans became skilled enough at sailing to reach these islands — sometime in the past 4,000 years. Hence three of the four world zones operated from about 10,000 BCE to about 1500 CE, while the fourth functioned only from about 2000 BCE to 1500 CE. After 1500 CE, extensive travel by sea connected all of the zones and established the first global exchange network.


What the four world zones reveal

The rising seas cut off the four groups of humans from each other long enough for them to develop different experiments in culture and civilization, but not so long that they would develop into separate species. How amazing is that?


Comparing human societies is a bit like deciding whether a glass is half full or half empty. You can notice how different human societies are from each other, or you can exclaim how similar they are to one another. World history and anthropology courses usually focus on the differences in human societies in the four world zones. Big history courses focus instead on the similarities of different human societies, even though they were completely separated from each other for quite a long period.


Agrarian civilizations emerged only in the two largest world zones for very specific reasons. A closer look at the four zones demonstrates that some zones had more advantages than others. Afro-Eurasia was so much larger, with better plants for food and animals better suited for transportation, that civilization emerged there several thousand years earlier than in the Americas. This gave peoples from Afro-Eurasia a decisive edge when they arrived in the Americas and found civilizations similar to theirs in structure, but earlier in their development.


The smaller two world zones were so much smaller in their habitable land mass, available resources, and population that they did not reach the density of people required for civilization in the time allowed. On the larger Pacific islands, like Hawaii and New Zealand’s North Island, agriculture emerged, and something very close to states. Would these societies have become states/civilizations if they had not been interrupted by conquest from the larger zones? We can never know.


Haynes was the first to observe that the four largest rivers on the four continents bordering the Atlantic Ocean (the Nile, Amazon, Mississippi, and Baltic) stand in relation to each other as do the outer arms of an enormous swastika. In "Tree of Life, Mythical Archetype" he persuasively argues that ancient navigators mapped these four rivers and derived the swastika from them. This is a facsimile edition of Wilson's 1896 report, which includes all of his writings on the subject of the swastika. The text quality is generally good, while the quality of the more than 450 illustrations is very good to excellent.




Gregory Haynes promises in this book to have finally unraveled the secret meaning of the nearly-universal religious symbol of the Tree of Life containing the fruits of immortality guarded by a serpent or dragon with four rivers flowing from it (most familiar to us in the Garden of Eden version). The key to the mystery, he says, is found in the mythical symbols found on the spindle whorls at the ancient site of Troy, which show the figure of the swastika associated with the Tree of Life image. Here's Haynes' theory (and I'm not making any of this up!):


The swastika figure, which is found worldwide in both Eurasia and the Americas, is a disguised map of the four major rivers that flow into the Atlantic: the Nile, the Baltic, the Amazon, and the Mississippi. Sometime thousands of years ago in the age of the Mesopotamian and Egyptian kingdoms, a mysterious civilization arose that built ships and explored the world (or at least the Atlantic), discovering these major rivers as well as gold in Brazil, etc. But they decided to keep this knowledge a secret, encoding it in the swastika image. However, they built a new advanced culture on some island in the middle of the Atlantic, which unfortunately was destroyed by earthquakes and volcanos, leaving no trace. But they did make cooperative agreements among the peoples of the Americas and Europe to meet at a future date, in the 15th century, and establish a new harmonious world order. However, partly because of desires to keep this knowledge secret, and partly because of cultures merely having forgotten the story, the knowledge was lost. However, the King of Spain, Haynes speculates, may have known about this tradition, thus deciding to send Columbus to the prearranged meeting place. What of the Tree of Life? That represents the Milky Way galaxy, which is a sort of guidepost to the center of the Atlantic where the island lies at the vertex of the Swastika figure formed by the four rivers. But all of this knowledge has been lost for 5000 years, until one Gregory Haynes rediscovered it in 2009.


The reader may well wonder if he has found himself in a Dan Brown novel (or perhaps an Indiana Jones episode?). This book is complete with mysterious lost civilizations (lost without a trace), Rosicrucian prophecies, the secret island of Atlantis, lost ancient colonies in the Amazon (again, destroyed without a trace), and various "mysterious synchronicities."


Perhaps needless to say, there is not a shred of evidence for any of this wild speculation. I challenge anyone to look at a map of Europe and America and see a swastika figure (even if one squints really hard). And we might note, one of Haynes' four "rivers" is not even a river, but the Baltic Sea. And just exactly how would it direct mapreaders to Brazil? And this is supposed to be a useful "map" of the world for future navigators?? Nor does it even fit the myth: the rivers are supposed to flow OUT OF the garden with the sacred tree. But the closest his story comes is that the rivers flow into the Atlantic ocean, and that there must have been a lost island at the center of the ocean (needless to say, there is utterly no evidence for such a lost island; it is pure fantasy). Nor does he explain how this knowledge had been entirely lost, while at the same time the Tree of Life myth remained central to cultures around the world.


people in motion, people on the move, whether they want to/or being forced;

movement, connection, exchange, spatial, conceptual making us humans;

four registers of scale as analytical, examining approaches;

scale of big history, binaries framing the cosmos, as being and nothingness;

harnessing collective learning, resource exploitation, hallmark of human society;

big history, interdisciplinary with natural history in coherent historical narrative;

linking spiritual quests with quest for knowledge, scientific and its methodology;

Equiano and Marsh, their experiences with capture and enslavement


This chapter contains sections titled:


Scale One, the Cosmos: Big History and Life on Earth


Scale Two, the Earth: Peopling the World


Scale Three, Modern Human Society: Globalizing Encounters and Migrations, 1500-1900


Scale Four, Microhistory and Biography: Individual Lifespans and Journeys




The BASIC countries (also Basic countries or BASIC) are a bloc of four large newly industrialized countries – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – formed by an agreement on 28 November 2009. The four committed to act jointly at the Copenhagen climate summit, including a possible united walk-out if their common minimum position was not met by the developed nations.[1]


There are currently four major GDS systems:






In addition, there are several smaller or regional GDSs, including SITA’s Sahara, Infini (Japan), Axess (Japan), Tapas (Korea), Fantasia (South Pacific), and Abacus (Asia/Pacific) that serve interests or specific regions or countries. In this article, we will provide a closer look at the four major GDSs.


Ulster. The name of one of Ireland's four traditional provinces. The area contains nine northern counties, six of which make up Northern Ireland, and three of which are part of the Republic of Ireland. It is also often used by Unionists to refer to the smaller Northern Ireland. Though Ulster has not been a political entity since the ancient Gaelic provincial kingdoms, it remains associated with a geographical area and is used in sporting and cultural contexts. See Ulster (disambiguation).


England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are the four countries of the United Kingdom, though they are also referred to, especially in sporting contexts, as the home nations of the United Kingdom.


Abraham Ortelius makes clear his understanding that England, Scotland and Ireland were politically separate in 1570 by the full title of his map: Angliae, Scotiae et Hiberniae, sive Britannicar. insularum descriptio ('A representation of England, Scotland and Ireland, or the Britannic islands'). George Lily's 1546 map divides Britain into the two kingdoms of England and Scotland, with Ireland alongside. Some maps from this period also appear to mark Wales, and sometimes Cornwall, as separate areas within Britain, while the history of England created by Polydore Vergil[35] for Henry VIII states, "The whole country of Britain is divided into four parts, whereof the one is inhabited by Englishmen, the other of Scots, the third Welshmen and the fourth of Cornish people."[36][37]


In association football, the Home Nations originally referred to the then four national teams of the United Kingdom: England, Ireland, Scotland and Wales.[3] Today, the term refers to the teams of England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales – the teams that contested the British Home Championship until 1984[4] – although references to the Home Nations sometimes include the Republic of Ireland team.[5]


The most praised "Four Major Cuisines" are Chuan, Lu, Yue and Huaiyang, representing West, North, South and East China cuisine correspondingly.[2]


To explore the governance, economy, and social structure created during the 17th Century within each of four colonial regions: the Chesapeake, Southern Colonies, the New England Colonies, and Middle Colonies.

