Journal articles on the topic '1821-1840'

O adulto de Coraliomela brunnea brunnea (Thunberg, 1821) é redescrito e ilustrado incluindo novos caracteres morfológicos. Coraliomela brunnea collaris (Guérin-Méneville, 1840) e C. brunnea nigripes (Guérin-Méneville, 1840) são considerados sinônimos de C. brunnea brunnea.

Este artículo aborda la evolución del ceremonial peruano y su relación con los cambiantes contextos políticos desde la independencia hasta el final de la Guerra de restauración dirigida por Agustín Gamarra, para comprender la falta de rituales políticos que caracterizó a la Confederación Perú-Boliviana. Para ello, se han utilizado fuentes primarias como el diario El Peruano y Guías de forasteros entre 1821 y 1840, así como documentos oficiales de la Confederación Perú-Boliviana y la Colección de leyes, decretos y órdenes publicadas en el Perú desde el año de 1821 hasta el 31 de diciembre de 1859. La investigación busca mostrar que el proyecto santacrucino careció de prácticas rituales esenciales para materializarse, pese a la voluntad del gobierno confederal por contar con ellos.

En este artículo, se examina la construcción de la cronología de la Independencia peruana mediante los calendarios publicados entre 1821 y 1840. También se analiza las perspectivas que desarrollaron sobre la Independencia un elenco de diversos autores: Valdez y Palacios, Pruvonena (Riva Agüero), S. Távara, C. Lissón, S. Lorente, M. F. Paz Soldán, Rodríguez. Sus textos evidencian distintas soluciones a la ambigüedad del proceso independentista y la preocupación por hacerlo calzar en una temporalidad unívoca y continua.

In 2008 we found 21 species of grasshoppers and crickets on Macošská stráň slope and 18 species on Vilémovická stráň slope. Both slopes are located in the northern part of the Moravský kras Protected landscape area and have xerothermic character. Both slopes are influenced by pasture management. For the most comprehensive picture of Orthoptera we used a standard method (sweeping of vegetation) and nonstandard methods (pitfall traps and Möricke yellow cups). Termophilous species of Orthoptera on Macošská stráň (47%) were dominating. On Vilémovická stráň mezophilous species (46%) were dominating. The most common species were Stenobothrus lineatus (Panzer, 1796) on Macošská stráň slope and Chorthippus parallelus (Zetterstedt, 1821), Stenobothrus lineatus, Chorthippus bigutulus (Linné, 1758) and Chorthippus dorsatus (Zetterstedt, 1821) on Vilémovická stráň slope. Rare species of this assemblage were Stenobothrus nigromaculatus (Herrich-Schaffer, 1840) which was on Macošská stráň slope only and Tetrix bipunctata (Linnaeus, 1758) which has much bigger abundances also on Macošská stráň slope.

ABSTRACTThe artist Pavel Nikolayevich Mikhailov (1786–1840) took part in the Antarctic expedition of the Imperial Russian Navy commanded by Captain F.F. Bellingshausen from 1819 to 1821. The author was invited to view the collection of Mikhailov's work, from two expeditions, that is held at the Russian Museum, St Petersburg. The Bellingshausen pieces in the collection are described, and their relationships to the smaller collection of Mikhailov's work for the Bellingshausen expedition, held at the State Historical Museum in Moscow, to the lithographs in the Atlas volume of Bellingshausen's published narrative, and to the various versions of Mikhailov's images that have been published in the 20th and 21st centuries, are discussed.

Rove beetles of the genus Piestus Gravenhorst, 1806 are commonly captured under the bark of or inside decaying logs from Neotropical forests. Piestus belongs to the subfamily Piestinae, historically an ill-defined dumping-ground for Staphylinidae defined by plesiomorphic characters, but which has gradually been restricted in concept and currently includes only six additional extant genera worldwide. Piestinae in this restricted sense has been considered a probably monophyletic subfamily, but its status and phylogenetic position, as a possible sister-group of Osoriinae within the recently proposed Oxyteline group of staphylinid subfamilies, are uncertain and need confirmation. The main aim of the present study was to provide a morphological cladistic analysis and complete taxonomic revision of Piestus, which, as the type and most speciose genus of Piestinae, is critical for future phylogenetic studies involving the subfamily. In our study, the monophyly of Piestus is established and phylogenetic relationships among its species are proposed based on 70 adult morphological characters. Piestus is supported by 11 synapomorphies and high branch support. All species of Piestus are revised and the genus is redefined. The genus contains 43 species, including 13 species described here for the first time. The previously proposed subgenera Antropiestus Bernhauer, 1917, Eccoptopiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Elytropiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Lissopiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Piestus s. str., Trachypiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952 and Zirophorus Dalman, 1821 have not been confirmed, as they were found to be poly- or paraphyletic, or are here removed from Piestus, and therefore subgenera are not used. The main taxonomic changes are as follows. Lissopiestus, syn. nov. is proposed as new synonym of Eleusis Laporte, 1835 and its species, E. interrupta (Erichson, 1840), comb. rest., is transferred again to that genus. Antropiestus, syn. nov. and Eccoptopiestus, syn. nov. are proposed as new synonyms of Hypotelus Erichson, 1839 and their species, H. laevis (Solsky, 1872), comb. nov. and H. andinus (Bernhauer, 1917), comb. nov., are transferred to Hypotelus. Fourteen new synonymies are proposed (valid species listed first): P. lacordairei Laporte, 1835 = Z. furcatus Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; P. capricornis Laporte, 1835 = P. frontalis Sharp, 1876, syn. nov.; P. pennicornis Fauvel, 1864 = P. plagiatus Fauvel, 1864, syn. nov.; P. rectus Sharp, 1876, syn. nov.; P. pygialis Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. surinamensis Bernhauer, 1928, syn. nov.; P. minutus Erichson, 1840 = P. nigrator Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. sulcatus Gravenhorst, 1806 = P. sanctaecatharinae Bernhauer, 1906, syn. nov.; P. condei Wendeler, 1955, syn. nov.; P. gounellei Fauvel, 1902 = P. wasmanni Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. mexicanus Laporte, 1835 = P. alternans Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; P. aper Sharp, 1876 = P. schadei Scheerpeltz, 1952, syn. nov.; P. angularis Fauvel, 1864 = P. crassicornis Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; H. andinus (Bernhauer, 1917) = P. strigipennis Bernhauer, 1921, syn. nov. One species is revalidated: P. fronticornis (Dalman, 1821), stat. rev., and one synonym is restored: P. penicillatus (Dalman, 1821) = P. erythropus Erichson, 1840, syn. rest. Neotypes are designated for P. lacordairei Laporte, 1835 and Oxytelus bicornis Olivier, 1811, and lectotypes are designated for P. puncticollis Fauvel, 1902, P. capricornis variety muticus Fauvel, 1902, P. zischkai Scheerpeltz, 1951, P. pennicornis Fauvel, 1864, P. plagiatus Fauvel, 1864, P. pygmaeus Laporte, 1835, P. niger Fauvel 1864, P. minutus Erichson, 1840, P. nigratror Fauvel, 1902, P. sulcatus Gravenhorst, 1806, P. sanctaecatharinae Bernhauer, 1906, P. sulcipennis Scheerpeltz, 1952, P. aper Sharp, 1876, P. schadei Scheerpeltz, 1952 and P. andinus Bernhauer, 1917.

Rove beetles of the genus Piestus Gravenhorst, 1806 are commonly captured under the bark of or inside decaying logs from Neotropical forests. Piestus belongs to the subfamily Piestinae, historically an ill-defined dumping-ground for Staphylinidae defined by plesiomorphic characters, but which has gradually been restricted in concept and currently includes only six additional extant genera worldwide. Piestinae in this restricted sense has been considered a probably monophyletic subfamily, but its status and phylogenetic position, as a possible sister-group of Osoriinae within the recently proposed Oxyteline group of staphylinid subfamilies, are uncertain and need confirmation. The main aim of the present study was to provide a morphological cladistic analysis and complete taxonomic revision of Piestus, which, as the type and most speciose genus of Piestinae, is critical for future phylogenetic studies involving the subfamily. In our study, the monophyly of Piestus is established and phylogenetic relationships among its species are proposed based on 70 adult morphological characters. Piestus is supported by 11 synapomorphies and high branch support. All species of Piestus are revised and the genus is redefined. The genus contains 43 species, including 13 species described here for the first time. The previously proposed subgenera Antropiestus Bernhauer, 1917, Eccoptopiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Elytropiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Lissopiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952, Piestus s. str., Trachypiestus Scheerpeltz, 1952 and Zirophorus Dalman, 1821 have not been confirmed, as they were found to be poly- or paraphyletic, or are here removed from Piestus, and therefore subgenera are not used. The main taxonomic changes are as follows. Lissopiestus, syn. nov. is proposed as new synonym of Eleusis Laporte, 1835 and its species, E. interrupta (Erichson, 1840), comb. rest., is transferred again to that genus. Antropiestus, syn. nov. and Eccoptopiestus, syn. nov. are proposed as new synonyms of Hypotelus Erichson, 1839 and their species, H. laevis (Solsky, 1872), comb. nov. and H. andinus (Bernhauer, 1917), comb. nov., are transferred to Hypotelus. Fourteen new synonymies are proposed (valid species listed first): P. lacordairei Laporte, 1835 = Z. furcatus Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; P. capricornis Laporte, 1835 = P. frontalis Sharp, 1876, syn. nov.; P. pennicornis Fauvel, 1864 = P. plagiatus Fauvel, 1864, syn. nov.; P. rectus Sharp, 1876, syn. nov.; P. pygialis Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. surinamensis Bernhauer, 1928, syn. nov.; P. minutus Erichson, 1840 = P. nigrator Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. sulcatus Gravenhorst, 1806 = P. sanctaecatharinae Bernhauer, 1906, syn. nov.; P. condei Wendeler, 1955, syn. nov.; P. gounellei Fauvel, 1902 = P. wasmanni Fauvel, 1902, syn. nov.; P. mexicanus Laporte, 1835 = P. alternans Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; P. aper Sharp, 1876 = P. schadei Scheerpeltz, 1952, syn. nov.; P. angularis Fauvel, 1864 = P. crassicornis Sharp, 1887, syn. nov.; H. andinus (Bernhauer, 1917) = P. strigipennis Bernhauer, 1921, syn. nov. One species is revalidated: P. fronticornis (Dalman, 1821), stat. rev., and one synonym is restored: P. penicillatus (Dalman, 1821) = P. erythropus Erichson, 1840, syn. rest. Neotypes are designated for P. lacordairei Laporte, 1835 and Oxytelus bicornis Olivier, 1811, and lectotypes are designated for P. puncticollis Fauvel, 1902, P. capricornis variety muticus Fauvel, 1902, P. zischkai Scheerpeltz, 1951, P. pennicornis Fauvel, 1864, P. plagiatus Fauvel, 1864, P. pygmaeus Laporte, 1835, P. niger Fauvel 1864, P. minutus Erichson, 1840, P. nigratror Fauvel, 1902, P. sulcatus Gravenhorst, 1806, P. sanctaecatharinae Bernhauer, 1906, P. sulcipennis Scheerpeltz, 1952, P. aper Sharp, 1876, P. schadei Scheerpeltz, 1952 and P. andinus Bernhauer, 1917.

Przedmiotem artykułu są konflikty między Stolicą Apostolską a protestanckimi państwami niemieckimi (Prusy, Hanower, Badenia, Wirtembergia, Hesja elektorska, Hesja-Darmstadt, Nassau), związane z ingerencjami rządu w elekcje biskupów i wyborem kontrowersyjnych kandydatów. Ramy chronologiczne to okres od publikacji bulli De salute animarum regulującej stosunki między papiestwem a Prusami (1821) do zjednoczenia Niemiec (1871). Podstawę źródłową tworzą niepublikowane akta Kongregacji Nadzwyczajnych Spraw Kościelnych, papieskiego organu doradczego. W badanym okresie Kongregacja odbyła 11 posiedzeń poświęconych problematycznym elekcjom. Dotyczyły one sytuacji we Wrocławiu (1836 i 1842), Trewirze (1837-1840), Limburgu (1841), Hildesheim (1841), Rottenburgu (1846-1847) i Fryburgu Bryzgowijskim (1869). Analizowany materiał rzuca nowe światło na wieloletni spór o interpretację porozumień zawartych między Stolicą Apostolską a poszczególnymi rządami w latach dwudziestych XIX wieku oraz na politykę Rzymu wobec władz państwowych i lokalnych Kościołów.

El ideal republicano del equilibrio de los poderes públicos fue garantizado por el ideario liberal de los constituyentes que se reunieron en el Congreso Constituyente de la Villa del Rosario de Cúcuta, cuando el ordenamiento constitucional concedió la preeminencia al Congreso, quien obtuvo la facultad para crear las cortes de justicia y los juzgados inferiores de la República. Pero durante las décadas de 1820 y 1830, el equilibrio se jugó entre el Ejecutivo y las cámaras legislativas. Este artículo examina de cerca cómo se construyó ese equilibrio de poderes públicos.

