row sec

The Battle of Winceby took place on 11 October 1643 during the English Civil War near the village of Winceby, Lincolnshire about 6 km east of Horncastle.

Prelude

During the summer of 1643, the Royalists laid plans to win the war by marching on London. However, before this could be contemplated, it would be necessary for them to defeat the Parliamentarian forces holding Kingston upon Hull and Plymouth; otherwise, as the Royalist forces moved on London, the garrisons of those two towns could sortie out and attack the Royalist rear areas.

While these sieges were underway, Charles I of England decided to make the best use of his time by reducing Gloucester, the one great fortress of Parliament in the west. Parliamentary forces relieved Gloucester on 5 September. The relieving army was bought to battle by Royalist forces in the First Battle of Newbury; it was a tactical draw but a strategic victory for the Parliamentarians as it reduced the likelihood of a Royalist attack on London.

Meanwhile, the second Royalist siege of Hull had commenced. The Eastern Association forces under the Earl of Manchester promptly moved up into Lincolnshire, the foot besieging King’s Lynn (which surrendered on 16 September) while the horse rode into the northern part of the county to give a hand to the Fairfaxes. Fortunately for the Parliamentary Forces, the sea communications of Kingston upon Hull were open.

On 18 September, part of the cavalry in Hull was ferried over to Barton, and the rest under Sir Thomas Fairfax went by sea to Saltfleet a few days later, the whole joining Oliver Cromwell near Spilsby. In return, the old Lord Fairfax, who remained in Hull, received infantry reinforcements and a quantity of ammunition and stores from the Eastern Association. On 9 October Parliamentary forces under Manchester laid siege to Bolingbroke Castle.

The battle

On 9 October, Sir John Henderson, the Royalist governor of Newark-on-Trent, took a large body of 1,500 men, consisting predominantly of cavalry in 8 troops, with some dragoons and infantry, to relieve the garrison at Bolingbroke. After a sharp skirmish they took Horncastle from a small outlying detachment of Fairfax’s force. The Parliamentary detachment reported back to the main army that the Royalists were moving towards them. The next morning leaving enough men to stop the Bolingbroke garrison from launching a sortie, Manchester arrayed his army on Kirkby Hill, overlooking Bolingbroke. Sometime between 12:00 and 14:00 hours he ordered a general advance towards Horncastle. The Parliamentary horse which moved faster than the infantry met the Royalists advancing in the opposite direction at Winceby. The field of battle was not ideal as the land falls away into sharp gullies on one side, but it was not bad enough to prohibit a battle. The two forces were roughly the same size and composition because, as with the Parliamentarians, the Royalist infantry was not present.

The ensuing battle lasted about half an hour. Cromwell feigned a retreat and lured the Royalists from a good defensive position onto flat ground. A small party of Parliamentarians advanced on the Royalists who discharged their weapons at them. Cromwell then led his main body of horse in a charge hoping to press home his charge before the Royalists had time to reload. But dismounted Royalist dragoons managed to fire a second volley, hitting several of the Ironsides. Cromwell had his horse shot from under him and was only able to rejoin the battle after he had secured another mount. Royalist cavalry under William Saville counter attacked hitting Cromwell’s right flank. They in turn were attacked in the flank by Fairfax’s horse. In the resulting melee, the Royalists lost cohesion when the command by Saville to about face was taken to be an order to retreat and Saville’s horse fled the battle. On the Roundhead’s left wing the Cavaliers enjoyed greater initial success, but the collapse of the Royalist left and centre meant that Henderson had to retreat or face envelopment. A flanking attack by Cromwell’s reformed cavalry was enough to cause the Royalists to flee the field in confusion back towards Newark.

In Horncastle, at a place now known as “slash hollow”, some Royalists were killed or captured when they became trapped against a parish boundary gate that only opened one way (against them) and in their panic the press of men jammed it shut. For the remainder of the day the Roundheads hunted down Cavalier stragglers not stopping until dusk, which in October occurs in early evening, when they were recalled by Manchester. The Royalists lost about 300 men and the Parliamentarians about 20 with a further 60 wounded .

On the same day, Newcastle’s army around Hull, which had suffered terribly from the hardships of continuous siege work, was attacked by the garrison. They were so severely handled that the siege of Hull was given up the next day.

Conclusion

Manchester left Bolingbroke Castle under siege and proceeded to retake Lincoln and Gainsborough. With all hope of relief gone the garrison of Bolingbroke Castle surrendered on 14 November. Thus Lincolnshire, which had been almost entirely in the Royalist Earl of Newcastle’s hands before he was compelled to undertake the siege of Hull, was added, in fact as well as in name, to the Eastern Association.

References

1. ^ UK Battlefields Resource Centre - The Civil Wars - Lincolnshire Campaign 1643 - The Battle of Battle of Winceby

• This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain. The text is based on the article GREAT REBELLION.
• Battle of Winceby overview

Notes

1. ^  The Battle of Winceby, and The Siege of Bolingbroke Castle 1643

ford chevrolet

A crystal system is a category of space groups, which characterize symmetry of structures in three dimensions with translational symmetry in three directions, having a discrete class of point groups. A major application is in crystallography, to categorize crystals, but by itself the topic is one of 3D Euclidean geometry.