To study the predominant American Indian nations within each colonial region and examine the manner in which the first European colonists dealt with the indigenous peoples.

To compare and contrast the political, economic, social, and spiritual development of the four colonial regions throughout the Seventeenth Century.


The thirteen colonies of British North America that eventually formed the United States of America can be loosely grouped into four regions: New England, the Middle Colonies, the Chesapeake, and the Lower South. Each of these regions started differently, and they followed divergent paths of development over the course of more than a century of British settlement; yet they shared enough in common to join together against British rule in 1776.


The significant differences that existed between these four regions lessened during the eighteenth century but never entirely disappeared. The society of New England became more heterogeneous and less moralistic due to increased migration of non-Puritans. Chesapeake society gradually stabilized as death rates fell, and by 1700 the population was demographically self-sustaining. Significant events began to have an impact throughout the colonies, creating a shared American colonial history. The Glorious Revolution of 1688 affected New England, New York, Maryland, and South Carolina as colonials successfully struggled against what they believed were the pro-French absolutist tendencies of James II (1633–1701) and his followers in America. In the eighteenth century the pan colonial religious revivals collectively known as the Great Awakening made household names of evangelists such as George Whitefield (1714–1770). Continued migration brought hundreds of thousands of new settlers to the colonies, not only from England but increasingly from Ireland, Scotland, France, and Germany. The dispersal of these settlers in America, together with half a million enslaved Africans, made the colonial population a truly diverse one.


As Shirley Hicks said, the four original provinces/territories were Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia. All the others joined at later dates.


I can't speak for every province/territory, but I do know some facts about a few (correct me if I am wrong about this):


The four original provinces (Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia) weren't initially supposed to form as one country. Initially, the four maritime colonies (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island and Newfoundland) were discussing in Charlottetown, PEI, a maritime union. However, Ontario and Quebec were also thinking about Confederation, and seeing that the maritime colonies were discussing a union, they seized this opportunity (you can say they weren't invited to this conference, lol) to convince the Maritime leaders that Confederation was a good idea. Two other Conferences ensued, and then the Dominion of Canada was formed on July 1, 1867.


In 1867 when Canada first became a country it had only four provinces: New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario and Quebec. After the first four provinces joined together to form Canada, it took 132 years before all the provinces and territories officially joined Canada.


The word Tetrarchy means "rule of four." It derives from the Greek words for four (tetra-) and rule (arch-). In practice, the word refers to the division of an organization or government into four parts, with a different person ruling each part. There have been several Tetrarchies over the centuries, but the phrase is usually used to refer to the division of the Roman Empire into a western and eastern empire, with subordinate divisions within the western and eastern empires.


While the Roman Tetrarchy is the most famous, other four-person ruling groups have existed through history. Among the best-known was The Herodian Tetrarchy, also called the Tetrarchy of Judea. This group, formed after the death of Herod the Great in 4 BCE, included Herod's sons.


Dissolution: formation of the Tetrarchies[edit]

Main article: Herodian Tetrarchy

Herod died in 4 BCE, and his kingdom was divided among his sons, who became tetrarchs ("rulers of a quarter part"). One of these quarters was Judea corresponding to the region of the ancient Kingdom of Judah. Herod's son Herod Archelaus, ruled Judea so badly that he was dismissed in 6 CE by the Roman emperor Augustus, who appointed Quirinius to exercise direct Roman rule after an appeal from Herod Archelaus' own population, thus was formed the Province of Judea. Another, Herod Antipas, ruled as tetrarch of Galilee and Perea from 4 BCE to 39 CE, being then dismissed by Caligula.


Oakley also points to two more problems with the sources. In Livy’s account, Bovianum, the capital of the Pentri, the largest of the four Samnite tribes, was captured in the first year of the war, which seems unlikely. Frontinus records three stratagems employed by one "Fulvius Nobilior" while fighting against the Samnites in Lucania.[99] The cognomen Nobilior is not otherwise recorded before 255 BC, forty-five years after the end of the Samnite Wars. A plausible explanation is therefore that Nobilior is a mistake and the stratagems should be attributed to the consul of 298 BC.[100]


The two consuls went on to besiege Bovianum, the capital of the Petrians, the largest of the four Samnite tribes, and wintered there. In 313 BC they were replaced by the dictator Gaius Poetelius Libo Visolus. The Samnites took Fregellae and Poetelius moved to retake it, but the Samnites had left at night. He placed a garrison and then marched on Nola (near Naples) to retake it. He set fire to the buildings near the city walls and took the city. Colonies were established at the Volscian island of Pontiae, the Volscian town of Interamna Sucasina and at Suessa Aurunca.


Machiavelli notes that Rome's actions as recounted by Livy proceeded either by "public counsel" or by "private counsel," and that they concerned either things inside the city or things outside the city, yielding four possible combinations. He says that he will restrict himself in Book I to those things that occurred inside the city and by public counsel (I 1.6)


Before the concept of the political state arose, four tribes based upon family relationships dominated the area. The members had certain rights, privileges, and obligations:


The reforms that Solon initiated dealt with both political and economic issues. The economic power of the Eupatridae was reduced by forbidding the enslavement of Athenian citizens as a punishment for debt (Debt bondage), by breaking up large landed estates and freeing up trade and commerce, which allowed the emergence of a prosperous urban trading class. Politically, Solon divided the Athenians into four classes, based on their wealth and their ability to perform military service. The poorest class, the Thetai, (Ancient Greek Θήται) who formed the majority of the population, received political rights for the first time and were able to vote in the Ecclesia (Assembly). But only the upper classes could hold political office. The Areopagus continued to exist but its powers were reduced.


The reforms of Cleisthenes replaced the traditional four "tribes" (phyle) with ten new ones, named after legendary heroes and having no class basis; they were in fact electorates. Each 'tribe' was in turn divided into three 'trittyes' and each trittys had one or more demes, which became the basis of local government. The tribes each elected fifty members to the Boule, a council which governed Athens on a day-to-day basis. The Assembly was open to all citizens and was both a legislature and a supreme court, except in murder cases and religious matters, which became the only remaining functions of the Areopagus.

Athenian silver didrachm of "heraldic type" from the time of Peisistratos, 545–510 BC. Obverse: Four-spoked wheel. Reverse: Incuse square, divided diagonally

The weight of the silver drachma was approximately 4.3 grams or 0.15 ounces,[12] although weights varied significantly from one city-state to another. It was divided into six obols of 0.72 grams, which were subdivided into four tetartemoria of 0.18 grams, one of the smallest coins ever struck, approximately 5–7 mm in diameter.[13]

“Tribes” is the conventional but misleading rendering of Greek phylai (singular, phyle), the principal units segmenting the populations and/or territories of many, perhaps originally all, Greek city-states. Just as in the case of the three ancestral phylai of the Dorians, Ionians inherited a set of four phylai, with an attested distribution at Athens and, to the east, on the Ionian islands and along the Ionian seaboard.



In the 5th century BC a Greek writer Ephoros described the Celts as one of the four great barbarian peoples, along with the Persians, the Scythians and the Libyans.