More than 4700 nominal family-group names (including names for fossils and ichnotaxa) are nomenclaturally available in the order Coleoptera. Since each family-group name is based on the concept of its type genus, we argue that the stability of names used for the classification of beetles depends on accurate nomenclatural data for each type genus. Following a review of taxonomic literature, with a focus on works that potentially contain type species designations, we provide a synthesis of nomenclatural data associated with the type genus of each nomenclaturally available family-group name in Coleoptera. For each type genus the author(s), year of publication, and page number are given as well as its current status (i.e., whether treated as valid or not) and current classification. Information about the type species of each type genus and the type species fixation (i.e., fixed originally or subsequently, and if subsequently, by whom) is also given. The original spelling of the family-group name that is based on each type genus is included, with its author(s), year, and stem. We append a list of nomenclaturally available family-group names presented in a classification scheme. Because of the importance of the Principle of Priority in zoological nomenclature, we provide information on the date of publication of the references cited in this work, when known. Several nomenclatural issues emerged during the course of this work. We therefore appeal to the community of coleopterists to submit applications to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (henceforth “Commission”) in order to permanently resolve some of the problems outlined here. The following changes of authorship for type genera are implemented here (these changes do not affect the concept of each type genus): CHRYSOMELIDAE: Fulcidax Crotch, 1870 (previously credited to “Clavareau, 1913”); CICINDELIDAE: Euprosopus W.S. MacLeay, 1825 (previously credited to “Dejean, 1825”); COCCINELLIDAE: Alesia Reiche, 1848 (previously credited to “Mulsant, 1850”); CURCULIONIDAE: Arachnopus Boisduval, 1835 (previously credited to “Guérin-Méneville, 1838”); ELATERIDAE: Thylacosternus Gemminger, 1869 (previously credited to “Bonvouloir, 1871”); EUCNEMIDAE: Arrhipis Gemminger, 1869 (previously credited to “Bonvouloir, 1871”), Mesogenus Gemminger, 1869 (previously credited to “Bonvouloir, 1871”); LUCANIDAE: Sinodendron Hellwig, 1791 (previously credited to “Hellwig, 1792”); PASSALIDAE: Neleides Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”), Neleus Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”), Pertinax Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”), Petrejus Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”), Undulifer Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”), Vatinius Harold, 1868 (previously credited to “Kaup, 1869”); PTINIDAE: Mezium Leach, 1819 (previously credited to “Curtis, 1828”); PYROCHROIDAE: Agnathus Germar, 1818 (previously credited to “Germar, 1825”); SCARABAEIDAE: Eucranium Dejean, 1833 (previously “Brullé, 1838”). The following changes of type species were implemented following the discovery of older type species fixations (these changes do not pose a threat to nomenclatural stability): BOLBOCERATIDAE: Bolbocerus bocchus Erichson, 1841 for Bolbelasmus Boucomont, 1911 (previously Bolboceras gallicum Mulsant, 1842); BUPRESTIDAE: Stigmodera guerinii Hope, 1843 for Neocuris Saunders, 1868 (previously Anthaxia fortnumi Hope, 1846), Stigmodera peroni Laporte & Gory, 1837 for Curis Laporte & Gory, 1837 (previously Buprestis caloptera Boisduval, 1835); CARABIDAE: Carabus elatus Fabricius, 1801 for Molops Bonelli, 1810 (previously Carabus terricola Herbst, 1784 sensu Fabricius, 1792); CERAMBYCIDAE: Prionus palmatus Fabricius, 1792 for Macrotoma Audinet-Serville, 1832 (previously Prionus serripes Fabricius, 1781); CHRYSOMELIDAE: Donacia equiseti Fabricius, 1798 for Haemonia Dejean, 1821 (previously Donacia zosterae Fabricius, 1801), Eumolpus ruber Latreille, 1807 for Euryope Dalman, 1824 (previously Cryptocephalus rubrifrons Fabricius, 1787), Galeruca affinis Paykull, 1799 for Psylliodes Latreille, 1829 (previously Chrysomela chrysocephala Linnaeus, 1758); COCCINELLIDAE: Dermestes rufus Herbst, 1783 for Coccidula Kugelann, 1798 (previously Chrysomela scutellata Herbst, 1783); CRYPTOPHAGIDAE: Ips caricis G.-A. Olivier, 1790 for Telmatophilus Heer, 1841 (previously Cryptophagus typhae Fallén, 1802), Silpha evanescens Marsham, 1802 for Atomaria Stephens, 1829 (previously Dermestes nigripennis Paykull, 1798); CURCULIONIDAE: Bostrichus cinereus Herbst, 1794 for Crypturgus Erichson, 1836 (previously Bostrichus pusillus Gyllenhal, 1813); DERMESTIDAE: Dermestes trifasciatus Fabricius, 1787 for Attagenus Latreille, 1802 (previously Dermestes pellio Linnaeus, 1758); ELATERIDAE: Elater sulcatus Fabricius, 1777 for Chalcolepidius Eschscholtz, 1829 (previously Chalcolepidius zonatus Eschscholtz, 1829); ENDOMYCHIDAE: Endomychus rufitarsis Chevrolat, 1835 for Epipocus Chevrolat, 1836 (previously Endomychus tibialis Guérin-Méneville, 1834); EROTYLIDAE: Ips humeralis Fabricius, 1787 for Dacne Latreille, 1797 (previously Dermestes bipustulatus Thunberg, 1781); EUCNEMIDAE: Fornax austrocaledonicus Perroud & Montrouzier, 1865 for Mesogenus Gemminger, 1869 (previously Mesogenus mellyi Bonvouloir, 1871); GLAPHYRIDAE: Melolontha serratulae Fabricius, 1792 for Glaphyrus Latreille, 1802 (previously Scarabaeus maurus Linnaeus, 1758); HISTERIDAE: Hister striatus Forster, 1771 for Onthophilus Leach, 1817 (previously Hister sulcatus Moll, 1784); LAMPYRIDAE: Ototreta fornicata E. Olivier, 1900 for Ototreta E. Olivier, 1900 (previously Ototreta weyersi E. Olivier, 1900); LUCANIDAE: Lucanus cancroides Fabricius, 1787 for Lissotes Westwood, 1855 (previously Lissotes menalcas Westwood, 1855); MELANDRYIDAE: Nothus clavipes G.-A. Olivier, 1812 for Nothus G.-A. Olivier, 1812 (previously Nothus praeustus G.-A. Olivier, 1812); MELYRIDAE: Lagria ater Fabricius, 1787 for Enicopus Stephens, 1830 (previously Dermestes hirtus Linnaeus, 1767); NITIDULIDAE: Sphaeridium luteum Fabricius, 1787 for Cychramus Kugelann, 1794 (previously Strongylus quadripunctatus Herbst, 1792); OEDEMERIDAE: Helops laevis Fabricius, 1787 for Ditylus Fischer, 1817 (previously Ditylus helopioides Fischer, 1817 [sic]); PHALACRIDAE: Sphaeridium aeneum Fabricius, 1792 for Olibrus Erichson, 1845 (previously Sphaeridium bicolor Fabricius, 1792); RHIPICERIDAE: Sandalus niger Knoch, 1801 for Sandalus Knoch, 1801 (previously Sandalus petrophya Knoch, 1801); SCARABAEIDAE: Cetonia clathrata G.-A. Olivier, 1792 for Inca Lepeletier & Audinet-Serville, 1828 (previously Cetonia ynca Weber, 1801); Gnathocera vitticollis W. Kirby, 1825 for Gnathocera W. Kirby, 1825 (previously Gnathocera immaculata W. Kirby, 1825); Melolontha villosula Illiger, 1803 for Chasmatopterus Dejean, 1821 (previously Melolontha hirtula Illiger, 1803); STAPHYLINIDAE: Staphylinus politus Linnaeus, 1758 for Philonthus Stephens, 1829 (previously Staphylinus splendens Fabricius, 1792); ZOPHERIDAE: Hispa mutica Linnaeus, 1767 for Orthocerus Latreille, 1797 (previously Tenebrio hirticornis DeGeer, 1775). The discovery of type species fixations that are older than those currently accepted pose a threat to nomenclatural stability (an application to the Commission is necessary to address each problem): CANTHARIDAE: Malthinus Latreille, 1805, Malthodes Kiesenwetter, 1852; CARABIDAE: Bradycellus Erichson, 1837, Chlaenius Bonelli, 1810, Harpalus Latreille, 1802, Lebia Latreille, 1802, Pheropsophus Solier, 1834, Trechus Clairville, 1806; CERAMBYCIDAE: Callichroma Latreille, 1816, Callidium Fabricius, 1775, Cerasphorus Audinet-Serville, 1834, Dorcadion Dalman, 1817, Leptura Linnaeus, 1758, Mesosa Latreille, 1829, Plectromerus Haldeman, 1847; CHRYSOMELIDAE: Amblycerus Thunberg, 1815, Chaetocnema Stephens, 1831, Chlamys Knoch, 1801, Monomacra Chevrolat, 1836, Phratora Chevrolat, 1836, Stylosomus Suffrian, 1847; COLONIDAE: Colon Herbst, 1797; CURCULIONIDAE: Cryphalus Erichson, 1836, Lepyrus Germar, 1817; ELATERIDAE: Adelocera Latreille, 1829, Beliophorus Eschscholtz, 1829; ENDOMYCHIDAE: Amphisternus Germar, 1843, Dapsa Latreille, 1829; GLAPHYRIDAE: Anthypna Eschscholtz, 1818; HISTERIDAE: Hololepta Paykull, 1811, Trypanaeus Eschscholtz, 1829; LEIODIDAE: Anisotoma Panzer, 1796, Camiarus Sharp, 1878, Choleva Latreille, 1797; LYCIDAE: Calopteron Laporte, 1838, Dictyoptera Latreille, 1829; MELOIDAE: Epicauta Dejean, 1834; NITIDULIDAE: Strongylus Herbst, 1792; SCARABAEIDAE: Anisoplia Schönherr, 1817, Anticheira Eschscholtz, 1818, Cyclocephala Dejean, 1821, Glycyphana Burmeister, 1842, Omaloplia Schönherr, 1817, Oniticellus Dejean, 1821, Parachilia Burmeister, 1842, Xylotrupes Hope, 1837; STAPHYLINIDAE: Batrisus Aubé, 1833, Phloeonomus Heer, 1840, Silpha Linnaeus, 1758; TENEBRIONIDAE: Bolitophagus Illiger, 1798, Mycetochara Guérin-Méneville, 1827. Type species are fixed for the following nominal genera: ANTHRIBIDAE: Decataphanes gracilis Labram & Imhoff, 1840 for Decataphanes Labram & Imhoff, 1840; CARABIDAE: Feronia erratica Dejean, 1828 for Loxandrus J.L. LeConte, 1853; CERAMBYCIDAE: Tmesisternus oblongus Boisduval, 1835 for Icthyosoma Boisduval, 1835; CHRYSOMELIDAE: Brachydactyla annulipes Pic, 1913 for Pseudocrioceris Pic, 1916, Cassida viridis Linnaeus, 1758 for Evaspistes Gistel, 1856, Ocnoscelis cyanoptera Erichson, 1847 for Ocnoscelis Erichson, 1847, Promecotheca petelii Guérin-Méneville, 1840 for Promecotheca Guérin- Méneville, 1840; CLERIDAE: Attelabus mollis Linnaeus, 1758 for Dendroplanetes Gistel, 1856; CORYLOPHIDAE: Corylophus marginicollis J.L. LeConte, 1852 for Corylophodes A. Matthews, 1885; CURCULIONIDAE: Hoplorhinus melanocephalus Chevrolat, 1878 for Hoplorhinus Chevrolat, 1878; Sonnetius binarius Casey, 1922 for Sonnetius Casey, 1922; ELATERIDAE: Pyrophorus melanoxanthus Candèze, 1865 for Alampes Champion, 1896; PHYCOSECIDAE: Phycosecis litoralis Pascoe, 1875 for Phycosecis Pascoe, 1875; PTILODACTYLIDAE: Aploglossa sallei Guérin-Méneville, 1849 for Aploglossa Guérin-Méneville, 1849, Colobodera ovata Klug, 1837 for Colobodera Klug, 1837; PTINIDAE: Dryophilus anobioides Chevrolat, 1832 for Dryobia Gistel, 1856; SCARABAEIDAE: Achloa helvola Erichson, 1840 for Achloa Erichson, 1840, Camenta obesa Burmeister, 1855 for Camenta Erichson, 1847, Pinotus talaus Erichson, 1847 for Pinotus Erichson, 1847, Psilonychus ecklonii Burmeister, 1855 for Psilonychus Burmeister, 1855. New replacement name: CERAMBYCIDAE: Basorus Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. for Sobarus Harold, 1879. New status: CARABIDAE: KRYZHANOVSKIANINI Deuve, 2020, stat. nov. is given the rank of tribe instead of subfamily since our classification uses the rank of subfamily for PAUSSINAE rather than family rank; CERAMBYCIDAE: Amymoma Pascoe, 1866, stat. nov. is used as valid over Neoamymoma Marinoni, 1977, Holopterus Blanchard, 1851, stat. nov. is used as valid over Proholopterus Monné, 2012; CURCULIONIDAE: Phytophilus Schönherr, 1835, stat. nov. is used as valid over the unnecessary new replacement name Synophthalmus Lacordaire, 1863; EUCNEMIDAE: Nematodinus Lea, 1919, stat. nov. is used as valid instead of Arrhipis Gemminger, 1869, which is a junior homonym. Details regarding additional nomenclatural issues that still need to be resolved are included in the entry for each of these type genera: BOSTRICHIDAE: Lyctus Fabricius, 1792; BRENTIDAE: Trachelizus Dejean, 1834; BUPRESTIDAE: Pristiptera Dejean, 1833; CANTHARIDAE: Chauliognathus Hentz, 1830, Telephorus Schäffer, 1766; CARABIDAE: Calathus Bonelli, 1810, Cosnania Dejean, 1821, Dicrochile Guérin-Méneville, 1847, Epactius D.H. Schneider, 1791, Merismoderus Westwood, 1847, Polyhirma Chaudoir, 1850, Solenogenys Westwood, 1860, Zabrus Clairville, 1806; CERAMBYCIDAE: Ancita J. Thomson, 1864, Compsocerus Audinet-Serville, 1834, Dorcadodium Gistel, 1856, Glenea Newman, 1842; Hesperophanes Dejean, 1835, Neoclytus J. Thomson, 1860, Phymasterna Laporte, 1840, Tetrops Stephens, 1829, Zygocera Erichson, 1842; CHRYSOMELIDAE: Acanthoscelides Schilsky, 1905, Corynodes Hope, 1841, Edusella Chapuis, 1874; Hemisphaerota Chevrolat, 1836; Physonota Boheman, 1854, Porphyraspis Hope, 1841; CLERIDAE: Dermestoides Schäffer, 1777; COCCINELLIDAE: Hippodamia Chevrolat, 1836, Myzia Mulsant, 1846, Platynaspis L. Redtenbacher, 1843; CURCULIONIDAE: Coeliodes Schönherr, 1837, Cryptoderma Ritsema, 1885, Deporaus Leach, 1819, Epistrophus Kirsch, 1869, Geonemus Schönherr, 1833, Hylastes Erichson, 1836; DYTISCIDAE: Deronectes Sharp, 1882, Platynectes Régimbart, 1879; EUCNEMIDAE: Dirhagus Latreille, 1834; HYBOSORIDAE: Ceratocanthus A. White, 1842; HYDROPHILIDAE: Cyclonotum Erichson, 1837; LAMPYRIDAE: Luciola Laporte, 1833; LEIODIDAE: Ptomaphagus Hellwig, 1795; LUCANIDAE: Leptinopterus Hope, 1838; LYCIDAE: Cladophorus Guérin-Méneville, 1830, Mimolibnetis Kazantsev, 2000; MELOIDAE: Mylabris Fabricius, 1775; NITIDULIDAE: Meligethes Stephens, 1829; PTILODACTYLIDAE: Daemon Laporte, 1838; SCARABAEIDAE: Allidiostoma Arrow, 1940, Heterochelus Burmeister, 1844, Liatongus Reitter, 1892, Lomaptera Gory & Percheron, 1833, Megaceras Hope, 1837, Stenotarsia Burmeister, 1842; STAPHYLINIDAE: Actocharis Fauvel, 1871, Aleochara Gravenhorst, 1802; STENOTRACHELIDAE: Stenotrachelus Berthold, 1827; TENEBRIONIDAE: Cryptochile Latreille, 1828, Heliopates Dejean, 1834, Helops Fabricius, 1775. First Reviser actions deciding the correct original spelling: CARABIDAE: Aristochroodes Marcilhac, 1993 (not Aritochroodes); CERAMBYCIDAE: Dorcadodium Gistel, 1856 (not Dorcadodion), EVODININI Zamoroka, 2022 (not EVODINIINI); CHRYSOMELIDAE: Caryopemon Jekel, 1855 (not Carpopemon), Decarthrocera Laboissière, 1937 (not Decarthrocerina); CICINDELIDAE: Odontocheila Laporte, 1834 (not Odontacheila); CLERIDAE: CORMODINA Bartlett, 2021 (not CORMODIINA), Orthopleura Spinola, 1845 (not Orthoplevra, not Orthopleuva); CURCULIONIDAE: Arachnobas Boisduval, 1835 (not Arachnopus), Palaeocryptorhynchus Poinar, 2009 (not Palaeocryptorhynus); DYTISCIDAE: Ambarticus Yang et al., 2019 and AMBARTICINI Yang et al., 2019 (not Ambraticus, not AMBRATICINI); LAMPYRIDAE: Megalophthalmus G.R. Gray, 1831 (not Megolophthalmus, not Megalopthalmus); SCARABAEIDAE: Mentophilus Laporte, 1840 (not Mintophilus, not Minthophilus), Pseudadoretus dilutellus Semenov, 1889 (not P. ditutellus). While the correct identification of the type species is assumed, in some cases evidence suggests that species were misidentified when they were fixed as the type of a particular nominal genus. Following the requirements of Article 70.3.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature we hereby fix the following type species (which in each case is the taxonomic species actually involved in the misidentification): ATTELABIDAE: Rhynchites cavifrons Gyllenhal, 1833 for Lasiorhynchites Jekel, 1860; BOSTRICHIDAE: Ligniperda terebrans Pallas, 1772 for Apate Fabricius, 1775; BRENTIDAE: Ceocephalus appendiculatus Boheman, 1833 for Uroptera Berthold, 1827; BUPRESTIDAE: Buprestis undecimmaculata Herbst, 1784 for Ptosima Dejean, 1833; CARABIDAE: Amara lunicollis Schiødte, 1837 for Amara Bonelli, 1810, Buprestis connexus Geoffroy, 1785 for Polistichus Bonelli, 1810, Carabus atrorufus Strøm, 1768 for Patrobus Dejean, 1821, Carabus gigas Creutzer, 1799 for Procerus Dejean, 1821, Carabus teutonus Schrank, 1781 for Stenolophus Dejean, 1821, Carenum bonellii Westwood, 1842 for Carenum Bonelli, 1813, Scarites picipes G.-A. Olivier, 1795 for Acinopus Dejean, 1821, Trigonotoma indica Brullé, 1834 for Trigonotoma Dejean, 1828; CERAMBYCIDAE: Cerambyx lusitanus Linnaeus, 1767 for Exocentrus Dejean, 1835, Clytus supernotatus Say, 1824 for Psenocerus J.L. LeConte, 1852; CICINDELIDAE: Ctenostoma jekelii Chevrolat, 1858 for Ctenostoma Klug, 1821; CURCULIONIDAE: Cnemogonus lecontei Dietz, 1896 for Cnemogonus J.L. LeConte, 1876; Phloeophagus turbatus Schönherr, 1845 for Phloeophagus Schönherr, 1838; GEOTRUPIDAE: Lucanus apterus Laxmann, 1770 for Lethrus Scopoli, 1777; HISTERIDAE: Hister rugiceps Duftschmid, 1805 for Hypocaccus C.G. Thomson, 1867; HYBOSORIDAE: Hybosorus illigeri Reiche, 1853 for Hybosorus W.S. MacLeay, 1819; HYDROPHILIDAE: Hydrophilus melanocephalus G.-A. Olivier, 1793 for Enochrus C.G. Thomson, 1859; MYCETAEIDAE: Dermestes subterraneus Fabricius, 1801 for Mycetaea Stephens, 1829; SCARABAEIDAE: Aulacium carinatum Reiche, 1841 for Mentophilus Laporte, 1840, Phanaeus vindex W.S. MacLeay, 1819 for Phanaeus W.S. MacLeay, 1819, Ptinus germanus Linnaeus, 1767 for Rhyssemus Mulsant, 1842, Scarabaeus latipes Guérin-Méneville, 1838 for Cheiroplatys Hope, 1837; STAPHYLINIDAE: Scydmaenus tarsatus P.W.J. Müller & Kunze, 1822 for Scydmaenus Latreille, 1802. New synonyms: CERAMBYCIDAE: CARILIINI Zamoroka, 2022, syn. nov. of ACMAEOPINI Della Beffa, 1915, DOLOCERINI Özdikmen, 2016, syn. nov. of BRACHYPTEROMINI Sama, 2008, PELOSSINI Tavakilian, 2013, syn. nov. of LYGRINI Sama, 2008, PROHOLOPTERINI Monné, 2012, syn. nov. of HOLOPTERINI Lacordaire, 1868.