Overview

There are 7 crystal systems:

• Triclinic, all cases not satisfying the requirements of any other system. There is no necessary symmetry other than translational symmetry, although inversion is possible.
• Monoclinic, requires either 1 twofold axis of rotation or 1 mirror plane.
• Orthorhombic, requires either 3 twofold axes of rotation or 1 twofold axis of rotation and two mirror planes.
• Tetragonal, requires 1 fourfold axis of rotation.
• Rhombohedral, also called trigonal, requires 1 threefold axis of rotation.
• Hexagonal, requires 1 sixfold axis of rotation.
• Isometric or cubic, requires 4 threefold axes of rotation.

There are 2, 13, 59, 68, 25, 27, and 36 space groups per crystal system, respectively, for a total of 230. The following table gives a brief characterization of the various crystal systems:

Within a crystal system there are two ways of categorizing space groups:

• by the linear parts of symmetries, i.e. by crystal class, also called crystallographic point group; each of the 32 crystal classes applies for one of the 7 crystal systems
• by the symmetries in the translation lattice, i.e. by Bravais lattice; each of the 14 Bravais lattices applies for one of the 7 crystal systems.

The 73 symmorphic space groups (see space group) are largely combinations, within each crystal system, of each applicable point group with each applicable Bravais lattice: there are 2, 6, 12, 14, 5, 7, and 15 combinations, respectively, together 61.

Crystallographic point groups

Main article: Crystallographic point group

A symmetry group consists of isometric affine transformations; each is given by an orthogonal matrix and a translation vector (which may be the zero vector). Space groups can be grouped by the matrices involved, i.e. ignoring the translation vectors (see also Euclidean group). This corresponds to discrete symmetry groups with a fixed point. There are infinitely many of these point groups in three dimensions. However, only part of these are compatible with translational symmetry: the crystallographic point groups. This is expressed in the crystallographic restriction theorem. (In spite of these names, this is a geometric limitation, not just a physical one.)

The point group of a crystal, among other things, determines the symmetry of the crystal’s optical properties. For instance, one knows whether it is birefringent, or whether it shows the Pockels effect, by simply knowing its point group.

Overview of point groups by crystal system

crystal system	point group / crystal class	Schönflies	Hermann-Mauguin	orbifold	Type
triclinic	triclinic-pedial	C1		11	enantiomorphic polar
	triclinic-pinacoidal	Ci		1x	centrosymmetric
monoclinic	monoclinic-sphenoidal	C2		22	enantiomorphic polar
	monoclinic-domatic	Cs		1*	polar
	monoclinic-prismatic	C2h		2*	centrosymmetric
orthorhombic	orthorhombic-sphenoidal	D2		222	enantiomorphic
	orthorhombic-pyramidal	C2v		*22	polar
	orthorhombic-bipyramidal	D2h		*222	centrosymmetric
tetragonal	tetragonal-pyramidal	C4		44	enantiomorphic polar
	tetragonal-disphenoidal	S4		2x
	tetragonal-dipyramidal	C4h		4*	centrosymmetric
	tetragonal-trapezoidal	D4		422	enantiomorphic
	ditetragonal-pyramidal	C4v		*44	polar
	tetragonal-scalenoidal	D2d	or	2*2
	ditetragonal-dipyramidal	D4h		*422	centrosymmetric
rhombohedral (trigonal)	trigonal-pyramidal	C3		33	enantiomorphic polar
	rhombohedral	S6 (C3i)		3x	centrosymmetric
	trigonal-trapezoidal	D3	or or	322	enantiomorphic
	ditrigonal-pyramidal	C3v	or or	*33	polar
	ditrigonal-scalahedral	D3d	or or	2*3	centrosymmetric
hexagonal	hexagonal-pyramidal	C6		66	enantiomorphic polar
	trigonal-dipyramidal	C3h		3*
	hexagonal-dipyramidal	C6h		6*	centrosymmetric
	hexagonal-trapezoidal	D6		622	enantiomorphic
	dihexagonal-pyramidal	C6v		*66	polar
	ditrigonal-dipyramidal	D3h	or	*322
	dihexagonal-dipyramidal	D6h		*622	centrosymmetric
cubic	tetartohedral	T		332	enantiomorphic
	diploidal	Th		3*2	centrosymmetric
	gyroidal	O		432	enantiomorphic
	tetrahedral	Td		*332
	hexoctahedral	Oh		*432	centrosymmetric

The crystal structures of biological molecules (such as protein structures) can only occur in the 11 enantiomorphic point groups, as biological molecules are invariably chiral. The protein assemblies themselves may have symmetries other than those given above, because they are not intrinsically restricted by the Crystallographic restriction theorem. For example the Rad52 DNA binding protein has an 11-fold rotational symmetry (in human), however, it must form crystals in one of the 11 enantiomorphic point groups given above.

Classification of lattices

The 7 Crystal systems	The 14 Bravais Lattices
triclinic (parallelepiped)
monoclinic (right prism with parallelogram base; here seen from above)	simple	centered
orthorhombic (cuboid)	simple	base-centered	body-centered	face-centered
tetragonal (square cuboid)	simple	body-centered
rhombohedral or trigonal (trigonal trapezohedron)
hexagonal (centered regular hexagon)
cubic (isometric; cube)	simple	body-centered	face-centered

In geometry and crystallography, a Bravais lattice is a category of symmetry groups for translational symmetry in three directions, or correspondingly, a category of translation lattices.