In the 5th century BC a Greek writer Ephoros described the Celts as one of the four great barbarian peoples, along with the Persians, the Scythians and the Libyans.


In the beginning, Hesiod says, there was 'Chaos' (pronounced 'Kaos').

From that emerged 'Ge',.....and so on. We know that the four principal

tribal groups of Albanians that has emerged from the past were Cham, Gege,

Tosk, and Lap. Let us suppose that the story might have been: 'In the

beginning there was a split or breaking away', Cha (just because the Greeks

call it 'Kaos', and interpret a meaning in Greek, it should not prevent one

from using the concept 'Cha' as in 'ch' and interpret it in another way).

What emerged then from that split was the earth mother as a result of the

wind (er) raking (tarr) the loose soil (ge 1), until it came together to

form the earth (ge 2).


We have now accounted for two of the four principal tribes, the Cham

and the Gege. Since the Ge was the mother, we might assume that the split

indicated the creation of a mother and father. The Greeks perhaps did not

understand this in their analysis of Hesiod's writings. Not until Ouranos,

the Greek word for Heaven, do we find the father. However this presented a

problem for the Greeks, because when Ouranos married Ge, he was marrying his

mother. I don't think that was the intended thought...hence the numbered

'Ge' in this interpretation depicting the different stages in evolution, or

time period, of the earth's creation and succession. The idea of a virgin

birth becomes apparent in the Greek interpretation because it was thought

that since there was no father present in the beginning, as the Greeks

understood things, it was the only explanation. We might account for the

father in the initial story by Hesiod, though he may not have understood it

as such or expressed it so. Perhaps it is a good opportunity to mention that

the Greek historian Herodotus (c.450 B.C.) stated that the Greeks did not

know or understand much about the origin or the nature of the functions of

their gods.


What we have left of the four principal tribal groups is Tos and Lap

(or Lab). 'In the beginning there was a split; one part left or was

abandoned by the initial split (la) and became the soil (ge), the other part

left, or was abandoned by the initial split (la) and became the 'darkness,

night (tos)'? Though this is expressed in a matter of fact manner, these

stories may have had a more primitive element to them initially and then

evolved into subsequent ideas of what became known as 'family'. With regard

to a father before the arrival of Ouranos, one must review Hesiod's Erebus,

night-wind and Aether (At her), shown on the genealogy chart, and think about

a possible Illyrian explanation, remembering that the 'tos' has been

identified with the opposite of 'soil', 'earth'. (In southern Albania there

is a river known as Semeni: Latin -'seed'.)


'Ouranos' is the classical Greek meaning for Heaven. In Albanian 'ou

ra' means 'I fell'. 'Ou' represents the name of the first god and the word

survives in Albanian as the personal pronoun 'I'. Imagine early man viewing

the sky around him. He notices that at every point that he views, the sky

appears to fall to the earth. His understanding may be that god comes to

earth. Place your finger at the point where the sky touches the

earth...follow the path of the sun as it goes overhead. You are making a

bridge over your head. In Albanian the word for bridge is 'ura'. 'Urate'

means the 'blessed Father'. How did these words originate and evolve in the

Albanian language. This concept of 'ra' is very important if one wishes to

understand the ancients and word development and usage.


We know that the dividing line between the four principal tribes is

generally thought to be the Shkumbi River. North of the River are the Geges.

In Albanian 'veri' is the word for 'north' - the place of the egg (ve{z}

ri)? South of the River, 'iuge', is 'the divine earth' (soil). In some

primitive way the early stories may have evolved whereby there was some

comparison of the beginnings with the concept of a marriage and even what

appears to be the concept of the 'fertilization' of an egg. That beginning

could be placed somewhere along the Shkumbi River, the ancient name of which

was Genusus. In classical Greek 'genesis' meant 'the beginning'. In

Albanian 'ge nuse' means the 'earth as a 'bride' - a bride of heaven? 'The

beginning' may have been conceptualized as taking place when heaven married

earth. (Ge - the root for many words in Albanian dealing with the soil, land,

etc.) The concept 'ge nuse' may have then passed on to the Hellenes and

evolved into the meaning of 'beginning', 'genesis'. The same might be said

with regard to the concept of 'heaven', 'ou ra' nos. It may be that the

ancients thought of the 'beginning of the world' taking place when Heaven

married Earth.


The Legions were later supplemented by the auxiliaries, who were normally non-citizens, and combined cavalry and infantry, there were four main forms of Auxiliary force


1. Alae quingenariae; one ala of 16 turma; one turma of 30 men; 480 men


2. Infantry cohort; one cohort of six centuries; one century of 80 men; 480 men


3. Cohorts equitates; mixed infantry and cavalry. The Auxiliaries were commanded by Prefects of the equestrian rank. However, as the auxiliaries developed, a forth kind of troop was introduced, this reflected the fact the auxiliaries had developed into a status very similar to that of the legionaries.


4. Numeri; from the 2nd century onwards, formed from local tribes, around 500 men, they didn’t have to speak Latin, and often fought in keeping with their local tradition.


The term legion is derived from the Latin word legio; which ultimately means draft or levy. At first there were only four legions. These legions were numbered "I" to "IIII", with the fourth being written as such and not "IV".


Regiments were now classified in four grades, which denoted quality, prestige and pay. These were, in descending order, scholares, palatini, comitatenses and limitanei


Those attached to the emperor were known as protectores domestici and organised in four scholae under a comes domesticorum. After a few years' service in the corps, a protector would normally be granted a commission by the emperor and placed in command of a military regiment.[


In the early Julio-Claudian period, the commanders of the auxiliary units (praefecti auxiliorum) were often senior centurions and so ranked below the legionary tribunes. The position changed under Claudius, who restricted command of auxiliary regiments to men of equestrian rank. Furthermore, an equestrian military cursus honorum became established, known as the tres militiae ("three commands"), each held for 3–4 years: command of an auxiliary cohort, followed by military tribune of a legion, followed by command of an ala. These reforms had the effect of elevating praefecti to the same rank as legionary tribunes. Under Hadrian, a fourth militia, command of a double-strength ala milliaria was established for especially proficient officers.


Based on their property and age, the infantrymen were divided into four specific groups, and were organized and equipped according to that particular group. The first group, which formed the first line of the Polybian legion, was that of the hastati. These men were recruited from the younger men eligible for service and were probably in their late teens or early 20s. The second line was formed by the principes, who were drawn from men in their later 20s or early 30s, and the last line was made up by the triarii, who were the oldest and (supposedly) most experienced men in the army. While there were normally 1,200 hasati and 1,200 principes in every legion, the triarii numbered just 600. The poorest and youngest of the citizens fought in the legions as light infantry (velites), of which there were usually 1,200 in each legion.[11]


The term United Nations was first officially used when 26 governments signed this Declaration. By 1 March 1945, 21 additional states had signed.[8] "Four Policemen" was coined to refer to the four major Allied countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, the Soviet Union, and China, which was emerged in Declaration by United Nations[9] and became the foundation of an executive branch of the United Nations, the Security Council.[10]


In mid-1944, the delegations from the Allied "Big Four", the Soviet Union, the UK, the US and China, met for the Dumbarton Oaks Conference in Washington, D.C. to negotiate the UN's structure,[11] and the composition of the UN Security Council quickly became the dominant issue.