‘La sventurata rispose’ [the poor wretch answered]. This sentence, among the most famous of Italian literature, appears in chapter 10 of Alessandro Manzoni's I promessi sposi (The Betrothed, first published in 1827 and revised in 1840), where it functions as stitches trying to heal the deep wound caused by a radical surgical intervention, the excision of pages and pages devoted to a description of seduction. In the best Gothic tradition, the first version of the novel, entitled Fermo e Lucia (1821–23), contained a long account of the seduction of the Nun of Monza by a young libertine, but religious and, apparently, aesthetic considerations convinced Manzoni to cut this episode and replace it with those three words. The rhetorical figure of reticence, so prominent in chapter 10 of I promessi sposi, dominates the tradition of Italian ‘high’ Classicist and Romantic literature, which seems to have considered seduction unfit as a literary theme, to be left to the gutter of the popular novel.

Dentre os 65 autores e 135 coletores que colaboraram para a grandiosa obra botânica denominada Flora Brasiliensis, coordenada inicialmente por Martius, e posteriormente por Eichler e Urban, publicada entre 1840 e 1906, participaram apenas duas mulheres: Maria Graham e a Princesa Teresa da Baviera. O presente estudo trata da contribuição de Maria Graham, que esteve no Brasil em três períodos entre 1821 e 1825, quando D. Pedro I era imperador, descreveu paisagens e coletou exemplares botânicos que foram enviados à Inglaterra, e utilizados por monografistas da dita Flora. A contribuição de Maria Graham para o estudo histórico das paisagens e aspectos da flora brasileira é pontual, porém importante. Os registros foram feitos no frescor da primeira impressão, conjugando uma observação acurada, às vezes acompanhada de iconografia. Mulher avançada para sua época, relacionava-se com a população local em situações diversas. Isto a coloca na privilegiada posição de testemunha da história daquele momento da monarquia brasileira.

Recibido: 15-09-2021.Aprobado: 09-11-2021. Desde tiempos coloniales hasta la mitad del siglo XIX, la escasez de circulante, en particular de baja denominación, fue un problema en Costa Rica. Como resultado, la semilla de cacao se autorizó como dinero a principios del siglo XVIII. Durante la década de 1840, el trabajo y producción en las plantaciones de café fueron los motores de la economía, y la demanda por monedas aumentó. Se permitió la circulación de monedas extranjeras para mitigar la escasez. Sin embargo, muchas eran de bajo contenido de metal precioso o eran falsificaciones. Monedas británicas, españolas, americanas y macuquinas coloniales se ensayaron y aquellas que cumplían los estándares locales de calidad se estamparon con sellos y fueron autorizadas para circular junto con monedas acuñadas localmente. Los sellos incluían figuras como árboles, una planta de tabaco, una estrella, un león y mujeres jóvenes. En este estudio se expone un vistazo de esas monedas desde 1821 hasta la fundación de la República en 1848 y los posibles significados de símbolos grabados en ellas.

La instrucción pública desde la instalación de la República misma, fue auspiciada por el propio Estado. Lo afirmado se comprueba meridianamente a través de los diversos decretos supremos y documentación legislativa a ella referidas. Inicialmente, bajo el patrocinio institucional de la Beneficencia Pública, así como de los Prefectos. En sus crepusculares funciones educativas, el Estado se vio apoyado por las instituciones clericales, como las parroquias y diócesis locales. El Colegio Central (o Normal) Lancasteriano, representó una creación política directa del período histórico del Protectorado. La precitada institución educativa, bajo la dirección del Pbro. José Francisco Navarrete, alcanzó no solo la venia y buena pro por parte del Supremo Gobierno durante sucesivos gobiernos, sino que ello representó abiertamente y sin duda alguna, la alianza política inicial entre la República peruana y la Iglesia, en este orden.

One of the best known compositions from Robert Schumann's "song year" of 1840 is the ballad "Die beiden Grenadiere," op. 49, no. 1, to a poem by Heinrich Heine (1797-1856). Any work about Napoleon, in any genre, was inevitably politically charged, both at the time Heine wrote his poem (perhaps in 1821, after hearing the news of the former emperor's death on 5 May 1821) and the date of its most famous musical setting (at the beginning of the decade when Germany was edging towards revolutionary outbreak). What impelled this 21st-century investigation of the song was curiosity about its confusing initial gesture in the piano, a tonic six-four chord as an anacrusis, leading to unharmonized tonic pitches on the downbeat of measure 1. Speculation about Schumann's intention led to an investigation of both men's attitudes towards Napoleon, especially the aftermath of his downfall. That Heine venerated Napoleon (who emancipated the Jews) cannot be doubted, but Heine, given to paradox and contradiction, was no hagiographer. His poem is as much literary as it is political, with its borrowings from Des Knaben Wunderhorn and Herder's translation of the Scottish ballad "Edward." The First Empire, like all empires, is not merely historical fact but a confabulation of poetic legends. Heine's underlying concern, I would argue, was not Bonapartism per se but rising German nationalism of the sort he found ominous and that Schumann, to some as yet ill-defined degree, supported. But composer and poet both associated Napoleon with the ideals of the French Revolution in the days before it and the emperor succumbed to what is darkest in human nature. In my opinion, Schumann understood Heine's delineation of nationalistic fanaticism and found apt musical gestures for that understanding. Here, I trace the composer's lifelong sense of identification with Napoleon and the compositional decisions that tell of a political point of view in "Die beiden Grenadiere."

AbstractWe present English translations of two French documents to show that the main reason for the rejection of Semmelweis's theory of the cause of childbed (puerperal) fever was because his proof relied on the post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy, and not because Joseph Skoda referred only to cadaveric particles as the cause in his lecture to the Academy of Science on Semmelweis's discovery. Friedrich Wieger (1821–1890), an obstetrician from Strasbourg, published an accurate account of Semmelweis's theory six months before Skoda's lecture, and reported a case in which the causative agent originated from a source other than cadavers. Wieger also presented data showing that chlorine hand disinfection reduced the annual maternal mortality rate from childbed fever (MMR) from more than 7 per cent for the years 1840–1846 to 1.27 per cent in 1848, the first full year in which chlorine hand disinfection was practised. But an editorial in the Gazette médicale de Paris rejected the data as proof of the effectiveness of chlorine hand disinfection, stating that the fact that the MMR fell after chlorine hand disinfection was implemented did not mean that this innovation had caused the MMR to fall. This previously unrecognized objection to Semmelweis's proof was also the reason why Semmelweis's chief rejected Semmelweis's evidence.

Currently 13 species-group names assigned to the subgenus Megaphanaeus of Coprophanaeus are deemed available (or 'potentially available'), four of which denote valid species. In the present work we review the nomenclatural history of those names and conclude that two of them, Scarabaeus satelles Lichtenstein, 1796 and Copris ajax Sturm, 1826, are unavailable. For the other 11 names, we found type specimens of five, Scarabaeus bellicosus Olivier, 1789, Copris ensifer Germar, 1821, Phanaeus septentrionalis Pêssoa, 1934, P. vicinus Martínez, 1944, and P. vicinus var. argentinus Martínez, 1944. Two lectotypes are designated, one for Copris ensifer and other for Phanaeus septentrionalis. We were unable to locate the type series of the four names described by Castelnau (1840), i.e. Phanaeus ducalis, P. sylvanus, P. heros and P. miles, and of P. bonariensis Gory, 1844 and Scarabaeus lancifer Linné, 1767. For the latter, based on some iconotypes, we found that its type series was composite, including specimens of two different Megaphanaeus species, and, in addition, it was mixed with Copris ensifer type series. In order to fix the name to a sole species, a neotype is designated for Scarabaeus lancifer. The history of the names are presented in detail, and the application of these names to species is briefly re-discussed.

In the early part of the nineteenth century the Dupont brothers ran separate natural history businesses in Paris. Relatively little is known about their early life but an investigation into the family history at Bayeux corrects Léonard Dupont's year of birth from 1795 to 1796. In 1818 Léonard joined Joseph Ritchie's expedition to North Africa to assist in collecting and preparing the discoveries but he did not get beyond Tripoli. After 15 months he came back to Paris with a small collection from Libya and Provence, and returned to Provence in 1821. While operating as a dealer-naturalist in Paris he published Traité de taxidermie (1823, 1827), developed a special interest in foreign birds and became well known for his anatomical models in coloured wax. Henry Dupont sold a range of natural history material and with his particular passion for beetles formed one of the finest collections in Europe; his best known publication is Monographie des Trachydérides (1836–1840). Because the brothers had overlapping interests and were rarely referred to by their forenames there has been confusion between them and the various eponyms that commemorate them. Although probably true, it would be an over-simplification to state that birds of this era named for Dupont refer to Léonard Dupont, insects to Henry Dupont, and molluscs to their mother.

This year « The Farming Journal» [Zemledelchesky zhurnal] celebrates the 200 th anniversary from the date of the first issue. This is the first All-Russian specialized agricultural journal, which was established by the Imperial Moscow Agricultural Society. On the basis of the method of biometric analysis of the content the article shows the significance of the journal in the history of agriculture and agricultural press in Russia. It had been estimated that over 1200 articles have been published in the journal. There was determined the typology of articles of the journal, the ratio of the number of publications of which 38 % were sharing experiences materials, surveys (22 %), economic statistical materials (10 %), original articles (8 %), translated articles (5 %), reviews of new agricultural books (17 %). The main publication subjects were general problems of agriculture (30%), plant production (25 %), animal husbandry (27 %), farming (10 %), and horticulture (8 %). The journal actively propagaded new farming systems, promoted developing such agricultural industries as beet sugar production, sheep breeding, bee keeping, and sericulture. Of 375 authors who published their articles in the journal, 73 % were landowners, 19 % professor and teaching staff, 11 % estate managers, 6 % agricultural specialists. Among well-known authors of the journal it is worth to name N. P. Shishkov, I. V. Saburov, A. F. Rebrov, A. S. Maslov, P. I. Prokopovich and others. «The Farming Journal» laid down the basic principles for developing agricultural periodicals. For the first time in history an attempt was made to unite progressive scientists and landowners by means of the journal in order to determine the ways of developing the agrarian sector of the country, to distribute agricultural knowledge among the population, to generate agricultural science and education. The «Farming Journal» is a valuable source for studying the agrarian history of Russia of the beginning of the XIX century.

Didymoplexis Griffith (1844: 383) belongs to a group of morphologically close genera, which also includes Asian genera, Gastrodia R.Brown (1810: 330), Didymoplexiella Garay (1954: 33) and Didymoplexiopsis Seidenfaden (1997: 13). All these plants are small, terrestrial, leafless mycoheterotrophic herbs forming the core of the subtribe Gastrodiinae Lindley (1840: 383) of tribe Gastrodieae Lindley (1821: Appendix), subfamily Epidendroideae Lindley (1821: Appendix). Two-lipped flower and column lacking distinct wings or appendages are main generic characters that distinguish Didymoplexis from related genera of this subtribe. Didymoplexis comprises about 20 species distributed mostly in tropical Africa, Asia, Australia and the Pacific Islands (Zhou et al. 2016, Govaerts et al. 2018). All species of this genus are miniature ephemeral herbs with small, unattractive fugacious flowers opening in one or two in succession and lasting commonly only one day, often only in the morning hours. As a result, representatives of this genus are easily overlooked in botanical surveys, poorly represented in herbaria (where they are often hardly recognized without additional spirit or photographic material) and remain infrequently inventoried in local floras throughout its range. According to available records (Fig. 1), the highest species diversity of Didymoplexis is observed in Java with 6 species (Comber 1990). Thailand (Pedersen et al. 2014) and Borneo (Wood & Cribb 1994, Tsukaya & Okada 2012, Tsukaya et al. 2014, Suetsugu et al. 2017) are inhabited by 5 species each. Three species were hitherto recorded in China (Chen et al. 2009, Lin et al. 2016, Zhou et al. 2016) and Vietnam (Averyanov 2011). Two species were found in Sri Lanka (Fernando & Ormerod 2008) and Laos (Averyanov et al. 2016, 2018). Floras of most other Asian regions such as Afghanistan, India, Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Japan, Peninsular Malaysia, Sumatra and the Philippines include only one species (Garay & Sweet 1974, Seidenfaden & Wood 1992, Comber 2001, Pearce & Cribb 2002, Kress et al. 2003, Rokaya et al. 2013, Islam et al. 2016). The presence of several species of Didymoplexis in Cambodia is highly possible, despite none of them were recorded there to date. One more species new to science that clearly differs from all hitherto known species of this genus was recently discovered in northern Vietnam, close to the Laos border. Here we describe and illustrate this remarkable plant as Didymoplexis holochelia.

En el presente artículo se hace un recorrido histórico en torno a la creación, evolución, desaparición y posterior resurgimiento de la corporación de Consejo de Estado, como institución que legislara sobre los destinos de las provincias recién liberadas de la monarquía española en lo que hoy son Colombia y Venezuela. Son dos los momentos coyunturales que configuran este acontecimiento institucional. La primera experiencia se da en 1817, en la provincia recién liberada de Angostura. Promovido por Bolívar, este Consejo provisional de Estado se da dentro de las limitaciones institucionales de un gobierno aún insurgente, en la emergencia de un estado de guerra y cuartel. Ya en tiempos de la República, y posterior al fracaso de la Convención de Ocaña (1828) y la extinción de la vigencia de la Constitución de la Villa del Rosario de Cúcuta (1821), Bolívar se erige como jefe supremo de la nación colombiana a través de decreto para regir el Estado hasta 1830, con las obvias y agrias disputas políticas que tal decisión suscitaría en la novel República. El Consejo de Estado obtiene su sanción constitucional en 1830 y se formaliza en la Constitución de 1832. La experiencia de la guerra civil de 1840-1841 provoca dudas acerca de su autoridad e idoneidad, que conducen al Consejo de Estado a una disputa política que llevará a su derogación, por parte de los constituyentes de 1843. Solo 43 años después, en la Constitución de 1886, esta corporación del Consejo Estado volverá a la vida para mantenerse hasta nuestros días.

El proyecto abolicionista fundacional a la creación de la República de Colombia en 1821 se vio truncado por los intereses de las clases esclavistas, especialmente las que derivaban su poderío económico en la extracción del oro en la costa Pacífica de la provincia de Popayán. En la década de 1840, cuando ya el país se había fragmentado y Popayán estaba dentro de la Nueva Granada, estas elites lograron que el gobierno volviera a instaurar el tráfico de esclavos y exportaron grandes números de esclavizados y manumisos hacia Perú y Panamá. Este artículo analiza el activismo de los esclavistas comenzando en 1822 y su culminación en el momento de la apertura del tráfico a través del puerto de Buenaventura en el Pacífico. El estudio muestra que en Sur América las luchas a favor y en contra de la esclavitud no tuvieron resultados lineales y que hicieron parte de la formación del estado en dos dimensiones: las tensiones regionales y las alianzas internacionales. También contribuye al debate sobre la abolición de la esclavitud en el mundo atlántico expandiendo la frontera del análisis hacia el Pacífico, a la vez que mostrando cómo las nuevas repúblicas del mundo Andino hacían parte de una red de ideas y de comercio que integraba a Norte América con América del Sur. En ese sentido, la historia de la abolición en Colombia, vista en un contexto más amplio, nos habla de la manera en que los proyectos económicos y políticos republicanos, tanto como la historia de las migraciones forzadas de afrodescendientes en esta región, deben enmarcarse en un marco transnacional.