Such symmetry groups consist of translations by vectors of the form

where n₁, n₂, and n₃ are integers and a₁, a₂, and a₃ are three non-coplanar vectors, called primitive vectors.

These lattices are classified by space group of the translation lattice itself; there are 14 Bravais lattices in three dimensions; each can apply in one crystal system only. They represent the maximum symmetry a structure with the translational symmetry concerned can have.

All crystalline materials must, by definition fit in one of these arrangements (not including quasicrystals).

For convenience a Bravais lattice is depicted by a unit cell which is a factor 1, 2, 3 or 4 larger than the primitive cell. Depending on the symmetry of a crystal or other pattern, the fundamental domain is again smaller, up to a factor 48.

The Bravais lattices were studied by Moritz Ludwig Frankenheim (1801-1869), in 1842, who found that there were 15 Bravais lattices. This was corrected to 14 by A. Bravais in 1848.

See also

• Crystal structure
• Point group
• List of the 230 crystallographic 3D space groups

Ideal Body Weight Kg

algebra

Dieschitz (Deš?ice), Austria

Dieschitz (Deš?ice ) is an Austrian village in the municipality of Velden (Vrba) am Wörthersee, Villach (Beljak) – district - countryside, federal state or Bundesland Carinthia (German Kärnten, Slovenian Koroška). In this article the Slovenian place-names follow the German in brackets written in italic.

Unterdieschitz (Deš?ice)

Geography

Oberdieschitz (Mo?ile)

Dieschitz (Deš?ice) is located approximately 5 km to the south of Velden (Vrba) in the eastern part of the meander of Rosegg (Rožek) of the Drau river (Drava). Dieschitz (Deš?ice) has two parts: Unterdieschitz = Dieschitz in the strict sense (Deš?ice) and Oberdieschitz (Mo?ile).

Population

El río Drava (Drau) en Dieschitz

According to the census of 2001 Dieschitz (Deš?ice) has a population of 122 inhabitants. A part of the inhabitants (still) is bilingual. Censuses of the colloquial language gave the following numbers of Slovenian-speakers (pay attention to the fluctuation of the percentages although there were no remarkable migration):

Economy

The Pub and the brick factory were closed in the 50’s, the store in 1970 and the carpentry in 1996. The inhabitants, in the past in their majority farmers, have to travel to their work to Villach (Beljak) or to Klagenfurt (Celovec), few found a use in the proximity in St. Egyden (Šentilj), Schiefling am See (Škofi?e) or Velden (Vrba).

ohio

3rd Signal Brigade
3rd Signal Brigade Insignia
Active	January 24, 1946
Country	United States
Branch	United States Army
Type	Communications
Role	Command and Control Communications
Garrison/HQ	Fort Hood, TX (former)
Nickname	Triple Threat
Motto	“First in, Last out, Warriors”
Engagements	Operation Desert Storm Operation Iraqi Freedom
Insignia
Distinctive Unit Insignia

The 3d Signal Brigade of the United States Army was an element of the III Corps (United States). It was based at Fort Hood, Texas, but was inactivated as part of the transition to the Army Modular Force. The 3d Signal Brigade was composed of the Brigade’s Headquarters and Headquarters Company & the 57th Signal Battalion. On order, the 3d Signal Brigade deployed to a theater of operations, provides command and control communications to the III Mobile Armored Corps (Phantom), and redeploys.

Mission:

Provide communications and automation support to III Corps (United States) and Fort Hood. The unit is tasked with:

• Installing, operating, and Maintaining (IOM) the communications network for III Armored Corps
• Being prepared to deploy in support of world wide contingency missions
• Providing viable, effective family support to Soldiers, civilians, and their families
• Assisting in training “Reserve Component” Signal Battalions
• Supporting the Fort Hood Installation Mission Area (IMA) functions and facilities (DOIM).

Subordinate Units:

1 Battalion makes up 3d Signal Brigade:

• 57th Signal Battalion
  • Alpha Company
  • Bravo Company
  • Charlie Company
  • Delta Company

Former subordinate Units:

• 176th Signal Company, 4 April 1967 to August 1968
• 596th Signal Company, 4 April 1967 to August 1968
• 57th Signal Battalion, 12 June 1978 to present
• 54th Signal Battalion, 10 July 1979 to 16 April 1989(Inactivated)
• 16th Signal Battalion, 12 June 1978 to 19 May 2006 (Inactivated)
• 313th Signal Company, 16 April 1989 to 19 May 2006(Inactivated)
• 1114th Signal Battalion, 1 March 1994 to Unknown (No longer part of 3d Signal Brigade)

History:

The 3d Signal Brigade was originally constituted on January24th, 1946, as the 1st Signal Service Group. It was activated at Camp Crowder, Missouri, February 1, 1946, as part of the Second United States Army. On February 13, 1946, the group was re-designated as Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment, 1st Signal Group. On March 9, 1946, the group was transferred from Camp Crowder to Camp Polk, Louisiana, as part of the Fourth United States Army.