Quatre-Vallées (i.e. "Four Valleys") (Gascon: Quate-Vaths) was a small province of France located in the southwest of France. It was made up of four constituent parts: Aure valley (Gascon: Aura), Barousse valley (Gascon: Varossa), Magnoac valley (Gascon: Manhoac), and Neste or Nestès valley (Gascon: Nèsta or Nestés).


Thus, the Quatre-Vallée province was altogether made up of four geographically detached parts, from south to north:


Aure and Barousse valleys

Neste valley (enclave #1)

Neste valley (enclave #2)

Magnoac valley

However, politically and administratively speaking, and no matter whether contiguous or detached, the four constituent parts of the Quatre-Vallée province were, from south to north:


Aure valley

Barousse valley

Neste valley

Magnoac valley

Four Peaks (Yavapai: Wi:khoba[4]) is a prominent landmark on the eastern skyline of Phoenix. Part of the Mazatzal Mountains, it is located in the Four Peaks Wilderness.[5] on the Tonto National Forest, 40 miles (64 km) east-northeast of Phoenix. In winter, Four Peaks offers much of the Phoenix metro area a view of snow-covered peaks. Four Peaks is the site of an amethyst mine that produces top-grade amethyst.

The name Four Peaks is a reference to the four distinct peaks of a north–south ridge forming the massif's summit. The northernmost peak is named Brown's Peak and is the tallest of the four at 7,659 feet (2,334 m).[2] It is the highest point in Maricopa County. The remaining summits are unnamed, and from north to south are 7,644 feet (2,330 m),[6] 7,574 feet (2,309 m)[7] and 7,526 feet (2,294 m)[8] in elevation.


Islands of Four MountainsCoordinates: 52°52′33″N 169°47′42″W is an island grouping of the Aleutian Islands in Alaska, United States. The chain includes, from west to east, Amukta, Chagulak, Yunaska, Herbert, Carlisle, Chuginadak, Uliaga, and Kagamil islands. This island chain is located between Amukta Pass and the Andreanof Islands to the west, and Samalga Pass and the Fox Islands to the east. These islands have a total land area of 210.656 sq mi (545.596 km²) and have no permanent population.[1] The two largest islands are Yunaska and Chuginadak. Chuginadak is mainly made up of the active volcano Mount Cleveland.[2]


The name is translated from Russian Четырехсопочные Острова (Ostrova Chetyre Soposhnye) meaning "Islands of Four Volcanoes" (Sarichev, 1826, map 3).


In Spartan government, the political power was divided between four bodies: two Spartan Kings (diarchy), gerousia (Council of Gerontes (Elders), including the two kings), the ephors (representatives of the citizens who oversaw the Kings) and the apella (assembly of Spartans).


Membership was restricted at this time to the top three of the original four property classes (the Pentacosiomedimni, Hippeis and Zeugitae, but not the Thetes) and to citizens over the age of thirty.


On 8 July 1497 Vasco da Gama led a fleet of four ships with a crew of 170 men from Lisbon. The distance traveled in the journey around Africa to India and back was greater than around the equator.[11][12] The navigators included Portugal's most experienced, Pero de Alenquer, Pedro Escobar, João de Coimbra, and Afonso Gonçalves. It is not known for certain how many people were in each ship's crew but approximately 55 returned, and two ships were lost. Two of the vessels were as naus or newly built for the voyage, possibly a caravel and a supply boat.[11]


The four ships were:


São Gabriel, commanded by Vasco da Gama; a carrack of 178 tons, length 27 m, width 8.5 m, draft 2.3 m, sails of 372 m²

São Rafael, commanded by his brother Paulo da Gama; similar dimensions to the São Gabriel

The caravel Berrio, slightly smaller than the former two (later renamed São Miguel), commanded by Nicolau Coelho

A storage ship of unknown name, commanded by Gonçalo Nunes, later lost near the Bay of São Brás, along the east coast of Africa[5]

A core challenge over the next decade will be to attract and retain a skilled work force as the labor market continues to tighten, technology continues to evolve, and fewer foreign students immigrate to America for job opportunities. This situation is exacerbated as companies find themselves managing four generations of American workers:

Silents (Born between 1925 and 1946)

Baby Boomers (Born between 1946 and 1964)

Generation Xers (Born between 1965 and 1980)

Generation Ys or Millennials (born after 1980)


The broadsheet describes objects of various shapes including crosses, globes, two lunar crescents, a black spear and tubular objects from which several smaller, round objects emerged and darted around the sky at dawn.[8]


Likewise there stood on both sides and as a torus about the sun such blood-red ones and other balls in large number, about three in a line and four in a square, also some alone. In between these globes there were visible a few blood-red crosses, between which there were blood-red strips, becoming thicker to the rear and in the front malleable like the rods of reed-grass, which were intermingled, among them two big rods, one on the right, the other to the left, and within the small and big rods there were three, also four and more globes.


A religious view would emphasize the crosses. Jung thinks the images of four globes coupled by lines suggested crossed marriage quaternities and forms the model for “the primitive cross cousin marriage.” It could also be an individuation symbol. The association of sunrise suggests “the revelation of the light.”[11]


The above picture entitled Motherhood from the Spirit and the Water dates from 1165. It's an extremely intriguing quaternity of images conveying a certain numinous quality of Hildgard's mystical experiences and shares in my view, an affinity with the Layer Monument quaternity.


Four Eternal Women: Tony Wolff Revisited: A Study in Opposites, by Mary Dian Molton and Lucy Anne Sikes (Fisher King Press, 2011) amplifies Toni Wolff’s paper, “Structural Forms of the Feminine Psyche (1934).” The model uses Wolff’s quaternity of archetypal patterns of women’s development: the personally related modes of Mother (Mary, mother of Jesus), and its opposite, Hetaira (pattern Toni Wolff lived out with C. G. Jung); and the other pole of the impersonally related: Amazon Woman (Gloria Steinem) opposite Medial Woman (Hildegard von Bingen). Although some of these terms may be unfamiliar, the authors’ full treatment of these patterns brings them to life and the reader will find soon enough that they have relevance today.


Joachim enjoyed the reputation of a prophet during his lifetime.746 conciliar and papal examination. The Fourth Lateran condemned his treatment of the Trinity as defined by Peter the Lombard. Peter had declared that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit constitute a certain supreme essence, quaedam summa res, and this, according to Joachim, involved a substitution of a quaternity for the Trinity. Those who adopted Joachim’s view were condemned as heretics, but Joachim and the convent of Flore were distinctly excepted from condemnation.747


24 October 1967: Devon Flying Cross UFO - PCs Roger Willey (from Okehampton) and Clifford Waycott (from Winkleigh) were driving from Holsworthy to Hatherleigh along the A3072 at 4 am. They saw a bright object in the shape of a cross at tree-top height at a distance of about 40 metres. They followed the 'pulsating' object for about fifteen minutes along the road at speeds up to 80 mph. The object was described as being star-spangled like 'looking through wet glass'. At 4:23 am it was joined by a second object. A motorist, Mr Christopher Garner of Hatherleigh, had also seen it and thought he was having a nightmare. The object disappeared around 5 am having been followed for fourteen miles. It was attributed to Venus[17] as were other similar sightings that same month.[18]

25 October 1967: Sussex flying cross - policemen in five police cars across East Sussex reported a bright flying cross in the early hours, with the first sighting at 4:45 am at Halland. The other sightings were a few minutes later.