The article in question is a continuity of the subject brought up in the magazine ”Artifex Novus” published in October 2017. Its first part referred to the tombstones created on the ground of works printed in Paris in 1832 on the pages of two illustrated magazines whose authors were Ferdinando Quaglia and Louis-Marie Normand respectively. The other part was dedicated to the pattern book by Joseph Mart and the objects performed on its ground. Collected pieces of information enable us to conclude that between 1840 and 1860 on the premises of the necropoleis of Warsaw a minimum of 20 tombstones, with the forms following those published in the above mentioned magazines, were raised. The vast majority of preserved examples, as many as 14, can be found on the premises of the Powązki Cemetery, another three were discovered at the Evangelical Augsburg Cemetery and two at the Evangelical Reformed Cemetery. Moreover, it has been stated that such tombstones happen to be funded on the premises of necropolies located outside the boundaries of the capital e.g. in Lublin, Pułtusk, Radom etc. Even though none of the tombstones was signed, it can be concluded the center of production and distribution was Warsaw and the stonework manufactures in operation in the city. Among others, attention was drawn to two manufactures: the one of Jan Ścisłowski (1805-1847) located at 6 Powązkowska Street, inherited and led by his two sons-in-law: Antoni Messing (1821-1867) and Jan Bernard Sikorski (1832-1906), and the other belonging to the Mantzl family, Jan Józef senior – the father (1806-1875) and Józef Jan junior, – the son (1834-1906), the manufacture previously located at 19 Chłodna Street. The tombstones funded and co-funded by relatives and friends were copings to graves of the wealthy, high officials, militaries, real estate and factory owners, entrepreneurs, merchants as well as craftsmen. The offer of the stonework manufactures in Warsaw reflected the taste of the elite, in the vast majority of Catholics of aristocratic descendance willing to show pro-French likeness and respect to the culture in question, having it as more sophisticated than the one dating back to the monarchy of Louis the XIV, and in particular, forming bonds with the empire of Napoleon Bonaparte the I.

A catalogue of the subfamilies Parandrinae (two tribes, four genera and 39 species), Prioninae (nine tribes, 83 genera, 309 species and 13 subspecies), Anoplodermatinae (three tribes, 10 genera and 27 species), Aseminae (two tribes, five genera, 18 species and two subspecies), Oxypeltinae (two genera and three species), Spondylidinae (one genus and one species) and Lepturinae (two tribes, 51 genera, 237 species and two subspecies) (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) of the Neotropical Region is presented. Under each family-group name bibliographical references are given and under each species-group name, data on the type-locality, the acronym of the institution where the type is deposited, the geographical distribution and detailed bibliographical references are provided. In Prioninae, Callipogonini: Anacanthus Audinet-Serville, 1832, preoccupied by Anacanthus Gray, 1830 (Pisces) is substituted by Chorenta Gistel, 1848. In Lepturinae, Lepturini: Euryptera virgata Gounelle, 1911, new status; Necydalini: Platynocera Blanchard, 1851, preoccupied by Platynocera Blanchard, 1847, Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae is substituted by Stenorhopalus Blanchard, 1851. Omissions to Monné (2005a, b) are given in the addenda. The following taxa described before February 2005 were absent and now are included: Cotyachryson inspergatus (Fairmaire & Germain, 1859), new comb. in Achrysonini, Urorcites Thomson, 1878 in Elaphidiini, Areotis Bates, 1867 in Graciliini, Limernaea Thomson, 1878 in Hesperophanini, Trichoplon Martins, 1967 in Ibidionini, Ischasia ecclinusae, I. mareki, I. pouteriae, I. sabatieri, I. viridithorax, Ommata (Ommata) gallardi, Ommata (Eclipta) bauhiniae, O. (E.) giuglarisi, O. (E.) guianensis, O. (E.) kawensis, O. (E.) lauraceae, O. (E.) pilosipes, O. (E.) vasconezi, Ommata (Rhopalessa) durantoni, Phygopoda ingae, in Rhinotragini, all Peñaherrera-Leiva & Tavakilian, 2004, Epipodocarpus Bosq, 1951 in Tillomorphini and in Trachyderini, Trachyderina, Vianauragus, new name for Uragus Guérin-Méneville, 1844, not Uragus Keyserling & Blasius, 1840, Aves. The following new names are given, in Achrysonini: Achryson jolyi, new name to replace Achryson concolor Joly, 2000 preoccupied by Achryson concolor LeConte, 1873 (Geropa) and Cerdaia new name to replace Pehuenia Cerda, 1980, preoccupied by Pehuenia Roth, 1902, extinct Mammalia; in Elaphidiini: Anelaphus martinsi, new name to replace Anelaphus fasciatus Martins, 2005, preoccupied by Anelaphus fasciatus (Fisher, 1932); in Rhopalophorini: Rhopaliella new name to replace Rhopalina Monné, 1990, preoccupied by Rhopalina Tinkham, 1939, Orthoptera; in Trachyderini, Trachyderina: Chemsakiella new name to replace Linsleyella Chemsak, 1984, preoccupied by Linsleyella Rohr, 1980, Mollusca, Laneiella new name to replace Pujolia Lane, 1973, preoccupied by Pujolia Levasseur, 1968, Coleoptera, Neomegaderus new name to replace Megaderus Dejean, 1821, preoccupied by Megaderus Rafinesque, 1815, Pisces; in Incertae Sedis: Tippmannia new name to replace Dolichopterus Tippmann, 1953, preoccupied by Dolichopterus Hall, 1859, Eurypterida. One new synonym is proposed: Championa chemsaki Martins & Napp, 1992 = Championa bifasciata Noguera & Chemsak, 1997.

El artículo da cuenta de la evolución del término “democracia” en México entre principios y mediados del siglo XIX. A principios de siglo, la democracia se asociaba a la revolución francesa; era sinónimo de demagogia e inestabilidad. En los debates en torno al Acta Constitutiva y la Constitución de 1823-1824, la democracia fue un término poco utilizado. Por el contrario, la palabra apareció muchas veces en el Congreso Constituyente de 1856-1857, pues comenzaba a utilizarse como sinónimo de elecciones representativas y del sistema republicano. El artículo da cuenta de la evolución en el uso del término en los textos de Mariano Otero en los 1840, el congreso constituyente fallido de 1842 y otras publicaciones de los 1850. Finalmente, analiza los distintos usos que se le dieron a la palabra en el Congreso Constituyente de 1856-1857. A partir de este momento, la democracia quedaría asociada al discurso oficial del Estado mexicano, junto al liberalismo y el federalismo.

Celem artykułu jest ukazanie kolei losów dziewiętnastowiecznego jezuity Iwana Martynowa, który wraz z trzema zakonnymi współbraćmi – Iwanem Gagarinem (1814–1882) Pawłem Pierlingiem (1840–1922) i Jewgienijem Bałabinem (1815–1895) – poświęcił swoje życie sprawom ekumenicznym, a szczególnie zjednoczeniu prawosławnej Rosji ze stolicą Apostolską. Jakkolwiek Martynow był pisarzem bardzo płodnym, a do tego wszechstronnym naukowcem, zajmującym się nie tylko kwestiami dogmatycznymi, ale także sprawami języków (szczególnie słowiańskich), sztuki, historii Kościoła, hagiografii, nie doczekał się dotąd żadnego obszernego naukowego opracowania, które pokazałoby jego miejsce zarówno w życiu religijnym, jak i naukowym Rosji i Francji. Nie zauważono jego wkładu w odkrywanie i propagowanie staroruskich tradycji kulturowych, nie poddano szerszej ocenie jego roli w tłumaczeniu i upowszechnianiu idei ekumenicznych. Materiałem badawczym będą prace Iwana Martynowa publikowane głównie we Francji, ale także w innych krajach. Wykorzystamy metodę analizy tekstowej i badań hermeneutycznych literatury podmiotu oraz przedmiotu. Szukając odpowiedzi na pytanie o zasługi Iwana Martynowa – jezuity i uczonego – spróbujemy przybliżyć jego najważniejsze teksty i te pola aktywności, które sprawiają, że powinien on znaleźć należne mu miejsce w historii religii, kultury, sztuki i literatury.

A review of genus-group names for darkling beetles in the family Tenebrionidae (Insecta: Coleoptera) is presented. A catalogue of 4122 nomenclaturally available genus-group names, representing 2307 valid genera (33 of which are extinct) and 761 valid subgenera, is given. For each name the author, date, page number, gender, type species, type fixation, current status, and first synonymy (when the name is a synonym) are provided. Genus-group names in this family are also recorded in a classification framework, along with data on the distribution of valid genera and subgenera within major biogeographical realms. A list of 535 unavailable genus-group names (e.g., incorrect subsequent spellings) is included. Notes on the date of publication of references cited herein are given, when known. The following genera and subgenera are made available for the first time: Anemiadena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Cheirodes Gené, 1839), Armigena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Debeauxiella Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Hyperopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Linio Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nilio Latreille, 1802), Matthewsotys Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Neosolenopistoma Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Eurynotus W. Kirby, 1819), Paragena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Paulianaria Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Phyllechus Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Prorhytinota Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Pseudorozonia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rozonia Fairmaire, 1888), Pseudothinobatis Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Rhytinopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Thalpophilodes Strand, 1942), Rhytistena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Spinosdara Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Osdara Walker, 1858), Spongesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822), and Zambesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822). The names Adeps Gistel, 1857 and Adepsion Strand, 1917 syn. nov. [= Tetraphyllus Laporte & Brullé, 1831], Asyrmatus Canzoneri, 1959 syn. nov. [= Pystelops Gozis, 1910], Euzadenos Koch, 1956 syn. nov. [= Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834], Gondwanodilamus Kaszab, 1969 syn. nov. [= Conibius J.L. LeConte, 1851], Gyrinodes Fauvel, 1897 syn. nov. [= Nesotes Allard, 1876], Helopondrus Reitter, 1922 syn. nov. [= Horistelops Gozis, 1910], Hybonotus Dejean, 1834 syn. nov. [= Damatris Laporte, 1840], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 syn. nov. [= Metriopus Solier, 1835], Lagriomima Pic, 1950 syn. nov. [= Neogria Borchmann, 1911], Orphelops Gozis, 1910 syn. nov. [= Nalassus Mulsant, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 syn. nov. [= Cryptochile Latreille, 1828], Prosoblapsia Skopin & Kaszab, 1978 syn. nov. [= Genoblaps Bauer, 1921], and Pseudopimelia Gebler, 1859 syn. nov. [= Lasiostola Dejean, 1834] are established as new synonyms (valid names in square brackets). Anachayus Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Chatanayus Ardoin, 1957, Genateropa Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Apterogena Ardoin, 1962, Hemipristula Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903, Kochotella Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Millotella Koch, 1962, Medvedevoblaps Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Protoblaps G.S. Medvedev, 1998, and Subpterocoma Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Pseudopimelia Motschulsky, 1860. Neoeutrapela Bousquet & Bouchard, 2013 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of Impressosora Pic, 1952. Anchomma J.L. LeConte, 1858 is placed in Stenosini: Dichillina (previously in Pimeliinae: Anepsiini); Entypodera Gerstaecker, 1871, Impressosora Pic, 1952 and Xanthalia Fairmaire, 1894 are placed in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Statirina (previously in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Lagriina); Loxostethus Triplehorn, 1962 is placed in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Diaperina (previously in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Adelinina); Periphanodes Gebien, 1943 is placed in Stenochiinae: Cnodalonini (previously in Tenebrioninae: Helopini); Zadenos Laporte, 1840 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of the older name Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834. The type species [placed in square brackets] of the following available genus-group names are designated for the first time: Allostrongylium Kolbe, 1896 [Allostrongylium silvestre Kolbe, 1896], Auristira Borchmann, 1916 [Auristira octocostata Borchmann, 1916], Blapidocampsia Pic, 1919 [Campsia pallidipes Pic, 1918], Cerostena Solier, 1836 [Cerostena deplanata Solier, 1836], Coracostira Fairmaire, 1899 [Coracostira armipes Fairmaire, 1899], Dischidus Kolbe, 1886 [Helops sinuatus Fabricius, 1801], Eccoptostoma Gebien, 1913 [Taraxides ruficrus Fairmaire, 1894], Ellaemus Pascoe, 1866 [Emcephalus submaculatus Brême, 1842], Epeurycaulus Kolbe, 1902 [Epeurycaulus aldabricus Kolbe, 1902], Euschatia Solier, 1851 [Euschatia proxima Solier, 1851], Heliocaes Bedel, 1906 [Blaps emarginata Fabricius, 1792], Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903 [Hemipristis ukamia Kolbe, 1903], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 [Stenocara ruficornis Solier, 1835], Isopedus Stein, 1877 [Helops tenebrioides Germar, 1813], Malacova Fairmaire, 1898 [Malacova bicolor Fairmaire, 1898], Modicodisema Pic, 1917 [Disema subopaca Pic, 1912], Peltadesmia Kuntzen, 1916 [Metriopus platynotus Gerstaecker, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 [Pimelia maculata Fabricius, 1781], Podoces Péringuey, 1886 [Podoces granosula Péringuey, 1886], Pseuduroplatopsis Pic, 1913 [Borchmannia javana Pic, 1913], Pteraulus Solier, 1848 [Pteraulus sulcatipennis Solier, 1848], Sciaca Solier, 1835 [Hylithus disctinctus Solier, 1835], Sterces Champion, 1891 [Sterces violaceipennis Champion, 1891] and Teremenes Carter, 1914 [Tenebrio longipennis Hope, 1843]. Evidence suggests that some type species were misidentified. In these instances, information on the misidentification is provided and, in the following cases, the taxonomic species actually involved is fixed as the type species [placed in square brackets] following requirements in Article 70.3 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: Accanthopus Dejean, 1821 [Tenebrio velikensis Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783], Becvaramarygmus Masumoto, 1999 [Dietysus nodicornis Gravely, 1915], Heterophaga Dejean, 1834 [Opatrum laevigatum Fabricius, 1781], Laena Dejean, 1821, [Scaurus viennensis Sturm, 1807], Margus Dejean, 1834 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Pachycera Eschscholtz, 1831 [Tenebrio buprestoides Fabricius, 1781], Saragus Erichson, 1842 [Celibe costata Solier, 1848], Stene Stephens, 1829 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Stenosis Herbst, 1799 [Tagenia intermedia Solier, 1838] and Tentyriopsis Gebien, 1928 [Tentyriopsis pertyi Gebien, 1940]. The following First Reviser actions are proposed to fix the precedence of names or nomenclatural acts (rejected name or act in square brackets): Stenosis ciliaris Gebien, 1920 as the type species for Afronosis G.S. Medvedev, 1995 [Stenosis leontjevi G.S. Medvedev, 1995], Alienoplonyx Bremer, 2019 [Alienolonyx], Amblypteraca Mas-Peinado, Buckley, Ruiz & García-París, 2018 [Amplypteraca], Caenocrypticoides Kaszab, 1969 [Caenocripticoides], Deriles Motschulsky, 1872 [Derilis], Eccoptostira Borchmann, 1936 [Ecoptostira], †Eodromus Haupt, 1950 [†Edromus], Eutelus Solier, 1843 [Lutelus], Euthriptera Reitter, 1893 [Enthriptera], Meglyphus Motschulsky, 1872 [Megliphus], Microtelopsis Koch, 1940 [Extetranosis Koch, 1940, Hypermicrotelopsis Koch, 1940], Neandrosus Pic, 1921 [Neoandrosus], Nodosogylium Pic, 1951 [Nodosogilium], Notiolesthus Motschulsky, 1872 [Notiolosthus], Pseudeucyrtus Pic, 1916 [Pseudocyrtus], Pseudotrichoplatyscelis Kaszab, 1960 [Pseudotrichoplatynoscelis and Pseudotrichoplatycelis], Rhydimorpha Koch, 1943 [Rhytimorpha], Rhophobas Motschulsky, 1872 [Rophobas], Rhyssochiton Gray, 1831 [Ryssocheton and Ryssochiton], Sphaerotidius Kaszab, 1941 [Spaerotidius], Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Mollusca) [Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Coleoptera)], Sulpiusoma Ferrer, 2006 [Sulpiosoma] and Taenobates Motschulsky, 1872 [Taeniobates]. Supporting evidence is provided for the conservation of usage of Cyphaleus Westwood, 1841 nomen protectum over Chrysobalus Boisduval, 1835 nomen oblitum.