On December 17, 1946, the Group made another move, this time to Fort Meade, Maryland, and was attached to Headquarters, Special Troops of the Sixth Army. From May 1, 1947 until March 31, 1949, the group headquarters was established but no personnel were assigned. On March 29, 1949, the group was re-designated as Headquarters, 1st Signal Service Troop and was allotted to the Regular Army. In September 1949, the group moved to Fort Bragg, North Carolina. On December 1, 1950, the group moved to Camp Gordon, Georgia, as part of the Third United States Army.

In April 1951, the unit was transferred to Camp Cooke, Carolina as part of the Sixth Army. In January 1952, the unit moved to Camp San Luis Obispo, California. The group inactivated on August 20, 1952. On June 3, 1953, the unit was re-designated as Headquarters, 1st Signal Group (Electronic Warfare) and activated at Fort Monmouth, New Jersey.

In April 1954, the unit moved to Fort Huachuca, Arizona, on June 10, 1955, the unit was reorganized and re-designated as Headquarters and Headquarters Detach­ment, 1st Signal Group. The group was inactivated at Fort Huachuca on December 9, 1957.

In April 1960, the unit was assigned to United States Army Europe and was activated on May 1, 1960 at Orleans, France. The group was assigned to USACOMZUER (United States Army Europe, Communication Zone). On February 26, 1965, the USACOMZUER Signal Section and the 1st Signal Group were integrated into one unit.

On February 28, 1967, the Department of the Army announced that HHD, 1st Signal Group would relocate to Fort Huachuca, Arizona at cadre strength no later than March 15, 1967. On April 4, 1967, the 1st Signal Group assumed the mission of command and control of the 176th Signal Company (LB), the 268th Signal Company (TL), and the 596th Signal Company (SPT) at Fort Huachuca.

August 1968 found the 1st Signal Group moving to Fort Lewis, Washington. The 596th Signal Company went to Vietnam from Fort Huachuca, leaving the 176th Signal Company and the 596th Signal Company to team up with the 58th and the 78th Signal Battalions.

The 1st Signal Group remained at Fort Lewis, Washington until June 12, 1978, where it was then reactivated at Fort Hood. On May 1, 1979, the 391st Signal Company was attached to the 1st Signal Group. On August 15, 1979, D Company, 57th Signal Battalion was relocated from Fort Sill, Oklahoma to Fort Hood.

On June 21, 1979, the 278th Signal Company (Cable and Wire Corps) was activated / organized. On July 10, 1979, the 54th Signal Battalion was relieved from U.S. Army Garrison, Fort Hood and attached to the group.

On September 17, 1979, the 1st Signal Group was inactivated and the HHC, 3d Signal Brigade was activated. HHC, 3d Signal Brigade commanded and controlled the 16th, 54th and 57th Signal Battalions. On April 16, 1989 the Brigade inactivated the 54th Signal Battalion and began a total reconfiguration for fielding on new Mobile Subscriber Equipment (MSE) which culminated with the Commander’s Acceptance Field Training Exercise in November 1989. The Brigade included HHC, 3d Signal Brigade, 16th Signal Battalion, 57th Signal Battalion, 313th Signal Company, and the 1114th Signal Battalion (Fort Hood Directorate of Information Management).

On September 27, 1990, the 57th Signal Battalion and elements of the HHC, 3d Signal Brigade were deployed to Southwest Asia (SWA) where they were attached to the 35th Signal Brigade (Corps) (Airborne), XVIII Airborne Corps in support of Operation Desert Shield and Operation Desert Storm. In April 1991, the 57th Signal Battalion and all other 3d Signal Brigade assets were released from attachment and returned to Fort Hood, Texas.

On January 4, 2004 the 57th Signal Battalion and elements of the HHC, 3d Signal Brigade were once again deployed to Southwest Asia (SWA) in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom II (OIF II). For the first time in its history, the entire HHC, 3d Signal Brigade deployed overseas in support of a real world mission. On December 23, 2004, the 3d Signal Brigade relinquished command and control of the OIF II theater communications network to the 35th Signal Brigade (Corps) (Airborne).

On May 19, 2006, the 3d Signal Brigade inactivated its 16th Signal Battalion and 313th Signal Company, leaving the Brigade with only its command and control element, its Headquarters and Headquarters Company, and the 57th Signal Battalion.

The Brigade’s three forms of telecommunication: MSE, TACSAT, and TROPO, provide the III Corps Commander and his field commanders with a strong communications triad which lives up to the Brigade’s motto of “TRIPLE THREAT!”

Insignia:

Shoulder Sleeve Insignia:

Description: On an orange shield 2 inches (51 mm) in width overall and within a 1/8 inch white border a blue star fimbriated white between three white lightning flashes.

Symbolism: Orange and white are the Signal Corps colors. The star, a reference to Texas, the “Lone Star State,” the place of initial activation, also refers to guidance and achievement. The flashes are symbolic of the speed of communications and also refer numerically to the present designation of the Brigade. The color blue is indicative of support to the Infantry and other combat forces.

Background: The insignia was approved on 29 Aug 79.