26 October 1967: 54-year-old Mr Angus Brooks, a former BOAC administrator for its Comet fleet, of Owermoigne was walking on Moigns Down at 11:25 am near Holworth close to the Dorset coast (a mile south of Owermoigne on the A354) with his two dogs in a force 8 gale and took shelter in a hollow. He then saw a circular translucent craft with a 'girder' to the front and three 'girders' pointing to the rear. The girders rearranged to form a cross shape around the central 25 ft diameter disc and then began to spin. Twenty two minutes later, the 'girders' went back to their original position and the craft sped off in a north-east direction.[19]


Cross-Shaped UFOs Are Being Reported Over War Zones

Paul Seaburn

December 19, 2015



Residents of Ukraine normally look skyward to watch for warplanes but lately they’ve been reportedly seeing something unexpected. Photographs and videos are being posted on the Internet of what appear to be brightly-lit UFOs in the shape of crosses. As expected, there’s talk of alien messages, religious warnings, flying humanoids, government propaganda, drones, kites, Project Blue Beam and hoaxes. Which one, if any, is it?


One sighting occurred on June 24, 2015, over Donetsk, Ukraine. Witnesses said it first appeared to be a meteorite but then changed into a cross shape. Donetsk has been the site of heavy fighting and is the location of the crash of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17. It has also had numerous UFO sightings over the past year. While some could be of military origin, those who saw the cross believe it’s a UFO, a humanoid or some sort of sign.


This image has a humanoid appearance

This Donetsk UFO has a humanoid appearance


Another sighting occurred in Sevastopol, the Crimean city that’s the center of the dispute between Russia and Ukraine. In late October 2015, a video appeared reportedly showing a cross-shaped UFO over the city. The object moved around and appeared to descend almost to the ground before rising with the light pulsating and increasing in intensity. While not a cross, a ball-shaped UFO was reported in Sevastopol just a month earlier.


Cross-shaped UFO descending to the ground

Cross-shaped UFO near the ground


As expected in an area with a strong religious belief that has seen the tragedies of war, it’s easy to see why the citizens would first believe the crosses are signs from aliens or spiritual beings upset about the conflicts. Perhaps even angels or some other type of flying humanoid.


A similar UFO reportedly seen in2014 in Volgograde

A similar UFO reportedly seen in 2014 in Volgograd


On the other hand, the lights could be from military operations or drones, especially with the up-and-down movement. One thought is that a reflective kite could have the same type of erratic motion. The movement also rules out lens flares or other camera anomalies.


Throw in Russia, Vladimir Putin, U.S. relations, terrorists, Syria and everything else going on in the world and a good case could be made that this is a perfect spot to see how the population would react to a Project Blue Beam-type religious projection or distribution of CGI videos with a religious connotation. Based on the activity in social media, the pictures and reports seem to have generated a strong response.


As of this writing, there is no explanation for these cross-shaped UFOs. Any thoughts?


● The Devon police case was the most high-profile sighting in a countrywide UFO flap that occurred during 1967 October. Among other cases in that month was the sighting of another bright, cross-shaped object by PCs in Cheshire three days after the Devon report. Click for more on the October 1967 UFO flap.


October 27 – another flying cross

Most celebrated of the cases was the famous ‘flying cross’ reported on the morning of October 24 by two Devon policemen and identified by astronomers and the MoD as Venus. What is less well known is that, three days later, policemen in Cheshire also reported a bright cross-shaped UFO. The MoD report on this sighting can be found in file AIR 20/11890. What follows is a brief summary with my own comments.


At 4.15 am on 1967 October 27 two constables on beat duty in Stalybridge, Cheshire, made the first sighting of an object said to be bright, cross-shaped and travelling at about 1,000 feet in a north-easterly direction. The actual azimuth of the object was not stated.


Carl Jung, on the symbolism of the Cross


It seems to have been one of the most original intuitions of man that the right form to express the source of mana would be the cross….

It is an absolute irrational fact to me that vital energy should have anything to do with a cross or the number four.

I don’t why it is perceived in such a form; I only know that the cross has always meant mana or life power.

Dream Analysis, pages 363-366




In the Res Gestae Divi Augustus (‘The Deeds of the Divine Augustus’), Augustus demonstrates his piety by stating that he was a member of all four major priesthoods in Rome – the Pontifices, Augures, Quindecemviri and Septemviri. There was, however, one Roman religious college that was off limits to men, even to the pious emperor himself. This was the College of the Vestals, which only had women amongst its ranks.


The Box-Grid System

However, it was not only in gender recognition nor in a volunteer workforce that made Mortimer Wheeler famous in archaeological circles. He developed a grid system of systematic digging whereby the field was divided into small squares. Each square clearly separated by a narrow baulk that was never excavated. This method permitted an area to be excavated yet preserved a vertical cross-section that revealed the strata of the site as the trench was dug.

Wheeler's box-grid system has been used universally in modern archaeology and although less popular in Europe it is still the most simple method to ensure a systematic approach.


Archeologically, Sparta itself begins to show signs of settlement only around 1000 BC, some 200 years after the collapse of Mycenaean civilization.[8] Of the four villages that made up the Spartan Polis, Forrest suggests that the two closest to the Acropolis were the originals, and the two more far flung settlements were of later foundation. The dual kingship may originate in the fusion of the first two villages.[9] One of the effects of the Mycenaean collapse had been a sharp drop in population. Following that, there was a significant recovery, and this growth in population is likely to have been more marked in Sparta, as it was situated in the most fertile part of the plain.[10]


J. F. Lazenby suggests, that the dual monarchy may date from this period as a result of a fusion of the four villages of Sparta which had, up until then, formed two factions of the villages of Pitana-Mesoa against the villages of Limnai-Konoura. According to this view, the Kings, who tradition says ruled before this time, were either totally mythical or at best factional chieftains.[15] Lazenby further hypothesizes that other reforms such as the introduction of the Ephors were later innovations that were attributed to Lycurgus.[16]

Of the small Greek force, attacked from both sides, all were killed except for the 400 Thebans, who surrendered to King Xerxes without a fight. Leonidas was killed, but the Spartans retrieved his body after driving back the Persians four times and protected it.

Four Regions  A regional health authority (Norwegian: Regionalt helseforetak or RHF) is a state enterprise responsible for specialist healthcare in one of four regions of Norway. Responsibilities of the RHFs include patient treatment, education of medical staff, research and training of patients and relatives. Areas covered by the authorities are hospitalspsychiatryambulance service, operation of pharmacies at the hospitals, emergency telephone number and laboratories. The actual performance is done by subsidiary health trusts (HF) that usually consist of one or more hospitals, with associate responsibilities. The authorities are subordinate to the Norwegian Ministry of Health and Care Services.


In recent years there has been growing support for the idea of freedom of movement between the UK, Canada and Australia, New Zealand with citizens able to live and work in any of the four countries - similar to the Trans-Tasman Travel Arrangement between Australia and New Zealand.[22][23]

The Fourth Labour Government of New Zealand was the government of New Zealand from 26 July 1984 to 2 November 1990. It was the first Labour government to win a second consecutive term since the First Labour Government of 1935 to 1949. The policy agenda of the Fourth Labour Government differed significantly from previous Labour governments: it enacted major social reforms (such as legalising homosexual relations) and economic reforms (including corporatisation of state services and reformation of the tax system)

The Convention agreed to four principles including the creation of a Federated army and navy. Interest in the proposed Australian Federation faded and New Zealand did not send a delegation to the 1897 National Australian Convention.