Problem statement. In this study, attention is focused on the Kharkiv theatre development in the 1940–1960’s, the activities of the theatrical entrepreneur Liudvih Mlotkovskyi and the directors of the Kharkov Theatre: Hendrikov, Alferaki, Petrovskyi, Lvov and Shcherbyna. The theatre directors served as intermediaries between the entrepreneur and the Provincial Offices authorities, while addressing issues of organization and contract negotiation with actors, maintenance of theatre premises. They played an important role on repertoire policies controlled with the censorship committee of the Tsar Russia. Research and publications. The subject of Kharkiv theatre as a part of Ukrainian theatre history development in noted period was highlighted in XIX century by the famous writer, literary critic, culture and public activist Hrigoriy Kvitka-Osnovianenko and by Mykola Cherniaiev – a journalist, literary and theatre critic, reviewer of the newspaper “Yuzhnyi krai” (one of the largest provincial newspapers of the XIX century), where his articles about history of theatre organization in Kharkiv was published. In the XX century this period is covered by famous theatre critics: Alexander Klinchin (in the monographs about the Ukrainian theatre prominent figures Mykhailo Shchepkin, Mykola Rybakov, Liubov Mlotkovska), Arkadii Pletniov (in the study “At the origin of the Kharkiv theatre”), Rostyslav Pylypchuk (in “Materials about the Ukrainian theatre history. From the foundation to the beginning of the twentieth century”), Yu. Polyakova (in numerous publications and the preface to M. Cherniaiev’s book “From Kharkiv’s theatrical antiquity”); ethnographers Andrii Paramonov, Volodymyr Titar (in “The materials for the Kharkiv Theatre history of 1780–1934”). The objective of this study is to attempt to supplement the scientific research of famous theatrical scholars (primarily A. Pletnov and M. Cherniaiev) with materials that were found in the Kharkiv region State Archives. The main material. Entrepreneur Liudvig Mlotkovskyi, who headed the Kharkiv theatre from the autumn of 1834 to the spring of 1843, played a significant role in the theatre history of above mentioned period. In 1839 Mlotkovskyi was allocated a piece of land in Kharkiv free of charge to build a theatre. The first stone building of the theater for 1020 seats was opened in 1841. Furthermore, the land was allocated to Mlotkovskyi’s ownership, he was obliged to comply with some terms among which was compulsory that the theatre director was appointed by the governor. As the first director of the new theatre the Count Hendrikov Oleksandr Ivanovych (1806–1881) was elected and approved. Unfortunately, no materials or documents about Hendrikov’s activity in the theatre were found. However, it is known that during the time of his directorship, due to difficulties and debts, the entrepreneur Mlotkovskyi left Kharkiv. The theatre’s premises were first leased to touring troupes (companies), and in 1853, Mlotkovsky donated it to his daughter, the dramatic actress Vera Liudvygovna Mlotkovska-Diukova. Thus, further theatrical activities in Kharkiv were connected with the Diukov’s entrepreneurial family and the managers of the theatre: Alferaki, Petrovskyi, Lviv and Shcherbyna. They faced the difficult task of theatre revival and getting back its fame. Mykola Dmytrovych Alferaki (1815–1860), Collegia Advisor, a nobleman, held the post from 1845 to 1849. As the director, he paid the debts and additionally invested his own money for the theatre development and improvement. From 1849 to 1856 Engineer-Lieutenant Colonel Petrovskyi was the director of the theater. Archival materials describing Petrovskyi’s directorship were located. He tried to save the situation by means of more democratic drama repertoire that was interesting for general public. Mykhailo PavlovychLvov (1819–1867) was the next theatre director appointed. He was an architect, the member of St. Petersburg Academy of Arts, the professor of Kharkiv University. Lvov purchased costumes, scenery, and library; he spent some money to restore the theatre premises. In addition to being in charge of the Kharkiv Theatre, Lvov rented Poltava Theatre and the railway station for 8 years. What his administration was like is not definitely known, but he served as the director to 1857. At the end of 1850’s and beginning of 1860’s the post of the theatre director was taken up by an experienced entrepreneur Ivan Oleksandrovych Shcherbyna (1821–1869). He had the theatre boxes reconstructed, started a permanent ballet company that worked in the theater for 3 years, alternating ballet performances with spectacles of touring companies and the permanent drama troupe stage enters. The time of Shcherbyna directorship at the Kharkiv Drama Theatre appeared to be the most favourable for the Ukrainian repertoire, when along with Russian drama products the plays by Ukrainian authors were staged, such as I. P. Kotliarevskyi, H. F. Kvitka-Osnovianenko, D. Dmytrenko etc. Conclusions. Basing on previously published studies of famous theatre critics and ethnographers and attempting to combine the results of their research with the materials found in Kharkiv State regional archive we conclude: Kharkiv was one of the provincial theatre art centers in the XIX century. Not only theatrical entrepreneurs, but also provincial authorities took part in theatre formation and development. The latters tried to control the repertoire policy through the theatre directors appointed by them. Despite the discouraging conditions connected with the difficulties and censorship oppression some progressive theatre directors, such as Petrovskyi and Shcherbyna, ignored the bans and staged prohibited by censorship dramas. It happened not only for the sake of commercial benefits, but also because the banned drama pieces were the most interesting for the general population, it were modern, democratic and satisfied the needs of the audience. This study does not claim to be complete. Its objectives are to combine some historical finds with modern researches about Kharkiv theatre development, and partly fill in the gaps relating to the activity of the entrepreneurs and directors who headed the Kharkiv theatre in 1840–1860s; the work in this direction will continued.

Grundtvig’s Experience in a Wood in 1811 and his subsequent sermons on the miraculous draught of fishes.By Christian Thodberg.It is common knowledge that in connection with the revival of his Christianity Grundtvig suffered a breakdown in December 1810, after which he returned with his friend, F. C. Sibbern, to his home village and his parents in Udby, South Zealand. However, in May 1811, after a stay in Copenhagen, he was again on his way to Udby to become curate for his aging father when he had an equally important experience in the wood outside Udby which has hitherto passed apparently unheeded. He describes it in a contemporary poem to Sibbern himself.In an attack of despondency, brought on by the sight of Udby church and his childhood home and by the thought of his forthcoming ministry, he knelt down in the wood and read I Cor. 15: 55-58. Grundtvig had been ordained in Copenhagen on May 29th, but in the wood two days later he experienced a special call to the priesthood. The nature of this experience is clearly visible in his sermon for the 5th Sunday after Trinity on the miraculous draught of fishes (Luke 5: 1-11), given 22 years later on July 7th 1833. In the sermon Grundtvig relates the experience and adds that the Lord Himself had spoken to him on that occasion and had called him with the words used to Simon Peter: “Let down the net. From henceforth thou shalt catch men!”A closer analysis of Grundtvig’s sermons from 1811 until his death in 1872 shows that over the years it is on the 5th Sunday after Trinity that he reflects on the Lord’s special call to him, and thus on his life’s special destiny. He uses Peter’s catch as his starting-point, both because of Jesus’ words to Peter and because the frightened and kneeling Peter in the gospel story undoubtedly reminds Grundtvig of his situation and literal position in the wood on Friday May 31st 1811.In his sermon for the 5th Sunday after Trinity 1811 the call motif does not appear; on the other hand he does use the biblical themes of Ezek. 47: 8-10 and Amos 8: 11, which are repeated in the later sermons on the miraculous draught. The unfinished sermon of 1812 is of a quite different order, but the very long sermon in 1818 is such a penetrating analysis of the preacher’s situation that it reveals Grundtvig’s extremely personal relationship to the account of Peter’s call. The same tension can be felt in the three drafts for the sermon of 1821; the last draft is continued in the major prose-poem sermon of 1822. The theme is “listening to God’s Word”, and the sermon is divided into five images: the first depicts the days of the ancient covenant, when the Jews refused to listen and ended up under the curse of slavery; the second is John the Baptist’s sermon; the third is Jesus’ teachings and works, while the fourth is the Church’s enthusiastic reflection on this central vision. The fifth image is basically Grundtvig’s own prophecy for the near future and for himself; for it is he himself who through his coming activity in Copenhagen, Denmark’s Jerusalem, will be the crucial link in the renewal of the salvation story. So self-conscious a sermon could not but have its source in a personal revelation, that is, the experience om May 31st 1811. The first sermon in Copenhagen in 1823 already includes the biblical themes mentioned above and describes the coming Christian revival. In the highly-charged sermon of 1824 Grundtvig clearly recalls the beginning of his ministry in 1811 and confesses that he has never preached better! This particular sermon of 1824 affords grounds for an analysis of the two central poems from that year: The Land o f the Living and N ew Year’s Morn, which were most probably written in June and July 1824 respectively. The Land o f the Living contains three sequences: 1) the childhood dream, 2) the vain dream of the adult worldling, and 3) the childhood dream recovered. The same three themes are also to be found in the poem to Sibbern, and the experience in the wood in 1811 offers a plausible explanation of the break between stanzas 1-6 and 7-13, i.e. between the description of the vain dream of the adult worldling and the childhood dream recovered. In fact it is compelling to regard stanzas 7-8 as a retelling in poetic form of the experience in the wood. The same experience would also seem to have left a significant trace in N ew Year’s Morn, in stanza 54 where there are similarities as regards both content and language between the Sibbern poem of 1811 and the retelling of the experience in the wood in the sermon of 1824.Among the reworked sermons in The Sunday Book we find in Vol. II (1828) a memoir of 1811 in a sermon on the miraculous draught of fishes, but the personal experience is emphasised by the stress, under the inspiration of Irenaeus, on the human as a prerequisite for the Christian. The gospel of the day must be particularly comforting to people torn between fear and hope – like Grundtvig in 1811. Jesus’ calling of Peter is again recalled in 1832 as the basic premise for Grundtvig’s own ministry. The sermon of 1833 - the cornerstone of this survey - has already been mentioned. In 1834 Jesus’ words to Peter are underlined with a minor gloss: fisher of living men, from which Grundtvig argues for his new view of the Church: the capacious Church. People must not be forced into Christianity, and they must be allowed to choose the priest they wish to attach themselves to. In 1835 Grundtvig recalls his ordination in 1811. In 1836 the human aspect of the sermon is emphasised, as it is in The Sunday Book.In 1837 Grundtvig uses the call of Peter to consider the justification of lay preaching - presumably because he himself received a direct call in 1811. In 1838 the Irenaeus inspiration culminates. The dangerous life of a fisherman is a precise image of the rightness of Grundtvig’s well-known thesis: First a Man, then a Christian. In 1839 the experience in the wood is retold, this time in even more detail than in 1833; while in 1840 Grundtvig demonstratively sets his two great “revelations” up against one another: the experience in the wood in 1811 and the “unparalleled discovery” of baptism and the eucharist in 1825. From now on it is clear to him that the later “revelation’ is the greater, a belief he finally confirms in his sermon of 1842. Irenaeus continues to inspire him in the sermons of 1841 and 1844, underlining yet again Grundtvig’s personal relationship to the account of the miraculous draught. In the remainder of Grundtvig’s preaching life the, experience of 1811 is less strongly recalled on the 5th Sunday after Trinity, though it does happen both in 1856 and in 1861.The survey shows that the experience has been of central significance to the revival of Grundtvig’s faith, and that right into the 1840s it is an important starting-point for his understanding of himself as a Christian. The sermon on the 5th Sunday after Trinity on the miraculous draught of fishes thus becomes an interesting guideline to an appreciation of Grundtvig’s personal and theological development.