Distinctive Unit Insignia:

Description: A gold color metal and enamel device 1 1/8 inches in height overall consisting of three blue discs conjoined two above one and centered thereon a red triangular area with one point down bordered by three gold lightning flashes with points conjoined, and in base on a semi-circular gold scroll the words “TRIPLE THREAT” in blue letters.

Symbolism: The three roundels represent rounds of ammunition and, together with the colors blue, gold and scarlet, refer to the organization’s mission to support the combat arms; Infantry, Armor, and Artillery. The three flashes denote the unit’s triple-threat capability in the performance of its mission, adding emphasis to the motto “TRIPLE THREAT.”

Background: The insignia was approved on 17 Dec 80

Ideal Body Weight In

Shire of Etheridge Queensland
Location within Queensland
Population:	1,012 (2005 census)
Established:	1882
Area:	39920 km² (15,413.2 sq mi)
Mayor:	John Smith
Council Seat:	Georgetown
State District:	Charters Towers
Federal Division:	Kennedy
Website: http://www.etheridge.qld.gov.au/
LGAs around Shire of Etheridge: Carpentaria Mareeba Herberton Croydon Shire of Etheridge Dalrymple Richmond Flinders Dalrymple

The Shire of Etheridge is a Local Government Area in north Queensland, Australia. The shire includes the towns of Mount Surprise, Einasleigh, Forsayth and the administrative centre, Georgetown.

The shire is part of the Gulf Savannah region and has an economy based around cattle grazing and mining.

depo black led tail lamp

Nied?wied?
—  Village  —
Country	Poland
Voivodeship	Lower Silesian
County	Z?bkowice ?l?skie
Gmina	Zi?bice

Nied?wied? is a village in the administrative district of Gmina Zi?bice, within Z?bkowice ?l?skie County, Lower Silesian Voivodeship, in south-western Poland. Prior to 1945 it was in Germany.

Ideal Body Weight With

In taxonomy, the Oltmansiellopsidales are an order of green algae, specifically the Ulvophyceae.

References

1. ^ See the NCBI webpage on Oltmansiellopsidales. Data extracted from the “NCBI taxonomy resources”. National Center for Biotechnology Information. ftp://ftp.ncbi.nih.gov/pub/taxonomy/. Retrieved on 2007-03-19. 

External links

Scientific references

• PubMed references for Oltmansiellopsidales
• PubMed Central references for Oltmansiellopsidales
• Google Scholar references for Oltmansiellopsidales

Healthy Weight Calories

marvel universe

Boucles de Spa

Jump to: navigation, search

The Boucles de Spa is a Belgian motor rally.

Results:

• 1953 Richard - - Volkswagen
• 1954 Gendebien - Wascher - Aston Martin
• 1955 No finishers - all out of time
• 1956 Evrard - Collignon - Ford Anglia
• 1962 Sander - Sander - DAF 33
• 1963 Event cancelled
• 1964 Staepaelere - Meeuwissen - Lotus Cortina
• 1965 Mombaerts - Mosbeaux - Lotus Elan
• 1967 Staepaelere - Christiaens - Ford Cortina GT
• 1968 Jacquemin - Chavan - Renault 8 Gordini
• 1969 Jacquemin - Demey - Alpine 110
• 1970 Chavan - Van Gutshoven - Alfa Romeo Duetto
• 1971 Pedro - ‘Jimmy’ - BMW 2002 Tii
• 1972 Adriensens - Daemers - BMW 2002 Tii
• 1973 Haxe - Delferrier - DAF 66
• 1974 Brink - ‘Idel’ - Porsche Carrera
• 1975 Staepaelere - Vaillant - Ford Escort RS
• 1976 Blomqvist - Sylvan - Saab 99 EMS
• 1977 Pond - Gallagher - Triumph TR7
• 1978 Dumont - Materne - Opel Kadett GTE
• 1979 Kleint - Wanger - Opel Ascona 1.9
• 1980 Blomqvist - Cederberg - Saab 99 Turbo
• 1981 Snyers - Symens - Ford Escort RS
• 1982 Colsoul - Lopes - Opel Ascona 400
• 1983 Duez - Lux - Audi Quattro
• 1984 Capone - Cresto - Lancia Rallye
• 1985 Waldegård - Thorselius - Audi Quattro
• 1986 Probst - De Canck - Ford Sierra 4×4
• 1987 Snyers - Colebunders - Lancia Delta HF
• 1988 Snyers - Colebunders - BMW M3
• 1989 Snyers - Colebunders - Toyota Celica 4WD
• 1990 Saby - Grateloup - Lancia Delta Integrale

Retrieved from “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boucles_de_Spa”
Categories: Rally competitions | Motorsport in Belgium

Views

• Article
• Discussion
• Edit this page
• History

Personal tools

• Log in / create account

Navigation

• Main page
• Contents
• Featured content
• Current events
• Random article

Search

Interaction

• About Wikipedia
• Community portal
• Recent changes
• Contact Wikipedia
• Donate to Wikipedia
• Help

Toolbox

• What links here
• Related changes
• Upload file
• Special pages
• Printable version
• Permanent link
• Cite this page

• This page was last modified on 21 December 2007, at 21:47.
• All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License. (See Copyrights for details.)
  Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a U.S. registered 501(c)(3) tax-deductible nonprofit charity.
• Privacy policy
• About Wikipedia
• Disclaimers

winnebago

Lai Junchen (Chinese: ???) (d. April 28, 697) was a secret police official during the Chinese dynasty Tang Dynasty and Wu Zetian’s Zhou Dynasty, whose ability to interrogate and falsely implicate officials of crimes made him a subject of fear and hatred. In 697, he was accused of plotting to falsely accuse Wu Zetian’s sons and other family members of treason, and he was executed.