The Anglo–Mysore Wars were a series of wars fought in over the last three decades of the 18th century between the Kingdom of Mysore on the one hand, and the British East India Company (represented chiefly by the Madras Presidency), and Maratha Confederacy and the Nizam of Hyderabad on the other. Hyder Ali and his successor Tipu Sultan fought a war on four fronts with the British attacking from the west, south and east, while the Marathas and the Nizam's forces attacked from the north.[1] The fourth war resulted in the overthrow of the house of Hyder Ali and Tipu (who was killed in the final war, in 1799), and the dismantlement of Mysore to the benefit of the East India Company, which won and took control of much of India .

COUNCIL OF FOUR His nomination, made by the Court of Directors, would in future be subject to the approval of a Council of Four appointed by the Crown. Initially, the Council consisted of Lt. General Sir John ClaveringThe Honourable Sir George MonsonSir Richard Barwell, and Sir Philip Francis.[41]


When the East India Company was chartered in 1600, it was still customary for individual merchants or members of Companies such as the Company of Merchant Adventurers to have a distinguishing merchant's mark which often included the mystical "Sign of Four" and served as a trademark. The East India Company's merchant mark consisted of a "Sign of Four" atop a heart within which was a saltire between the lower arms of which were the initials "EIC". This mark was a central motif of the East India Company's coinage[59] and forms the central emblem displayed on the Scinde Dawk postage stamps.[60]


One such symbol combined the mystical "Sign of Four" with the merchant's name or initials. The "Sign of Four"[11] was an outgrowth of an ancient symbol adopted by the Romans and by Christianity, Chi Rho (XP), standing for the first two letters of Christus in Greek letters; this was simplified to a reversed "4" in Medieval times. The evolution of this symbol is shown in M. J. Shah's article.[12] The "Sign of Four" is called the "Staff of Mercury" (Caduceus) in German and Scandinavian literature on house marks

When the East India Company was chartered by Elizabeth I, Queen of England in 1600 it was still customary for each merchant or Company of Merchant Adventurers to have a distinguishing mark which included the "Sign of Four" and served as a trademark. The East India Company's mark was made up from a '+', a '4' and the initials EIC.

In support of the first two theories are the inscriptions, which can be read as the names of four places; in support of the third theory are the geographic statistics, which do not associate any of the four words to a particular place or region other than the entire southern kingdom of Judah. Furthermore, approximately 10–20 percent of the excavated jars and jar handles were stamped.


The original "philippics" were delivered by Demosthenes, Greek statesman and orator of ancient Athens who delivered several attacks on Philip II of Macedon in the 4th century BC.


A First, Second, and Third Philippic have been ascribed to Demosthenes. A Fourth Philippic is also extant, but is of disputed authorship.


The Roman province of Macedonia (Latin: Provincia Macedoniae, Greek: Ἐπαρχία Μακεδονίας) [2][3] was officially established in 146 BC, after the Roman general Quintus Caecilius Metellus defeated Andriscus of Macedon, the last self-styled King of the ancient kingdom of Macedonia in 148 BC, and after the four client republics (the "tetrarchy") established by Rome in the region were dissolved

The Fourth Philippic is a speech attributed to the Athenian statesman and orator, Demosthenes and given in 341 BC. It constitutes the last of the four philippics. Modern scholars, however, consider that the speech is not Demosthenes' work and may be attributed to Anaximenes of Lampsacus who frequently wrote imagined dialogues or speeches for real figures.[1] If it was a genuine Demosthenic speech, it is likely that it was issued in pamphlet form rather than actually delivered as a speech.[1]

"The whole of Greece is divided into four great pashaliks; Tripolizza, Egripo or Neropont, Yanina, and Salonica. The pashalik of […] Salonica [comprises], the southern divisions of Macedonia. The north of Macedonia is governed by beys;…" Quoted from: Thomas Thornton, The Present State of Turkey, London 1807, Vol. 2, p. 10,

Jump up ^


Warship Number 111, never named, was planned as the fourth member of the Yamato class and the second ship to incorporate the improvements of Shinano. The ship's keel was laid after Yamato's launch in August 1940 and construction continued until December 1941, when the Japanese began to question their ambitious capital ship building program—with the coming of war, the resources essential in constructing the ship would become much harder to obtain. As a result, the hull of the fourth vessel, only about 30% complete, was taken apart and scrapped in 1942; materials from this were used in the conversions of Ise and Hyūga to hybrid battleship/aircraft carriers.[48][49][A 2]


Battle of the Hydaspes, (326 bce), fourth and last pitched battle fought by Alexander the Great during his campaign of conquest in Asia. The fight on the banks of the Hydaspes River in India was the closest Alexander the Great came to defeat. His feared Companion cavalry was unable to subdue fully the courageous King Porus. Hydaspes marked the limit of Alexander’s career of conquest; he died before he could launch another campaign.


It probably was, but we have no alternative account, so we have to examine what we have critically. We have four classical accounts, and these are (quoting from Wikipedia for convenience):


# Diodorus Siculus (90-30 BC). Bibliotheca Historica.

# Quintus Curtius Rufus (60-70 AD). Historiae Alexandri Magni.

# Plutarch (75 AD). The Life of Alexander the Great, Parallel Lives.

# Arrian (early 2nd c. AD).


Alexander fought four battles during his Persian campaign, Granicus, Issus and Gaugamela, and finally at Hydaspes. All the other engagements were sieges, not set-piece battles. In all four of these battles, Alexander and the Macedonians were outnumbered.


Alexander had four major battles in his Asian Campaign: the Granicus River (334 BC), Issus (333 BC), Gaugamela (331 BC), and the Hydraspes River (326 BC). Stone starts the movie in 331 BC, thus completely eliminating the first two battles. A viewer could be forgiven for thinking Alexander took down the Persians in a single battle. But I think this omission was a reasonable choice. The film is already quite long, and trying to depict those two battles would probably have added another hour or two to the film’s running time.


Alexander III of Macedon, son of a great father only overshadowed by his brilliant son, master of battles, unbeaten war-lord, King of Macedon, Hegemon of Greece and King of Kings of Persia, fought four set-piece battles after leaving Greece, when he attacked Persia. The first three were the Battle of the Granicus, the Battle of Issus and the Battle of Gaugamela


After Gaugamela, Alexander pursued Darius in hot pursuit, until Darius met his end at the hands of a satrap driven to treachery by the vision of a vengeful Alexander pursuing the former supreme king of kings of Persia right to the ends of the world. Then a period of mountain warfare followed, ending with a descent into the plains of India, more closely-fought mountain battles and a very difficult set-piece battle, the last that Alexander fought in his life, with a relatively small force of Indians, who deployed elephants in their battle line. This was the Battle of the Hydaspes.


It is this battle that is the most interesting of the four Persian battles (counting this as one of the four for reasons that will be made apparent as we go along).


There were great changes in the cavalry{3}. Hephaestion still commanded his hipparchy of the Companions, four squadrons; but after the death of Cleitus the Black, Alexander had taken command of the other hipparchy himself, one of its four squadrons being the Royal squadron, henceforth always called the agema, (Guard), which thus came under his personal command; this enabled him to incorporate in it the sons of a few great Persian nobles, and it was now raised to 300 men, if indeed it had not been so all the time.