A list of available taxonomic names in Curculionidae: Scolytinae and Platypodinae in familyand genus-groups is given, together with some remarks on unavailable nominal taxa. Comments are provided on their status and nomenclature, and additions and corrections to extant catalogues given, as a first step for their inclusion in the electronic catalogue ‘WTaxa’. Available names, not recognised as such in current published catalogues, are: Mecopelminae Thompson, 1992; Trypodendrina Nunberg, 1954; Archaeoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Camptocerus Dejean, 1821; Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Coptogaster Illiger, 1804; Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Cryptoxyleborus Wood & Bright, 1992; Cylindra Illiger, 1802; Dendrochilus Schedl, 1963; Dendrocranulus Schedl, 1938; Doliopygus Browne, 1962; Doliopygus Schedl, 1972; Erioschidias Wood, 1960; Ernopocerus Wood, 1954; Idophelus Rye, 1877; Lepicerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Lepidocerus Rye, 1880; Miocryphalus Schedl, 1963; Ozopemon Hagedorn, 1910; Phloeoditica Schedl, 1963; Pinetoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Pygmaeoscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Spinuloscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Stephanopodius Schedl, 1963; Stylotentus Schedl, 1963; Thamnophthorus Blackman, 1942; Trachyostus Browne, 1962; Treptoplatypus Schedl, 1972; Triarmocerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Trypodendrum Agassiz, 1846; Tubuloscolytus Butovitsch, 1929; Xelyborus Schedl, 1939. Unavailable names, not recognised as such in the current published catalogues, are: Chaetophloeini Schedl, 1966; Eidophelinae Murayama, 1954; Mecopelmini Wood, 1966; Strombophorini Schedl, 1960; Tomicidae Shuckard, 1840; Trypodendrinae Trédl, 1907; Acryphalus Tsai & Li, 1963; Adryocoetes Schedl, 1952; Asetus Nunberg, 1958; Carphoborites Schedl, 1947; Charphoborites Schedl, 1947; Cryptoxyleborus Schedl, 1937; Cylindrotomicus Eggers, 1936; Damicerus Dejean, 1835; Damicerus Dejean, 1836; Dendrochilus Schedl, 1957; Dendrocranulus Schedl, 1937; Doliopygus Schedl, 1939; Erioschidias Schedl, 1938; Ernopocerus Balachowsky, 1949; Gnathotrichoides Blackman, 1931; Ipites Karpiński, 1962; Isophthorus Schedl, 1938; Jugocryphalus Tsai & Li, 1963; Landolphianus Schedl, 1950; Mesopygus Nunberg, 1966; Micraciops Schedl, 1953; Miocryphalus Schedl, 1939; Mixopygus Nunberg, 1966; Neohyorrhynchus Schedl, 1962; Neophloeotribus Eggers, 1943; Neopityophthorus Schedl, 1938; Neoxyleborus Wood, 1982; Phloeoditica Schedl, 1962; Platypinus Schedl, 1939; Platyscapulus Schedl, 1957; Platyscapus Schedl, 1939; Pygodolius Nunberg, 1966; Scutopygus Nunberg, 1966; Stephanopodius Schedl, 1941; Stylotentus Schedl, 1939; Taphrostenoxis Schedl, 1965; Tesseroplatypus Schedl, 1935; Thamnophthorus Schedl, 1938; Thylurcos Schedl, 1939; Trachyostus Schedl, 1939; Treptoplatus Schedl, 1939. The name Tesseroceri Blandford, 1896, incorrectly given as “Tesserocerini genuini” in current catalogues, is unavailable as basionym for the family-group name, since it was proposed as a genusgroup name. Resurrected names from synonymy are: Hexacolini Eichhoff, 1878 from synonymy under Ctenophorini Chapuis, 1869 (invalid name because its type genus is a homonym) and given precedence over Problechilidae Eichhoff, 1878 under Art. 24.2; Hylurgini Gistel, 1848 from virtual synonymy under Tomicini C.G. Thomson, 1859 (unavailable name); Afromicracis Schedl, 1959 from synonymy under Miocryphalus Schedl, 1939 (an unavailable name) to valid genus; Costaroplatus Nunberg, 1963 from synonymy under Platyscapulus Schedl, 1957 (an unavailable name) to valid genus; Cumatotomicus Ferrari, 1867 from synonymy under Ips DeGeer, 1775 to valid subgenus of the same; Hapalogenius Hagedorn, 1912 from synonymy under Rhopalopselion Hagedorn, 1909 to valid genus; Pseudips Cognato, 2000, from synonymy under Orthotomicus Ferrari, 1867 to valid genus. New synonyms are: Hexacolini Eichhoff, 1878 (= Erineophilides Hopkins, 1920, syn. nov.); Hypoborini Nuesslin, 1911 (= Chaetophloeini Schedl, 1966, unavailable name, syn. nov.); Scolytini Latreille, 1804 (= Minulini Reitter, 1913, syn. nov.); Afromicracis Schedl, 1959 (= Miocryphalus Schedl, 1963, syn. nov.); Aphanarthrum Wollaston, 1854 (= Coleobothrus Enderlein, 1929, syn. nov.); Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Cosmoderes Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Cumatotomicus Ferrari, 1867 (=Emarips Cognato, 2001, syn. nov.); Doliopygus Browne, 1962 (=Doliopygus Schedl, 1972, syn. nov.); Eidophelus Eichhoff, 1875 (= Idophelus Rye, 1877, syn. nov.); Hapalogenius Hagedorn, 1912 (= Hylesinopsis Eggers, 1920, syn. nov.); Phloeoborus Erichson, 1836 (= Phloeotrypes Agassiz, 1846, syn. nov.); Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Pycnarthrum Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Scolytogenes Eichhoff, 1878 (December) = Lepicerus Eichhoff, 1878 (December) = Lepidocerus Rye, 1880, synn. nov.); Trypodendron Stephens, 1830 (=Xylotrophus Gistel, 1848 = Trypodendrum Gistel, 1856, synn. nov.); Xylechinus Chapuis, 1869 (= Chilodendron Schedl, 1953, syn. nov.); Cosmoderes monilicollis Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Cosmoderes monilicollis Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Hylastes pumilus Mannerheim, 1843 (= Dolurgus pumilus Eichhoff, 1868, syn. nov.); Hypoborus hispidus Ferrari, 1867 (= Pycnarthrum gracile Eichhoff, 1878 (April) syn. nov.); Miocryphalus agnatus Schedl, 1939 (= Miocryphalus agnatus Schedl, 1942, syn. nov.); Miocryphalus congonus Schedl, 1939 (= Miocryphalus congonus Eggers, 1940, syn. nov.); Lepicerus aspericollis Eichhoff, 1878 (April) = Lepicerus aspericollis Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Spathicranuloides moikui Schedl, 1972 (June) (= Spathicranuloides moikui Schedl, 1972 (December), syn. nov.); Triarmocerus cryphalo-ides Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Triarmocerus cryphaloides Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.); Scolytogenes darvini Eichhoff, 1878 (April) (= Scolytogenes darwinii Eichhoff, 1878 (December), syn. nov.). New type species designations are: Bostrichus dactyliperda Fabricius, 1801 for Coccotrypes Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Triarmocerus cryphaloides Eichhoff, 1878 (April) for Triarmocerus Eichhoff, 1878 (April); Ozopemon regius Hagedorn, 1908 for Ozopemon Hagedorn, 1910 (non 1908); Dermestes typographus Linnaeus, 1758 for Bostrichus Fabricius, 1775 (non Geoffroy, 1762). New combinations are: Afromicracis agnata (Schedl, 1939), A. attenuata (Eggers, 1935), A. ciliatipennis (Schedl, 1979), A. congona (Schedl, 1939), A. dubia (Schedl, 1950), A. elongata (Schedl, 1965), A. grobleri (Schedl, 1961), A. klainedoxae (Schedl, 1957), A. longa (Nunberg, 1964), A. natalensis (Eggers, 1936), A. nigrina (Schedl, 1957), A. nitida (Schedl, 1965), A. pennata (Schedl, 1953) and A. punctipennis (Schedl, 1965) all from Miocryphalus; Costaroplatus abditulus (Wood, 1966), C. abditus (Schedl, 1936), C. carinulatus (Chapuis, 1865), C. clunalis (Wood, 1966), C. cluniculus (Wood, 1966), C. clunis (Wood, 1966), C. costellatus (Schedl, 1933), C. frontalis (Blandford, 1896), C. imitatrix (Schedl, 1972), C. manus (Schedl, 1936), C. occipitis (Wood, 1966), C. pulchellus (Chapuis, 1865), C. pulcher (Chapuis, 1865), C. pusillimus (Chapuis, 1865), C. subabditus (Schedl, 1935), C. turgifrons (Schedl, 1935) and C. umbrosus (Schedl, 1936) all from Platyscapulus; Hapalogenius africanus (Eggers, 1933), H. alluaudi (Lepesme, 1942), H. angolanus (Wood, 1988), H. angolensis (Schedl, 1959), H. arabiae (Schedl, 1975), H. atakorae (Schedl, 1951), H. ater (Nunberg, 1967), H. baphiae (Schedl, 1954), H. brincki (Schedl, 1957), H. confusus (Eggers, 1935), H. decellei (Nunberg, 1969), H. dimorphus (Schedl, 1937), H. dubius (Eggers, 1920), H. emarginatus (Nunberg, 1973), H. endroedyi (Schedl, 1967), H. fasciatus (Hagedorn, 1909), H. ficus (Schedl, 1954), H. fuscipennis (Chapuis, 1869), H. granulatus (Lepesme, 1942), H. hirsutus (Schedl, 1957), H. hispidus (Eggers, 1924), H. horridus (Eggers, 1924), H. joveri (Schedl, 1950), H. kenyae (Wood, 1986), H. oblongus (Eggers, 1935), H. orientalis (Eggers, 1943), H. pauliani (Lepesme, 1942), H. punctatus (Eggers, 1932), H. quadrituberculatus (Schedl, 1957), H. rhodesianus (Eggers, 1933), H. saudiarabiae (Schedl, 1971), H. seriatus (Eggers, 1940), H. squamosus (Eggers, 1936), H. striatus (Schedl, 1957), H. sulcatus Eggers, 1944), H. togonus (Eggers, 1919), H. ugandae (Wood, 1986) and H. variegatus (Eggers, 1936), all from Hylesinopsis. New ranks are: Diapodina Strohmeyer, 1914, downgraded from tribe of Tesserocerinae to subtribe of Tesserocerini; Tesserocerina Strohmeyer, 1914, downgraded from tribe of Tesserocerinae to subtribe of Tesserocerini. New placements are: Coptonotini Chapuis, 1869 from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Scolytinae; Mecopelmini Thompson, 1992, from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Platypodinae; Schedlariini Wood & Bright, 1992, from tribe of Coptonotinae to tribe of Platypodinae; Spathicranuloides Schedl, 1972, from Platypodinae s.l. to Tesserocerina; Toxophthorus Wood, 1962 from Scolytinae incertae sedis to Dryocoetini. Confirmed placements are: Onychiini Chapuis, 1869 to tribe of Cossoninae (including single genus Onychius Chapuis, 1869); Sciatrophus Sampson, 1914 in Cossoninae incertae sedis; Cryphalites Cockerell, 1917 in Zopheridae Colydiinae. Corrected spellings are: Micracidini LeConte, 1876 for Micracini; Phrixosomatini Wood, 1978 for Phrixosomini. Gender agreements are corrected for species of several genera.

The Cambrian olenid trilobite Peltura Milne-Edwards, 1840 is widespread in the Furongian strata of the Cambrian continents of Baltica and Avalonia, and has played a significant role in biostratigraphic zonations for both regions. Despite this importance, the genus is poorly known in Avalonian Canada. New collections from the Chelsey Drive Group on Cape Breton Island, Nova Scotia, yielded numerous sclerites of a new species, Peltura hutchinsoni sp. nov., that may also occur in the Parabolina lobata Zone of Baltica. Archival specimens from Sweden and Norway allow the revision of Pelturascarabaeoides ( Wahlenberg, 1821 ) and Pelturaacutidens Brögger, 1882 , respectively.

ZusammenfassungUm die Mitte des 19. Jahrhunderts war Johannes Müller der unbestritten vielseitigste und genialste Physiologe seines Zeitalters. Müller wurde im Jahre 1801 als ältestes von 5 Kindern in Koblenz geboren. Er erhielt eine hervorragende Ausbildung in Mathematik und den alten Sprachen und konnte so die Schriften von Aristoteles im Original mühelos lesen.Nach dem Abitur 1818 diente er ein Jahr bei den Pionieren, 1819 immatrikulierte er sich an der Universität in Bonn. 1821 erhielt er, noch als Student, den Universitätspreis für seine wissenschaftliche Arbeit über die Atmung des Fötus. Müller wurde 1822 in Bonn promoviert und ging anschließend nach Berlin, wo er Vorlesungen des Anatomen Karl Asmund Rudolphi gehört hat.1824 habilitierte er sich in Bonn für Physiologie und vergleichende Anatomie. Nach seinen Bonner Jahren folgte er 1833 dem Ruf an die Berliner Universität auf den Lehrstuhl von Rudolphi. In Berlin erschien sein berühmtes „Handbuch der Physiologie“ (1833–1840). Müllers Arbeitsgebiet betraf die Physiologie, die Humananatomie sowie die vergleichende zoologische Anatomie und pathologische Anatomie.Müller hat eine Vielzahl an Publikationen und Schriften hinterlassen. Er und seine zahlreichen Schüler (Emil du Bois-Reymond, Ernst Haeckel, Hermann von Helmholtz, Friedrich Gustav Jakob Henle, Carl Ludwig, Theodor Schwann und Rudolf Virchow etc.) begründeten den Weltruhm des Berliner Physiologischen Instituts. Die Anfang des 19. Jahrhunderts vorherrschende naturphilosophisch ausgerichtete Denkweise der Medizin wurde durch Müller mehr und mehr durch eine naturwissenschaftlich orientierte ersetzt.

Among numerous genres of sacred music (such as chorales, hymns, motets, masses, etc.), Requiem, or otherwise Missa pro defunctis, Missa defunctorum (Mass for the Deceased) stands out. It is the Mass for the Deceased, corresponding to the Roman Catholic Missal, that is celebrated mainly during the funeral. Over time, Requiem has become a vocal-instrumental genre, a composition associated with the theme of death and mourning. In the 19th century, two principal forms of the genre of Requiem co-existed: a proud, concert-type form, heavily influenced by secular music, and a more modest, reserved, and more “traditional” liturgical one. The latter was smaller in scope, written for a more modest composition of performers in a simpler music language and of a non-dramatic character. The development of the liturgical Requiem over the period in question was largely affected by the Cecilian Movement, active also in Lithuania. True, it is also possible to discuss an intermediate link between the concert and the liturgical types of Requiem – a concert-type vocal-instrumental Requiem, which could also be performed in liturgy. The paper focuses on the manuscripts of the Requiem compositions re-written in the 19th century that were once performed in churches of Vilnius and other cities of Lithuania and currently are stored in in the Rare Books and Manuscripts Reading Room of the Martynas Mažvydas National Library of Lithuania and in the Manuscript Department of the Vilnius University Library. These are copies of the Requiem compositions by the following authors: Gioacchino Albertini (1748–1812), Josef Becher (1821–1888), Luigi Cherubini (1760–1842), Max Filke (1855–1911), Joseph Gruber (1855–1933), Lambert Kraus (1728–1790), Antonio Rosetti (1750–1792), and Johann Baptist Schiedermayr (1779–1840).

Huolen kankahalla – metsä Kantelettaressa (eli mitä kansanlyriikalle Lönnrotin prosessissa tapahtui?) - huolen kankahaksi voisi miksi ei koko tätä laulukokousta nimittää (Kantelettaren esipuhe) Kansanrunojen mielikuvat metsästä heijastavat tarvetta jäsentää ja lähentää ympäröivää tilaa. Metsällä oli monta ulottuvuutta: se kehysti ihmisen elinympäristöä ja edusti vaurautta, mutta sisälsi myös vaaran ja voiman merkkejä, joiden käsittelyyn tarvittiin erityistä tietoa. Metsän uskottiin kätkevän sinne meneviä sisäänsä (metsänpeitto); toisinaan metsä myös liikkui tai lohdutti siellä kävijää. Elias Lönnrot nimitti kansanlyriikan kokoelmaansa, Kanteletarta (1840, 1841) ”huolen kankahaksi” liittäen yksinäisen ja surullisen kokemukset osaksi luontoa. Ympäröivä luonto ja metsä lohduttivat ja ymmärsivät yksinäistä, ja Lönnrot jatkaa esipuheessa: ”Niin usein pitävät [yksinäiset, surulliset] puhetta ja kanssakäymistä lintuin, kalain ja muiden eläväin, puiden ja kukkien, kivien ja kantojen, järvien, jokien, lampien ja muiden senlaisten olentojen kanssa.” Samaisessa esipuheessa Lönnrot esitti luonnon ja ihmisen yhteyden luontoon olevan elinehto juuri kansanrunolle. Tehdessään eron oppineitten ja kansan laulamien runojen välillä Lönnrot korosti jälkimmäisen syntyä ”ilmaumana”, edellisen ”työnä”, käyttäen luontoa vertauskuvana kansanrunon luonnolliselle, aidolle synnylle. Folkloristiikassa kansanrunouden luontokäsityksiä on jonkin verran tutkittu, esimerkiksi Kalevalaseuran vuosikirja Metsä ja metsänviljaa (1994) tarkastelee suomalaisten luontosuhdetta eri aineistojen, kuten kansanrunojen, kautta. Myös yksittäisissä, kalevalamittaiseen runouteen keskittyvissä tutkimuksissa metsä ja luonto ovat tarjonneet näkökulmia aineistoon (esim. Tarkka 2005; Timonen 2004). Tässä artikkelissa lähestyn metsää / luontoa tarkastelemalla metsän poeettista ja ideologista käyttöä kansanlyriikan kirjallisessa esityksessä eli Kantelettaressa. Kirjallisen sivistyksen ja koulutuksen saanut Lönnrot pyrki esittämään kansanrunoutta mahdollisimman monipuolisesti lukijakunnalle, jolla oli useimmiten heikko suomen kielen taito ja ymmärrys tavallisen kansan, rahvaan, elämismaailmasta tai perinteestä. Tämän vuoksi Lönnrot pyrki kuromaan etäisyyttä umpeen erilaisin tekstuaalisin keinoin. Kysyn, missä määrin Kantelettaren lyriikka nivoutuu käsityksiin metsän ja luonnon aitoudesta; entä miten Lönnrotin muokkaamat runot eroavat tallennetusta runoaineistosta? Pohdin myös, miten Lönnrotin tekstualisointitavat suhteutuvat sivistyneistön ylläpitämään (ja tutkimushistorian jatkamaan) kalevalamittaisen runon aitousdiskurssiin, jossa kansanlyriikka esitettiin huolen ja murheen runoutena. KirjallisuusMetsä ja metsänviljaa. Kalevalaseuran vuosikirja 73. Toim. Pekka Laaksonen ja Sirkka-Liisa Mettomäki. Helsinki: SKS. 1994.Tarkka, Lotte 2005: Rajarahvaan laulu. Tutkimus Vuokkiniemen kalevalamittaisesta runokulttuurista 1821-1921. Helsinki: SKS.Timonen, Senni 2004: Minä, tila, tunne. Näkökulmia kalevalamittaiseen kansanlyriikkaan. Helsinki: SKS.