Background

It is not known when Lai Junchen was born, but it is known that he was from Wannian County (??), one of the two counties making up the Tang Dynasty capital Chang’an. His father was one Lai Cao (??) — who was said to have won Lai Junchen’s mother, then the wife of his friend Cai Ben (??), after winning in gambling with Cai. Lai Junchen was said to be a thug who did not work, who was investigated for thievery while he was at He Prefecture (??, roughly modern Chaohu, Anhui) and who then made false accusations against others to the prefect, Li Xu (??) the Prince of Dongping, a cousin of then-reigning Emperor Ruizong. Li Xu had him caned 100 times and thrown out.

In 689, in the aftermath of rebellions against Emperor Ruizong’s mother and regent Empress Dowager Wu (later known as Wu Zetian) by Emperor Ruizong’s uncle Li Zhen the Prince of Yue and Li Chong the Prince of Langye, Li Xu, along with many other imperial Li clan members, was executed by Empress Dowager Wu. Lai again made a secret report, this time directly to Empress Dowager Wu, who encouraged such reports from anyone. When she met with him, he claimed that what he was reporting earlier dealt with Li Zhen’s and Li Chong’s rebellions, and that Li Xu had improperly suppressed them. Empress Dowager Wu believed him and thought he was faithful to her, and therefore made him a secret police official, rising to the rank of deputy imperial censor (????, Yushi Zhongcheng).

First stint as secret police official

It was said that Lai Junchen personally retained a staff of several hundred men who were previously thugs, with the intent to have them make reports. If he decided to falsely implicate someone in a crime, then he had the men submit false reports that corroborate each other. Lai and his assisant Wan Guojun (???) even authored a text known as the Classic of Accusation (???), teaching their subordinates how to accuse people of crimes and how to create details that make the alleged plot appear logical and likely. Lai and the other secret police officials were also said to have created a number of torture methods and equipments to get the accused to confess, and further, each time he knew that a general pardon was set to be issued, he had the jailers kill important prisoners first before the general pardon would be declared. Lai’s authorities continued to grow, particularly after Empress Dowager Wu herself took the throne in 690 as “emperor” of a new Zhou Dynasty, interrupting Tang and reducing Emperor Ruizong to the rank of crown prince.

In 691, the official Liu Xinggan (???) was accused of treason. Wu Zetian had the chancellor Shi Wuzi investigate along with Lai. After Liu Xinggan and his brothers were executed for treason, Lai further reported to Wu Zetian that Shi had good relations with Liu Xinggan and had tried to hide evidence of Liu Xinggan’s guilt. Wu Zetian had Lai investigate Shi as well and Shi, in fear, committed suicide.

That year, a famous incident involving Lai and fellow secret police official Zhou Xing occurred. Earlier that year, the general Qiu Shenji (???) had been accused of crime and executed, and subsequently, there were secret reports that Zhou was involved with Qiu’s crimes. Wu Zetian had Lai investigate, without Zhou’s knowledge. One day, Lai and Zhou sat down to lunch, and Lai asked Zhou the question of, “Many of the accused are not wiling to confess. Do you have an idea on how to get them to confess?” Zhou responded, “That is easy. Take a big urn and set a fire under it. Put the accused in it, and surely he will confess everything.” Lai had a big urn brought and a fire set underneath, in accordance with Zhou’s instructions, and then rose and stated to Zhou, “I had received secret instructions from Her Imperial Majesty with regard to you, big brother. Please enter the urn.” Zhou, in fear, knelt and confessed. Wu Zetian did not execute Zhou but exiled him, and on the way to his place of exile, Zhou was killed by his enemies. (This incident inspired the Chinese proverb “invite the gentleman into the urn” (????, qing jun ru weng), now used for the concept of putting a person into a trap that he himself or she herself had set.)

Later that year, when investigating the general Zhang Qianxu (???), Lai interrogated Zhang and tortured him severely. Zhang, unable to stand the torture, yelled out to another official in charge of investigations, Xu Yougong (???), who was known for being merciful. Angry that Zhang was yelling out to Xu, Lai had his guards slash Zhang to death with their swords and then beheaded him. When he subsequently investigated the prefect Yun Hongsi (???), he did not bother interrogating Yun — he just beheaded Yun and then forged a confession from Yun.

Yet later that year, the chancellors Cen Changqian and Ge Fuyuan offended Wu Zetian by strenuously opposing the proposal to elevate her powerful nephew Wu Chengsi to be crown prince, and she had them arrested. Lai coerced Cen’s son Cen Lingyuan (???) into implicating another chancellor, Ouyang Tong, whom Lai subsequently arrested and tortured. However, he was unable to get Ouyang to admit to treason, and so he forged a confession from Ouyang. Cen, Ge, and Ouyang were all executed. Lai also killed the general Li Anjing (???).