There was no question of a public trial – they were hunted down and killed out of hand. Since Hadrian was not in Rome at the time, he was able to claim that Attianus had acted on his own initiative. According to Elizabeth Speller, the real reason for their deaths was that they were Trajan's men.[71] Or better, all four were prominent senators of consular rank and, as such, were prospective candidates for the imperial office (capaces imperii).[72] Also, they were the chiefs of a war hawk group of senators who were committed to Trajan's expansionist policies, which Hadrian intended to change.[73] Besides Lusius Quietus, the consular Aulus Cornelius Palma was a former conqueror of Arabia Nabatea and as such had a stake in Trajan's Eastern policy.[74] (Hadrian's consistent refusal to expand frontiers was to remain a bone of contention between him and the Senate throughout his reign).[75] According to the Historia Augusta, Palma, as well as the third consular Lucius Publilius Celsus (consul for the second time in 113), were Hadrian's personal enemies and had spoken in public against him.[76] The fourth executed consular, Gaius Avidius Nigrinus, was an intellectual, friend of Pliny the Younger and briefly a Governor of Dacia at the start of Hadrian's reign. Nigrinus' ambiguous relationship with Hadrian would outlive him, having consequences late in the reign, when Hadrian had to plot his own succession.[77]


Hadrian's instrument for getting rid of the four consulars, Prefect Attianus, was made a senator and promoted to consular rank. He was later discarded by Hadrian, who suspected his personal ambition. It is probable that Attianus was executed (or was already dead) by the end of Hadrian's reign.[78] The four consulars episode strained Hadrian's relations with the Senate for his entire reign.[79] This tense relationship – and Hadrian's authoritarian stance towards the Senate – was acknowledged one generation later by Fronto, himself a senator, who wrote in one of his letters to Marcus Aurelius that "I praised the deified Hadrian, your grandfather, in the senate on a number of occasions with great enthusiasm, and I did this willingly, too [...] But, if it can be said – respectfully acknowledging your devotion towards your grandfather – I wanted to appease and assuage Hadrian as I would Mars Gradivus or Dis Pater, rather than to love him."[80] The strained relationship between Hadrian and the Senate never took the form of an overt confrontation as had happened during the reigns of previous "bad" emperors. Hadrian knew how to remain aloof to avoid an open clash.[81] The Senate's political role was effaced behind Hadrian's personal rule (in Ronald Syme's view. Hadrian "was a Führer, a Duce, a Caudillo").[82] The fact that Hadrian spent half of his reign away from Rome in constant travel undoubtedly helped the management of this strained relationship.[83] Hadrian underscored the autocratic character of his reign by counting the day of his acclamation by the armies as his dies imperiii, and legislating by frequent use of imperial decrees, to avoid having to seek the approval of the Senate.[84] According to Syme, Tacitus' description of the rise and accession of Tiberius is a disguised account of Hadrian's authoritarian Principate.[85] According, again, to Syme, Tacitus' Annals would be a work of contemporary history, written "during Hadrian's reign and hating it".[86]


For instance, in that year he restored the Picentine earth goddess Cupra in the town of Cupra Maritima. At some unspecified time, he improved the drainage of the Fucine lake. Less welcome than such largesse was his decision in 127 to divide Italy into four regions under imperial legates with consular rank, who had jurisdiction over all of Italy excluding Rome itself, therefore shifting cases from the courts of Rome.[191] Actually, the four consulars acted as governors of the regions assigned to them. Having Italy effectively reduced to the status of a group of mere provinces did not go down well with Italian hegemonic feelings (especially with the Roman Senate),[192] and this innovation did not long outlive Hadrian.[190]


He was the son-in-law of Gaius Avidius Nigrinus, one of the "four consulars" executed in 118, but was himself in delicate health. Also, his reputation was more that "of a voluptuous, well educated great lord than that of a leader".[287] Already at the time, it was ventured that Aelius had as his only commendation his beauty, a piece of gossip that found its way into the Historia Augusta biography.[288] Various modern attempts have been made to justify this apparently unjustified choice, one of them – advanced by the French historian Jerome Carcopino – being that Aelius was actually Hadrian's natural son.[289] It has also been speculated that Hadrian was fully aware that Aelius would never outlive him, and that the adoption of an aristocrat scion with no blood ties to the Emperor[290] was a belated attempt to make amends for the episode of the four consulars, therefore aiming at a reconciliation with the powerful clan of old Italian families in the Senate.[145] Of the four consulars, Aelius' father-in-law Avidius Nigrinus had been Hadrian's chief rival for the throne, as a senator of highest rank, breeding, and connections, and as a Stoic. According to the Historia Augusta, early in his reign Hadrian had even considered making Nigrinus his heir apparent, before eventually deciding to get rid of this worthy opponent.[291]


Regiones Quattuor: the four regions — Suburana, Esquilina, Collina, Palatina — into which the city, within the pomerium, was divided during the republic (Varro, LL V.45). Tradition ascribed to Servius Tullius (Liv. I.43; Dionys. IV.14; de vir. ill. 7; Fest. 368) the division of the inhabitants of Rome into four tribus, which, while purely a political division so far as our knowledge goes, are usually supposed to have been based on the earlier local division described by Varro. This city of the Four Regions (text fig. 5) was a stage of development intermediate between the Palatine settlement (or the Septimontium) and what is ordinarily p444 called the Servian city, a stage that was the result of the union of the Palatine and Esquiline settlements, that is shown by archaeological evidence to have taken place about the middle of the seventh century B.C. (Mon. L. XV.764). The division into four regions remained in force until the reorganisation of Augustus.


The tribus Esquilina was one of the four, large, urban tribes of Rome (Palatina, Collina, Esquilina, Suburana), which corresponded to the four urban regions that Servius Tullius created.


The Hundred and Four, or Council of 104 (Phoenician Miat, from the Mia - "hundred", Ancient Greek: Εκατόν, Latin: Ordo judicum), was a Carthaginian tribunal of judges. They were created early in Carthage's history, and are described in Aristotle's Politics (4th century BC) as "the highest constitutional authority." The Hundred and Four were in charge of judging generals and the military, who exercised a great deal of independence from the government in Carthage. The Hundred and Four were intended to provide a check to ensure the military served the needs of the senate and the people. However, by the time of Hannibal Barca, and his stint as Suffet (early 2nd century BC), the 104 had acquired tyrannical power.

Sumerians believed that the universe consisted of a flat disk enclosed by a dome. The Sumerian afterlife involved a descent into a gloomy netherworld to spend eternity in a wretched existence as a Gidim (ghost).[44]


The universe was divided into four quarters:


To the north were the hill-dwelling Subartu, who were periodically raided for slaves, timber, and other raw materials.

To the west were the tent-dwelling Martu, ancient Semitic-speaking peoples living as pastoral nomads tending herds of sheep and goats.

To the south was the land of Dilmun, a trading state associated with the land of the dead and the place of creation.

To the east were the Elamites, a rival people with whom the Sumerians were frequently at war.

Their known world extended from The Upper Sea or Mediterranean coastline, to The Lower Sea, the Persian Gulf and the land of Meluhha (probably the Indus Valley) and Magan (Oman), famed for its copper ores.