IntroductionIn 1802 George Howe (1769-1821), the recently appointed Government Printer, published Australia’s first book. The following year he established Australia’s first newspaper; an enterprise that ran counter to all the environmental factors of the day, including: 1) issues of logistics and a lack of appropriate equipment and basic materials to produce a regularly issued newspaper; 2) issues resulting from the very close supervision of production and the routine censorship by the Governor; and 3) issues associated with the colony’s primary purposes as a military outpost and as a penal settlement, creating conflicts between very different readerships. The Sydney Gazette was, critically for Howe, the only newspaper in the infant city for over two decades. Alternative voices would not enter the field of printed media until the 1820s and 1830s. This article briefly explores the birth of an Australian industry and looks at how a very modest newspaper overcame a range of serious challenges to ignite imaginations and lay a foundation for media empires.Government Printer The first book published in Australia was the New South Wales General Standing Orders and General Orders (1802), authorised by Governor Philip Gidley King for the purposes of providing a convenient, single-volume compilation of all Government Orders, issued in New South Wales, between 1791 and 1802. (As the Australian character has been described as “egalitarian, anti-authoritarian and irreverent” [D. Jones 690], it is fascinating that the nation’s first published book was a set of rules.) Prescribing law, order and regulation for the colony the index reveals the desires of those charged with the colony’s care and development, to contain various types of activities. The rules for convicts were, predictably, many. There were also multiple orders surrounding administration, animal husbandry as well as food stuffs and other stores. Some of the most striking headings in the index relate to crime. For example, in addition to headings pertaining to courts there are also headings for a broad range of offences from: “BAD Characters” to “OFFENSIVE Weapons – Again[s]t concealing” (i-xii). The young colony, still in its teenage years, was, for the short-term, very much working on survival and for the long-term developing ambitious plans for expansion and trade. It was clear though, through this volume, that there was no forgetting the colony of New South Wales was first, and foremost, a penal settlement which also served as a military outpost. Clear, too, was the fact that not all of those who were shipped out to the new colony were prepared to abandon their criminal careers which “did not necessarily stop with transportation” (Foyster 10). Containment and recidivism were matters of constant concern for the colony’s authorities. Colonial priorities could be seen in the fact that, when “Governor Arthur Phillip brought the first convicts (548 males and 188 females) to Port Jackson on 26 January 1788, he also brought a small press for printing orders, rules, and regulations” (Goff 103). The device lay dormant on arrival, a result of more immediate concerns to feed and house all those who made up the First Fleet. It would be several years before the press was pushed into sporadic service by the convict George Hughes for printing miscellaneous items including broadsides and playbills as well as for Government Orders (“Hughes, George” online). It was another convict (another man named George), convicted at the Warwick Assizes on March 1799 (Ferguson vi) then imprisoned and ultimately transported for shoplifting (Robb 15), who would transform the small hand press into an industry. Once under the hand of George Howe, who had served as a printer with several London newspapers including The Times (Sydney Gazette, “Never” 2) – the printing press was put to much more regular use. In these very humble circumstances, Australia’s great media tradition was born. Howe, as the Government Printer, transformed the press from a device dedicated to ephemera as well as various administrative matters into a crucial piece of equipment that produced the new colony’s first newspaper. Logistical Challenges Governor King, in the year following the appearance of the Standing Orders, authorised the publishing of Australia’s first newspaper, The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser. The publication history of The Sydney Gazette, in a reflection of some of the challenges faced by the printer, is erratic. First published on a Saturday from 5 March 1803, it quickly changed to a Sunday paper from 10 April 1803. Interestingly, Sunday “was not an approved day for the publication of newspapers, and although some English publishers had been doing so since about 1789, Sunday papers were generally frowned upon” (Robb 58). Yet, as argued by Howe a Sunday print run allowed for the inclusion of “the whole of the Ship News, and other Incidental Matter, for the preceeding week” (Sydney Gazette, “To the Public” 1).The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser Vol. 1, No. 1, 5 March 1803 (Front Page)Call Number DL F8/50, Digital ID a345001, State Library of New South WalesPublished weekly until 1825, then bi-weekly until 1827 before coming out tri-weekly until 20 October 1842 (Holden 14) there were some notable pauses in production. These included one in 1807 (Issue 214, 19 April-Issue 215, 7 June) and one in 1808-1809 (Issue 227, 30 August-Issue 228, 15 May) due to a lack of paper, with the latter pause coinciding with the Rum Rebellion and the end of William Bligh’s term as Governor of New South Wales (see: Karskens 186-88; Mundle 323-37). There was, too, a brief attempt at publishing as a daily from 1 January 1827 which lasted only until 10 February of that year when the title began to appear tri-weekly (Kirkpatrick online; Holden 14). There would be other pauses, including one of two weeks, shortly before the final issue was produced on 20 October 1842. There were many problems that beset The Sydney Gazette with paper shortages being especially challenging. Howe regularly advertised for: “any quantity” of Spanish paper (e.g.: Sydney Gazette, “Wanted to Purchase” 4) and needing to be satisfied “with a variety of size and colour” (P.M. Jones 39). In addition, the procurement of ink was so difficult in the colony, that Howe often resorted to making his own out of “charcoal, gum and shark oil” (P.M. Jones 39).The work itself was physically demanding and papers printed during this period, by hand, required a great deal of effort with approximately “250 sheets per hour … [the maximum] produced by a printer and his assistant” (Robb 8). The printing press itself was inadequate and the subject of occasional repairs (Sydney Gazette, “We Have” 2). Type was also a difficulty. As Gwenda Robb explains, traditionally six sets of an alphabet were supplied to a printer with extras for ‘a’, ‘e’, ‘r’ and ‘t’ as well as ‘s’. Without ample type Howe was required to improvise as can be seen in using a double ‘v’ to create a ‘w’ and an inverted ‘V’ to represent a capital ‘A’ (50, 106). These quirky work arounds, combined with the use of the long-form ‘s’ (‘∫’) for almost a full decade, can make The Sydney Gazette a difficult publication for modern readers to consume. Howe also “carried the financial burden” of the paper, dependent, as were London papers of the late eighteenth century, on advertising (Robb 68, 8). Howe also relied upon subscriptions for survival, with the collection of payments often difficult as seen in some subscribers being two years, or more, in arrears (e.g.: Sydney Gazette, “Sydney Gazette” 1; Ferguson viii; P.M. Jones 38). Governor Lachlan Macquarie granted Howe an annual salary, in 1811, of £60 (Byrnes 557-559) offering some relief, and stability, for the beleaguered printer.Gubernatorial Supervision Governor King wrote to Lord Hobart (then Secretary of State for War and the Colonies), on 9 May 1803: it being desirable that the settlers and inhabitants at large should be benefitted by useful information being dispersed among them, I considered that a weekly publication would greatly facilitate that design, for which purpose I gave permission to an ingenious man, who manages the Government printing press, to collect materials weekly, which, being inspected by an officer, is published in the form of a weekly newspaper, copies of which, as far as they have been published, I have the honor to enclose. (85)In the same letter, King wrote: “to the list of wants I have added a new fount of letters which may be procured for eight or ten pounds, sufficient for our purpose, if approved of” (85). King’s motivations were not purely altruistic. The population of the colony was growing in Sydney Cove and in the outlying districts, thus: “there was an increasing administrative need for information to be disseminated in a more accessible form than the printed handbills of government orders” (Robb 49). There was, however, a need for the administration to maintain control and the words “Published By Authority”, appearing on the paper’s masthead, were a constant reminder to the printer that The Sydney Gazette was “under the censorship of the Secretary to the Governor, who examined all proofs” (Ferguson viii). The high level of supervision, worked in concert with the logistical difficulties described above, ensured the newspaper was a source of great strain and stress. All for the meagre reward of “6d per copy” (Ferguson viii). This does not diminish Howe’s achievement in establishing a newspaper, an accomplishment outlined, with some pride, in an address printed on the first page of the first issue:innumerable as the Obstacles were which threatened to oppose our Undertaking, yet we are happy to affirm that they were not insurmountable, however difficult the task before us.The utility of a PAPER in the COLONY, as it must open a source of solid information, will, we hope, be universally felt and acknowledged. (Sydney Gazette, “Address” 1)Howe carefully kept his word and he “wrote nothing like a signature editorial column, nor did he venture his personal opinions, conscious always of the powers of colonial officials” (Robb 72). An approach to reportage he passed to his eldest son and long-term assistant, Robert (1795-1829), who later claimed The Sydney Gazette “reconciled in one sheet the merits of the London Gazette in upholding the Government and the London Times in defending the people” (Walker 10). The censorship imposed on The Sydney Gazette, by the Governor, was lifted in 1824 (P.M. Jones 40), when the Australian was first published without permission: Governor Thomas Brisbane did not intervene in the new enterprise. The appearance of unauthorised competition allowed Robert Howe to lobby for the removal of all censorship restrictions on The Sydney Gazette, though he was careful to cite “greater dispatch and earlier publication, not greater freedom of expression, as the expected benefit” (Walker 6). The sudden freedom was celebrated, and still appreciated many years after it was given:the Freedom of the Press has now been in existence amongst us on the verge of four years. In October 1824, we addressed a letter to the Colonial Government, fervently entreating that those shackles, under which the Press had long laboured, might be removed. Our prayer was attended to, and the Sydney Gazette, feeling itself suddenly introduced to a new state of existence, demonstrated to the Colonists the capabilities that ever must flow from the spontaneous exertions of Constitutional Liberty. (Sydney Gazette, “Freedom” 2)Early Readerships From the outset, George Howe presented a professional publication. The Sydney Gazette was formatted into three columns with the front page displaying a formal masthead featuring a scene of Sydney and the motto “Thus We Hope to Prosper”. Gwenda Robb argues the woodcut, the first produced in the colony, was carved by John W. Lewin who “had plenty of engraving skills” and had “returned to Sydney [from a voyage to Tahiti] in December 1802” (51) while Roger Butler has suggested that “circumstances point to John Austin who arrived in Sydney in 1800” as being the engraver (91). The printed text was as vital as the visual supports and every effort was made to present full accounts of colonial activities. “As well as shipping and court news, there were agricultural reports, religious homilies, literary extracts and even original poetry written by Howe himself” (Blair 450). These items, of course, sitting alongside key Government communications including General Orders and Proclamations.Howe’s language has been referred to as “florid” (Robb 52), “authoritative and yet filled with deference for all authority, pompous in a stiff, affected eighteenth century fashion” (Green 10) and so “some of Howe’s readers found the Sydney Gazette rather dull” (Blair 450). Regardless of any feelings towards authorial style, circulation – without an alternative – steadily increased with the first print run in 1802 being around 100 copies but by “the early 1820s, the newspaper’s production had grown to 300 or 400 copies” (Blair 450).In a reflection of the increasing sophistication of the Sydney-based reader, George Howe, and Robert Howe, would also publish some significant, stand-alone, texts. These included several firsts: the first natural history book printed in the colony, Birds of New South Wales with their Natural History (1813) by John W. Lewin (praised as a text “printed with an elegant and classical simplicity which makes it the highest typographical achievement of George Howe” [Wantrup 278]); the first collection of poetry published in the colony First Fruits of Australian Poetry (1819) by Barron Field; the first collection of poetry written by a Australian-born author, Wild Notes from the Lyre of a Native Minstrel (1826) by Charles Tompson; and the first children’s book A Mother’s Offering to Her Children: By a Lady, Long Resident in New South Wales (1841) by Charlotte Barton. The small concern also published mundane items such as almanacs and receipt books for the Bank of New South Wales (Robb 63, 72). All against the backdrop of printing a newspaper.New Voices The Sydney Gazette was Australia’s first newspaper and, critically for Howe, the only newspaper for over two decades. (A second paper appeared in 1810 but the Derwent Star and Van Diemen’s Land Intelligencer, which only managed twelve issues, presented no threat to The Sydney Gazette.) No genuine, local rival entered the field until 1824, when the Australian was founded by barristers William Charles Wentworth and Robert Wardell. The Monitor debuted in 1826, followed the Sydney Herald in 1831 and the Colonist in 1835 (P.M. Jones 38). It was the second title, the Australian, with a policy that asserted articles to be: “Independent, yet consistent – free, yet not licentious – equally unmoved by favours and by fear” (Walker 6), radically changed the newspaper landscape. The new paper made “a strong point of its independence from government control” triggering a period in which colonial newspapers “became enmeshed with local politics” (Blair 451). This new age of opinion reflected how fast the colony was evolving from an antipodean gaol into a complex society. Also, two papers, without censorship restrictions, without registration, stamp duties or advertisement duties meant, as pointed out by R.B. Walker, that “in point of law the Press in the remote gaol of exile was now freer than in the country of origin” (6). An outcome George Howe could not have predicted as he made the long journey, as a convict, to New South Wales. Of the early competitors, the only one that survives is the Sydney Herald (The Sydney Morning Herald from 1842), which – founded by immigrants Alfred Stephens, Frederick Stokes and William McGarvie – claims the title of Australia’s oldest continuously published newspaper (Isaacs and Kirkpatrick 4-5). That such a small population, with so many pressing issues, factions and political machinations, could support a first newspaper, then competitors, is a testament to the high regard, with which newspaper reportage was held. Another intruder would be The Government Gazette. Containing only orders and notices in the style of the London Gazette (McLeay 1), lacking any news items or private advertisements (Walker 19), it was first issued on 7 March 1832 (and continues, in an online format, today). Of course, Government orders and other notices had news value and newspaper proprietors could bid for exclusive rights to produce these notices until a new Government Printer was appointed in 1841 (Walker 20).Conclusion George Howe, an advocate of “reason and common sense” died in 1821 placing The Sydney Gazette in the hands of his son who “fostered religion” (Byrnes 557-559). Robert Howe, served as editor, experiencing firsthand the perils and stresses of publishing, until he drowned in a boating accident in Sydney Harbour, in 1829 leaving the paper to his widow Ann Howe (Blair 450-51). The newspaper would become increasingly political leading to controversy and financial instability; after more changes in ownership and in editorial responsibility, The Sydney Gazette, after almost four decades of delivering the news – as a sole voice and then as one of several alternative voices – ceased publication in 1842. During a life littered with personal tragedy, George Howe laid the foundation stone for Australia’s media empires. His efforts, in extraordinary circumstances and against all environmental indicators, serve as inspiration to newspapers editors, proprietors and readers across the country. He established the Australian press, an institution that has been described asa profession, an art, a craft, a business, a quasi-public, privately owned institution. It is full of grandeurs and faults, sublimities and pettinesses. It is courageous and timid. It is fallible. It is indispensable to the successful on-going of a free people. (Holden 15)George Howe also created an artefact of great beauty. The attributes of The Sydney Gazette are listed, in a perfunctory manner, in most discussions of the newspaper’s history. The size of the paper. The number of columns. The masthead. The changes seen across 4,503 issues. Yet, consistently overlooked, is how, as an object, the newspaper is an exquisite example of the printed word. There is a physicality to the paper that is in sharp contrast to contemporary examples of broadsides, tabloids and online publications. Concurrently fragile and robust: its translucent sheets and mottled print revealing, starkly, the problems with paper and ink; yet it survives, in several collections, over two centuries since the first issue was produced. The elegant layout, the glow of the paper, the subtle crackling sound as the pages are turned. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser is an astonishing example of innovation and perseverance. It provides essential insights into Australia’s colonial era. It is a metonym for making words matter. AcknowledgementsThe author offers her sincere thanks to Geoff Barker, Simon Dwyer and Peter Kirkpatrick for their comments on an early draft of this paper. The author is also grateful to Bridget Griffen-Foley for engaging in many conversations about Australian newspapers. ReferencesBlair, S.J. “Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser.” A Companion to the Australian Media. Ed. Bridget Griffen-Foley. North Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2014.Butler, Roger. Printed Images in Colonial Australia 1801-1901. Canberra: National Gallery of Australia, 2007.Byrnes, J.V. “Howe, George (1769–1821).” Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography: 1788–1850, A–H. Canberra: Australian National University, 1966. 557-559. Ferguson, J.A. “Introduction.” The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser: A Facsimile Reproduction of Volume One, March 5, 1803 to February 26, 1804. Sydney: The Trustees of the Public Library of New South Wales in Association with Angus & Robertson, 1963. v-x. Foyster, Elizabeth. “Introduction: Newspaper Reporting of Crime and Justice.” Continuity and Change 22.1 (2007): 9-12.Goff, Victoria. “Convicts and Clerics: Their Roles in the Infancy of the Press in Sydney, 1803-1840.” Media History 4.2 (1998): 101-120.Green, H.M. “Australia’s First Newspaper.” Sydney Morning Herald, 11 Apr. 1935: 10.Holden, W. Sprague. Australia Goes to Press. Detroit: Wayne State UP, 1961. “Hughes, George (?–?).” Australian Dictionary of Biography, National Centre of Biography: 1788–1850, A–H. Canberra: Australian National University, 1966. 562. Isaacs, Victor, and Rod Kirkpatrick. Two Hundred Years of Sydney Newspapers. Richmond: Rural Press, 2003. Jones, Dorothy. “Humour and Satire (Australia).” Encyclopedia of Post-Colonial Literatures in English. 2nd ed. Eds. Eugene Benson and L.W. Conolly. London: Routledge, 2005. 690-692.Jones, Phyllis Mander. “Australia’s First Newspaper.” Meanjin 12.1 (1953): 35-46. Karskens, Grace. The Colony: A History of Early Sydney. Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin, 2010. King, Philip Gidley. “Letter to Lord Hobart, 9 May 1803.” Historical Records of Australia, Series 1, Governors’ Despatches to and from England, Volume IV, 1803-1804. Ed. Frederick Watson. Sydney: Library Committee of the Commonwealth Parliament, 1915.Kirkpatrick, Rod. Press Timeline: 1802 – 1850. Canberra: National Library of Australia, 2011. 6 Jan. 2017 <https://www.nla.gov.au/content/press-timeline-1802-1850>. McLeay, Alexander. “Government Notice.” The New South Wales Government Gazette 1 (1832): 1. Mundle, R. Bligh: Master Mariner. Sydney: Hachette, 2016.New South Wales General Standing Orders and General Orders: Selected from the General Orders Issued by Former Governors, from the 16th of February, 1791, to the 6th of September, 1800. Also, General Orders Issued by Governor King, from the 28th of September, 1800, to the 30th of September, 1802. Sydney: Government Press, 1802. Robb, Gwenda. George Howe: Australia’s First Publisher. Kew: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2003.Spalding, D.A. Collecting Australian Books: Notes for Beginners. 1981. Mawson: D.A. Spalding, 1982. The Sydney Gazette and New South Wales Advertiser. “Address.” 5 Mar. 1803: 1.———. “To the Public.” 2 Apr. 1803: 1.———. “Wanted to Purchase.” 26 June 1803: 4.———. “We Have the Satisfaction to Inform Our Readers.” 3 Nov. 1810: 2. ———. “Sydney Gazette.” 25 Dec. 1819: 1. ———. “The Freedom of the Press.” 29 Feb. 1828: 2.———. “Never Did a More Painful Task Devolve upon a Public Writer.” 3 Feb. 1829: 2. Walker, R.B. The Newspaper Press in New South Wales, 1803-1920. Sydney: Sydney UP, 1976.Wantrup, Johnathan. Australian Rare Books: 1788-1900. Sydney: Hordern House, 1987.