In 692, Lai falsely accused the chancellors Ren Zhigu, Di Renjie, and Pei Xingben, along with other officials Cui Xuanli (???), Lu Xian (??), Wei Yuanzhong, and Li Sizhen (???) of treason. Lai tried to induce them to confess by citing an imperial edict that stated that those who confessed would be spared their lives, and Di confessed and was not tortured. He then wrote a petition on his blanket and hid it inside cotton clothes, and then had his family members take the clothes home to be changed into summer clothes. Wu Zetian thereafter became suspicious and inquired with Lai, who responded by forging, in the names of Di and the other officials, submissions thanking Wu Zetian for preparing to execute them. However, the young son of another chancellor who had been executed, Le Sihui, who was seized to be a servant at the ministry of agriculture, made a petition to Wu Zetian and told her that Lai was so skillful at manufacturing charges that even the most honest and faithful individuals would be forced into confessions by Lai. Wu Zetian thereafter summoned the seven accused officials and personally interrogated them, and after they disavowed the forged confessions, released but exiled them. Later that year, Lai demanded a bribe from the general Quan Xiancheng (???), the grandson of the former Goguryeo regent Yeon Gaesomun and, when Quan refused, falsely accused Quan of treason and had him strangled.

In 693, the officials Pei Feigong (???) and Fan Yunxian (???) were accused of secretly meeting with the crown prince Li Dan (the former emperor), and when Fan tried to speak on his own behalf, Lai had his tongue cut off, and then had Pei and Fan both executed by being cut in half at the waist. Wu Zetian decreed that officials would not be allowed to meet with Li Dan. When, subsequently, there were secret accusations that Li Dan was plotting to overthrow her, she had Lai investigate Li Dan’s associates, whom Lai arrested and tortured. One of them, An Jinzang (???), proclaimed Li Dan’s innocence and cut his own abdomen, causing the organs to fall out. When Wu Zetian heard this, she was touched, and she had the imperial physicians treat An, barely saving his life, and on account of An’s assurance that Li Dan was not plotting against her, ordered Lai to end his investigations against Li Dan. Meanwhile, Lai falsely accused the minister of public works, Su Gan (??), of having been a coconspirator of Li Chong’s, and had him executed.

Either in 693 or 694, Lai was accused by the imperial censor JI Lüzhong (???) of five crimes, including corruption, and initially, Lai was sentenced to death, but Wu Zetian, believing him to have accomplished much for her, spared his life and reduced him to commoner rank — and soon thereafter reinstated him as secretary general of palace affairs (???, Dianzhong Cheng). Lai was, however, thereafter again accused of corruption, and he was demoted to be a military officer at Tong Prefecture (??, roughly modern Weinan, Shaanxi), interrupting his career as a secret police official.

Second stint as secret police official

In 696, Lai Junchen was recalled to then-capital Luoyang to serve as the sheriff of Hegong County (??), one of the two counties making up Luoyang. In late 696, the sheriff of Mingtang County (??, one of the counties making up Chang’an), Ji Xu, heard about a treasonous plot by the officials Liu Sili (???), Qilian Yao (???), and Wang Ju (??) — as the conspirators believed that Qilian was fated to be emperor one day. Ji relayed the plot to Lai, and had Lai submit a secret report of it. Wu Zetian had Wu Yizong (???) the Prince of Henan, the grandson of her uncle Wu Shiyi (???), investigate. Liu implicated some 36 officials into the plot, and they and their families were executed. Lai, wanting to monopolize the rewards for reporting this plot, was prepared to falsely accuse Ji of crimes as well, but Ji found this out and submitted a secret petition; he was able to meet Wu Zetian, who promoted him, while Lai was further restored to good graces in Wu Zetian’s eyes and was promoted to be the deputy minister of husbandry (????, Sipu Shaoqing).

It was said that, particularly after this restoration to power, Lai did what he could to seize beautiful women for his gratification, finding ways to implicate and execute their husbands and then seize them. (He had been planning to seize a beautiful servant girl of Western Tujue’s Jiezhongshizhu Khan Ashina Huseluo, then at Luoyang, and he therefore accused Ashina Huseluo of treason, but Ashina Huseluo escaped death when the chiefs of his subordinate tribes pleaded in front of the palace and cut their own faces to vouch for Ashina Huseluo.) It was further said that he created a book of the officials’ names and then random chose whom to accuse by drawing lots, and that he compared himself to Shi Le, the founder of Later Zhao. As he had an inimical relationship with the censor Li Zhaode, he and another enemy of Li Zhaode’s, Huangfu Wenbei (????), falsely accused Li Zhaode of treason, and Li Zhaode was arrested later in 697.

Meanwhile, Lai was said to be ready for something much more major — falsely accusing Li Dan, his older brother Li Zhe the Prince of Luling (also a former emperor), the Wu clan imperial princes, and Wu Zetian’s powerful daughter Princess Taiping, of treason as well, to wipe them out gradually to give himself a chance to start a coup to seize the throne himself. His friend Wei Suizhong (???), publicly reported the plot, and the Wu clan princes and Princess Taiping responded by submitting accusations against Lai. Wu Zetian arrested Lai, and Lai was sentenced to death — but Wu Zetian, still believing that he was faithful to her, did not approve the execution order for three days. Only at Ji’s urging did she approve the execution, and Lai and Li Zhaode were executed on the same day. It was said that the people mourned Li Zhaode while celebrating Lai’s death — with his enemies cutting out his flesh and organs, consuming much of it in anger.