The army with which Julius Caesar fought his campaigns in Gaul consisted of legions — four in the first instance, subsequently increased to ten — with auxiliaries attached.


of the Regal Period and of the early Republic appear to have been formed in phalanx — an unbroken line 5 or 6 deep.1 But this formation was too rigid and unwieldy to suit the uneven ground on which much of the fighting of Roman armies in Italy took place. In the age of Camillus, i.e., the beginning of the 4th century B.C., the manipular system began to be adopted. The infantry of the legion were arranged in maniples (manipuli) or double companies, each composed of two centuries (centuriae) drawn up one behind the other, and formed for battle in three lines, quincunx-fashion — :·: This formation gave the individual soldier room to fight, and made it easy to extend or reinforce the first line — in other words, it satisfied the tactical requirements of breadth, depth, and a reserve. This system continued, with some modifications, to the time of Marius; but considerably before this the need of a larger tactical unit than the maniple had been recognised, and the legion had been divided on occasion, if not regularly, into ten cohorts p597 (cohortes) or battalions of three maniples (six centuries) each. The definite adoption of the cohort as the tactical unit is attributed to Marius; and in the Gallic War of Caesar there are frequent instances of a certain number of cohorts detached for particular duties. There is, however, no clear evidence of the manner in which the maniples were distributed among the cohorts. Two general arrangements appear to be possible:


The structural history of the Roman military concerns the major transformations in the organization and constitution of ancient Rome's armed forces, "the most effective and long-lived military institution known to history."[1] From its origins around 800 BC to its final dissolution in AD 476 with the demise of the Western Roman Empire, Rome's military organization underwent substantial structural change. At the highest level of structure, the forces were split into the Roman Army and the Roman Navy, although these two branches were less distinct than in many modern national defense forces. Within the top levels of both army and navy, structural changes occurred as a result of both positive military reform and organic structural evolution. These changes can be divided into four distinct phases.


Phase I

The army was derived from obligatory annual military service levied on the citizenry, as part of their duty to the state. During this period, the Roman army would wage seasonal campaigns against largely local adversaries.

Phase II

As the extent of the territories falling under Roman control expanded and the size of the forces increased, the soldiery gradually became salaried professionals. As a consequence, military service at the lower (non-salaried) levels became progressively longer-term. Roman military units of the period were largely homogeneous and highly regulated. The army consisted of units of citizen infantry known as legions (Latin: legiones) as well as non-legionary allied troops known as auxilia. The latter were most commonly called upon to provide light infantry, logistical, or cavalry support.

Phase III

At the height of the Roman Empire's power, forces were tasked with manning and securing the borders of the vast provinces which had been brought under Roman control. Serious strategic threats were less common in this period and emphasis was placed on preserving gained territory. The army underwent changes in response to these new needs and became more dependent on fixed garrisons than on march-camps and continuous field operations.

Phase IV

As Rome began to struggle to keep control over its sprawling territories, military service continued to be salaried and professional for Rome's regular troops. However, the trend of employing allied or mercenary elements was expanded to such an extent that these troops came to represent a substantial proportion of the armed forces. At the same time, the uniformity of structure found in Rome's earlier military disappeared. Soldiery of the era ranged from lightly armed mounted archers to heavy infantry, in regiments of varying size and quality. This was accompanied by a trend in the late empire of an increasing predominance of cavalry rather than infantry troops, as well as a requirement for more mobile operations. In this period there was more focus (on all frontiers but the east) on smaller units of independently-operating troops, engaging less in set-piece battles and more in low-intensity, guerilla actions.


The Servian reforms increased the number of tribes and expanded the city, which was protected by a new rampart, moat and wall. The enclosed area was divided into four administrative regiones (regions, or quarters); the Suburana, Esquilana, Collina and Palatina. Servius himself is said to have taken a new residence, on the Esquiline.[31] The situation beyond the walls is unclear,[32] but thereafter, membership of a Roman voting-tribe would have depended on residence rather than kinship, ancestry and inheritance. This would have brought significant numbers of urban and rural plebs into active political life; and a significant number of these would have been allocated to centuries of the first class, and therefore likely to vote.[33] The city of Rome's division into "quarters" remained in use until 7 BC, when Augustus divided the city into 14 new regiones. In modern Rome, an ancient portion of surviving wall is attributed to Servius, the remainder supposedly being rebuilt after the sack of Rome in 390/387 BC by the Gauls.[citation needed]

Kwon Hyok, a former head of security at Camp 22, described laboratories equipped with gas chambers for suffocation gasexperiments, in which three or four people, normally a family, are the experimental subjects.[14][15] After undergoing medical checks, the chambers are sealed and poison is injected through a tube, while scientists observe from above through glass. In a report reminiscent of an earlier account of a family of seven, Kwon claims to have watched one family of two parents, a son and a daughter die from suffocating gas, with the parents trying to save the children using mouth-to-mouth resuscitationfor as long as they had the strength. Kwon's testimony was supported by documents from Camp 22 describing the transfer of prisoners designated for the experiments. The documents were identified as genuine by Kim Sang Hun, a London-based expert on Korea and human rights activist.[16] A press conference in Pyongyang, organized by North Korean authorities, denounced this.[17][18]


Continental United States air defense forces during World War II were initially under the command of the four air districts - Northeast Air District, Northwest Air District, Southeast Air District, and Southwest Air District. The air districts established on 16 January 1941 before the Pearl Harbor attack.[1] The four air districts also handled USAAF combat training with the Army Ground Forces and "organization and training of bomber, fighter and other units and crews for assignments overseas".[1] The air districts were redesignated on 26 March 1941 as the 1st Air Force, 2nd Air Force, 3rd Air Force, & 4th Air Force,[1] First and Fourth Air Forces, through their interceptor commands, managed the civilian Aircraft Warning Service on the West and East Coasts.


ADC had four day-type fighter squadrons (FDS) in 1946. The ADC interceptor force grew to ninety-three (93) active Air Force fighter interceptor squadrons, seventy-six (76) Air National Guard fighter interceptor squadrons, several U.S. Navy fighter squadrons, USAF and USN airborne early warning squadrons, radar squadrons, training squadrons, and numerous support units that have played important roles in our nation's defense.[17]


The 9th ADD established the temporary 1962 "Cuban Missile Early Warning System" for the missile crisis. Responsibility for a USAFSS squadron's AN/FPS-17 radar station in Turkey for missile test monitoring transferred to ADC on 1 July 1963, the same date the site's AN/FPS-79 achieved IOC.[43] By January 1963, ADC's Detachment 3 of the 9th Aerospace Defense Division (9th ADD) was providing space surveillance data from the Moorestown BMEWS station "to a Spacetrack Analysis Center at Colorado Springs."[44] On 31 December 1965, Forward Scatter Over-the-Horizon network data from the 440L Data Reduction Center was being received by ADC for missile warning, and a NORAD plan for 1 April 1966 was for ADC to "reorganize its remaining 26th, 28th, 29th, and 73d Air Divisions into four air forces."[45]


The Fourth Air Force (4 AF) is a numbered air force of the United States Air Force Reserve (AFRC). It is headquartered at March Air Reserve Base, California.


4 AF directs the activities and supervises the training of more than 30,000 Air Force Reservists. If called to active duty, 4 AF's ready reserve units would be assigned to Air Mobility Command, Air Education and Training Command, and Pacific Air Forces.[2]


One of the four original pre–World War II numbered air forces, 4 AF was activated on 18 December 1940, at March Field, California with a mission of air defense of the Southwestern United States and Lower Midwest regions. During the war, its primary mission became the organization and training of combat units prior to their deployment to the overseas combat air forces.


Historical sources offer wildly different and confused accounts as to who assassinated Archelaus I, although it likely involved a homosexual love affair with royal pages at his court.[51] What ensued was a power struggle lasting from 399 to 393 BC of four different monarchs claiming the throne: Orestes, son of Archelaus I; Aeropus II, uncle, regent, and murderer of Orestes; Pausanias, son of Aeropus II; and Amyntas II, who was married to the youngest daughter of Archelaus I.[52] Very little is known about this period, although each of these monarchs aside from Orestes managed to mint debased currency imitating that of Archelaus I.[53] Finally, Amyntas III (r. 393–370 BC), son of Arrhidaeus and grandson of Amyntas I, succeeded to the throne by killing Pausanias.[52]