1971 cadillac fender skirts

digivice

Cavalier County, North Dakota
Map
Location in the state of North Dakota
North Dakota’s location in the U.S.
Statistics
Founded	1879
Seat	Langdon
Largest city	Langdon
Area  - Total  - Land  - Water	1,510 sq mi (3,911 km²) 1,488 sq mi (3,854 km²) 22 sq mi (57 km²), 1.44%
Population  - (2000)  - Density	4,831 3/sq mi (1/km²)

Cavalier County is a county located in the U.S. state of North Dakota. As of 2000, the population was 4,831. Its county seat is Langdon. The city of Cavalier is in nearby Pembina County. The county was created by the 1879 territorial legislature and named for Charles Cavileer of Pembina, North Dakota ( 1818-1902 ), one of the earliest white settlers. There is no explanation for the difference in the spelling of “Cavalier”. The county was organized on July 8, 1884 and Langdon became the county seat.

History

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references (ideally, using inline citations). Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (July 2007)

Cavalier County was created from the western part of Pembina County in 1873 and named by the Territorial Legislature for Charles Cavileer, a well known fur trader, customs agent and postmaster. The spelling has always been Cavalier.

After petitioning the Territorial Governor for permission to organize the county, Patrick McHugh, W. Hudson Matthews, and L.C. Noracong met for the purpose on July 8, 1884. On July 2,6 the new county officials met for the second time and chose Noracong as Chairman of the Board with William H. Doyle and Matthews as Commissioners. The first Register of Deeds and County Clerk was McHugh. W.J. Mooney became the first Judge of Probate, Charles B. Nelson was the first Cavalier County Supt. of Schools, and Clarence Hawkes the first Sheriff.

The site of the new county seat was chosen at this meeting and named Langdon for Robert Bruce Langdon of Minnesota, a federal railroad official who never visited the town.

Fifteen townships from Pembina County were added to Cavalier County by vote of their residents in May 1885. A census taken at that time revealed 5,029 residence living in nine large townships. The nine townships names used in 1885 are still used. The current boundaries and township names were standardized in 1906.

The first court house was built in the fall of 1884 at a cost of $360.00. It was used briefly and then abandoned for warmer and more centrally located quarters in a downtown bank. A large brick court house was built in 1895 on the present site at a contract cost of $9,099.00. This building served county officials until the current court house was constructed in 1957-58.

Geography

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the county has a total area of 1,510 square miles (3,911 km²), of which, 1,488 square miles (3,855 km²) of it is land and 22 square miles (56 km²) of it (1.44%) is water.

Townships

Adjacent counties and rural municipalities

• Louise, Manitoba (north)
• Pembina, Manitoba (north)
• Stanley, Manitoba (north)
• Pembina County (east)
• Walsh County (southeast)
• Ramsey County (south)
• Towner County (west)

		Louise, Manitoba, Canada; Pembina, Manitoba, Canada; and Stanley, Manitoba, Canada		v • d • e
	Towner County		Pembina County
		Cavalier County, North Dakota
		Ramsey County	Walsh County

Major highways

• North Dakota Highway 1
• North Dakota Highway 5
• North Dakota Highway 20
• North Dakota Highway 66

Demographics

As of the census of 2000, there were 4,831 people, 2,017 households, and 1,361 families residing in the county. The population density was 3 people per square mile (1/km²). There were 2,725 housing units at an average density of 2 per square mile (1/km²). The racial makeup of the county was 98.10% White, 0.14% Black or African American, 0.52% Native American, 0.10% Asian, 0.10% from other races, and 1.03% from two or more races. 0.64% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race. 44.5% were of German, 23.1% Norwegian and 6.4% French ancestry according to Census 2000.

There were 2,017 households out of which 27.50% had children under the age of 18 living with them, 60.80% were married couples living together, 3.80% had a female householder with no husband present, and 32.50% were non-families. 30.80% of all households were made up of individuals and 17.00% had someone living alone who was 65 years of age or older. The average household size was 2.34 and the average family size was 2.93.

In the county the population was spread out with 24.60% under the age of 18, 3.70% from 18 to 24, 21.30% from 25 to 44, 27.50% from 45 to 64, and 22.90% who were 65 years of age or older. The median age was 45 years. For every 100 females there were 98.90 males. For every 100 females age 18 and over, there were 97.60 males.

The median income for a household in the county was $31,868, and the median income for a family was $39,601. Males had a median income of $28,886 versus $19,647 for females. The per capita income for the county was $15,817. About 7.80% of families and 11.50% of the population were below the poverty line, including 16.60% of those under age 18 and 11.90% of those age 65 or over.

Places

Cities

• Alsen
• Calio
• Calvin
• Hannah
• Langdon
• Loma
• Milton
• Munich
• Nekoma
• Osnabrock
• Sarles
• Wales

Note: all incorporated communities in North Dakota are called “cities” regardless of their size.

Unincorporated communities

• Hove Mobile Park
• Maida

vintage computing