On the night of 31 August, 1888, Mary Ann ‘Polly’ Nichols was found murdered in Buck’s Row, her throat slashed and her body mutilated. She was followed by Annie Chapman on 8 September in the year of 29 Hanbury Street, Elizabeth Stride in Dutfield’s Yard and Catherine Eddowes in Mitre Square on 30 September, and finally Mary Jane Kelly in Miller’s Court, on 9 November. These five women, all prostitutes, were victims of an unknown assailant commonly referred to by the epithet ‘Jack the Ripper’, forming an official canon which excludes at least thirteen other cases around the same time. As the Ripper was never identified or caught, he has attained an almost supernatural status in London’s history and literature, immortalised alongside other iconic figures such as Sherlock Holmes. And his killing ground, the East End suburb of Whitechapel, has become notorious in its own right. In this article, I will discuss how Whitechapel developed as a Gothic location through the body of literature devoted to the Whitechapel murders of 1888, known as 'Ripperature'. I will begin by speaking to the turn of Gothic literature towards the idea of the city as a Gothic space, before arguing that Whitechapel's development into a Gothic location may be attributed to the threat of the Ripper and the literature which emerged during and after his crimes. As a working class slum with high rates of crime and poverty, Whitechapel already enjoyed an evil reputation in the London press. However, it was the presence of Jack that would make the suburb infamous into contemporary times. The Gothic Space of the City In the nineteenth century, there was a shift in the representation of space in Gothic literature. From the depiction of the wilderness and ancient buildings such as castles as essentially Gothic, there was a turn towards the idea of the city as a Gothic space. David Punter attributes this turn to Robert Louis Stevenson’s 1886 novel The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The wild landscape is no longer considered as dangerous as the savage city of London, and evil no longer confined only to those of working-class status (Punter 191). However, it has been argued by Lawrence Phillips and Anne Witchard that Charles Dickens may have been the first author to present London as a Gothic city, in particular his description of Seven Dials in Bell’s Life in London, 1837, where the anxiety and unease of the narrator is associated with place (11). Furthermore, Thomas de Quincey uses Gothic imagery in his descriptions of London in his 1821 book Confessions of an English Opium-Eater, calling the city a “vast centre of mystery” (217). This was followed in 1840 with Edgar Allen Poe’s story The Man of the Crowd, in which the narrator follows a stranger through the labyrinthine streets of London, experiencing its poorest and most dangerous areas. At the end of the story, Poe calls the stranger “the type and the genius of deep crime (...) He is the man of the crowd” (n. p). This association of crowds with crime is also used by Jack London in his book The People of the Abyss, published in 1905, where the author spent time living in the slums of the East End. Even William Blake could be considered to have used Gothic imagery in his description of the city in his poem London, written in 1794. The Gothic city became a recognisable and popular trope in the fin-de-siècle, or end-of-century Gothic literature, in the last few decades of the nineteenth century. This fin-de-siècle literature reflected the anxieties inherent in increasing urbanisation, wherein individuals lose their identity through their relationship with the city. Examples of fin-de-siècle Gothic literature include The Beetle by Richard Marsh, published in 1897, and Bram Stoker’s Dracula, published in the same year. Evil is no longer restricted to foreign countries in these stories, but infects familiar city streets with terror, in a technique that is described as ‘everyday Gothic’ (Paulden 245). The Gothic city “is constructed by man, and yet its labyrinthine alleys remain unknowable (...) evil is not externalized elsewhere, but rather literally exists within” (Woodford n.p). The London Press and Whitechapel Prior to the Ripper murders of 1888, Whitechapel had already been given an evil reputation in the London press, heavily influenced by W.T. Stead’s reports for The Pall Mall Gazette, entitled The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon, in 1885. In these reports, Stead revealed how women and children were being sold into prostitution in suburbs such as Whitechapel. Stead used extensive Gothic imagery in his writing, one of the most enduring being the image of London as a labyrinth with a monstrous Minotaur at its centre, swallowing up his helpless victims. Counter-narratives about Whitechapel do exist, an example being Henry Mayhew’s London Labour and the London Poor, who attempted to demystify the East End by walking the streets of Whitechapel and interviewing its inhabitants in the 1860’s. Another is Arthur G. Morrison, who in 1889 dismissed the graphic descriptions of Whitechapel by other reporters as amusing to those who actually knew the area as a commercially respectable place. However, the Ripper murders in the autumn of 1888 ensured that the Gothic image of the East End would become the dominant image in journalism and literature for centuries to come. Whitechapel was a working-class slum, associated with poverty and crime, and had a large Jewish and migrant population. Indeed the claim was made that “had Whitechapel not existed, according to the rationalist, then Jack the Ripper would not have marched against civilization” (Phillips 157). Whitechapel was known as London’s “heart of darkness (…) the ultimate threat and the ultimate mystery” (Ackroyd 679). Therefore, the reporters of the London press who visited Whitechapel during and immediately following the murders understandably imbued the suburb with a Gothic atmosphere in their articles. One such newspaper article, An Autumn Evening in Whitechapel, released in November of 1888, demonstrates these characteristics in its description of Whitechapel. The anonymous reporter, writing during the Ripper murders, describes the suburb as a terrible dark ocean in which there are human monsters, where a man might get a sense of what humanity can sink to in areas of poverty. This view was shared by many, including author Margaret Harkness, whose 1889 book In Darkest London described Whitechapel as a monstrous living entity, and as a place of vice and depravity. Gothic literary tropes were also already widely used in print media to describe murders and other crimes that happened in London, such as in the sensationalist newspaper The Illustrated Police News. An example of this is an illustration published in this newspaper after the murder of Mary Kelly, showing the woman letting the Ripper into her lodgings, with the caption ‘Opening the door to admit death’. Jack is depicted as a manifestation of Death itself, with a grinning skull for a head and clutching a doctor’s bag filled with surgical instruments with which to perform his crimes (Johnston n.p.). In the magazine Punch, Jack was depicted as a phantom, the ‘Nemesis of Neglect’, representing the poverty of the East End, floating down an alleyway with his knife looking for more victims. The Ripper murders were explained by London newspapers as “the product of a diseased environment where ‘neglected human refuse’ bred crime” (Walkowitz 194). Whitechapel became a Gothic space upon which civilisation projected their inadequacies and fears, as if “it had become a microcosm of London’s own dark life” (Ackroyd 678). And in the wake of Jack the Ripper, this writing of Whitechapel as a Gothic space would only continue, with the birth of ‘Ripperature’, the body of fictional and non-fiction literature devoted to the murders. The Birth of Ripperature: The Curse upon Mitre Square and Leather Apron John Francis Brewer wrote the first known text about the Ripper murders in October of 1888, a sensational horror monograph entitled The Curse upon Mitre Square. Brewer made use of well-known Gothic tropes, such as the trans-generational curse, the inclusion of a ghost and the setting of an old church for the murder of an innocent woman. Brewer blended fact and fiction, making the Whitechapel murderer the inheritor, or even perhaps the victim of an ancient curse that hung over Mitre Square, where the second murdered prostitute, Catherine Eddowes, had been found the month before. According to Brewer, the curse originated from the murder of a woman in 1530 by her brother, a ‘mad monk’, on the steps of the high altar of the Holy Trinity Church in Aldgate. The monk, Martin, committed suicide, realising what he had done, and his ghost now appears pointing to the place where the murder occurred, promising that other killings will follow. Whitechapel is written as both a cursed and haunted Gothic space in The Curse upon Mitre Square. Brewer’s description of the area reflected the contemporary public opinion, describing the Whitechapel Road as a “portal to the filth and squalor of the East” (66). However, Mitre Square is the former location of a monastery torn down by a corrupt politician; this place, which should have been holy ground, is cursed. Mitre Square’s atmosphere ensures the continuation of violent acts in the vicinity; indeed, it seems to exude a self-aware and malevolent force that results in the death of Catherine Eddowes centuries later. This idea of Whitechapel as somehow complicit in or even directing the acts of the Ripper will later become a popular trope of Ripperature. Brewer’s work was advertised in London on posters splashed with red, a reminder of the blood spilled by the Ripper’s victims only weeks earlier. It was also widely promoted by the media and reissued in New York in 1889. It is likely that a ‘suggestion effect’ took place during the telegraph-hastened, press-driven coverage of the Jack the Ripper story, including Brewer’s monograph, spreading the image of Gothic Whitechapel as fact to the world (Dimolianis 63). Samuel E. Hudson’s account of the Ripper murders differs in style from Brewer’s because of his attempt to engage critically with issues such as the failure of the police force to find the murderer and the true identity of Jack. His book Leather Apron; or, the Horrors of Whitechapel, London, was published in December of 1888. Hudson described the five murders canonically attributed to Jack, wrote an analysis of the police investigation that followed, and speculated as to the Ripper’s motivations. Despite his intention to examine the case objectively, Hudson writes Jack as a Gothic monster, an atavistic and savage creature prowling Whitechapel to satisfy his bloodlust. Jack is associated with several Gothic tropes in Hudson’s work, and described as different types of monsters. He is called: a “fiend bearing a charmed and supernatural existence,” a “human vampire”, an “incarnate monster” and even, like Brewer, the perpetrator of “ghoulish butchery” (Hudson 40). Hudson describes Whitechapel as “the worst place in London (...) with innumerable foul and pest-ridden alleys” (9). Whitechapel becomes implicated in the Ripper murders because of its previously established reputation as a crime-ridden slum. Poverty forced women into prostitution, meaning they were often out alone late at night, and its many courts and alleyways allowed the Ripper an easy escape from his pursuers after each murder (Warwick 560). The aspect of Whitechapel that Hudson emphasises the most is its darkness; “off the boulevard, away from the streaming gas-jets (...) the knave ran but slight chance of interruption” (40). Whitechapel is a place of shadows, its darkest places negotiated only by ‘fallen women’ and their clients, and Jack himself. Hudson’s casting of Jack as a vampire makes his preference for the night, and his ability to skilfully disembowel prostitutes and disappear without a trace, intelligible to his readers as the attributes of a Gothic monster. Significantly, Hudson’s London is personified as female, the same sex as the Ripper victims, evoking a sense of passive vulnerability against the acts of the masculine and predatory Jack, Hudson writing that “it was not until four Whitechapel women had perished (...) that London awoke to the startling fact that a monster was at work upon her streets” (8). The Complicity of Gothic Whitechapel in the Ripper Murders This seeming complicity of Whitechapel as a Gothic space in the Ripper murders, which Brewer and Hudson suggest in their work, can be seen to have influenced subsequent representations of Whitechapel in Ripperature. Whitechapel is no longer simply the location in which these terrible events take place; they happen because of Whitechapel itself, the space exerting a self-conscious malevolence and kinship with Jack. Historically, the murders forced Queen Victoria to call for redevelopment in Spitalfields, the improvement of living conditions for the working class, and for a better police force to patrol the East End to prevent similar crimes (Sugden 2). The fact that Jack was never captured “seemed only to confirm the impression that the bloodshed was created by the foul streets themselves: that the East End was the true Ripper,” (Ackroyd 678) using the murderer as a way to emerge into the public consciousness. In Ripperature, this idea was further developed by the now popular image of Jack “stalking the black alleyways [in] thick swirling fog” (Jones 15). This otherworldly fog seems to imply a mystical relationship between Jack and Whitechapel, shielding him from view and disorientating his victims. Whitechapel shares the guilt of the murders as a malevolent and essentially pagan space. The notion of Whitechapel as being inscribed with paganism and magic has become an enduring and popular trope of Ripperature. It relates to an obscure theory that drawing lines between the locations of the first four Ripper murders created Satanic and profane religious symbols, suggesting that they were predetermined locations for a black magic ritual (Odell 217). This theory was expanded upon most extensively in Alan Moore’s graphic novel From Hell, published in 1999. In From Hell, Jack connects several important historical and religious sites around London by drawing a pentacle on a map of the city. He explains the murders as a reinforcement of the pentacle’s “lines of power and meaning (...) this pentacle of sun gods, obelisks and rational male fire, within unconsciousness, the moon and womanhood are chained” (Moore 4.37). London becomes a ‘textbook’, a “literature of stone, of place-names and associations,” stretching back to the Romans and their pagan gods (Moore 4.9). Buck’s Row, the real location of the murder of Mary Ann Nichols, is pagan in origin; named for the deer that were sacrificed on the goddess Diana’s altars. However, Moore’s Whitechapel is also Hell itself, the result of Jack slipping further into insanity as the murders continue. From Hell is illustrated in black and white, which emphasises the shadows and darkness of Whitechapel. The buildings are indistinct scrawls of shadow, Jack often nothing more than a silhouette, forcing the reader to occupy the same “murky moral and spiritual darkness” that the Ripper does (Ferguson 58). Artist Eddie Campbell’s use of shade and shadow in his illustrations also contribute to the image of Whitechapel-as-Hell as a subterranean place. Therefore, in tracing the representations of Whitechapel in the London press and in Ripperature from 1888 onwards, the development of Whitechapel as a Gothic location becomes clear. From the geographical setting of the Ripper murders, Whitechapel has become a Gothic space, complicit in Jack’s work if not actively inspiring the murders. Whitechapel, although known to the public before the Ripper as a crime-ridden slum, developed into a Gothic space because of the murders, and continues to be associated with the Gothic in contemporary Ripperature as an uncanny and malevolent space “which seems to compel recognition as not of this earth" (Ackroyd 581). References Anonymous. “An Autumn Evening in Whitechapel.” Littell’s Living Age, 3 Nov. 1888. Anonymous. “The Nemesis of Neglect.” Punch, or the London Charivari, 29 Sep. 1888. Ackroyd, Peter. London: The Biography. Great Britain: Vintage, 2001. Brewer, John Francis. The Curse upon Mitre Square. London: Simpkin, Marshall and Co, 1888. De Quincey, Thomas. Confessions of an English Opium-Eater. Boston: Ticknor, Reed and Fields, 1850. Dimolianis, Spiro. Jack the Ripper and Black Magic: Victorian Conspiracy Theories, Secret Societies and the Supernatural Mystique of the Whitechapel Murders. North Carolina: McFarland and Co, 2011. Ferguson, Christine. “Victoria-Arcana and the Misogynistic Poetics of Resistance in Iain Sinclair’s White Chappell, Scarlet Tracings and Alan Moore’s From Hell.” Lit: Literature Interpretation Theory 20.1-2 (2009): 58. Harkness, Mary, In Darkest London. London: Hodder and Staughton, 1889. Hudson, Samuel E. Leather Apron; or, the Horrors of Whitechapel. London, Philadelphia, 1888. Johnstone, Lisa. “Rippercussions: Public Reactions to the Ripper Murders in the Victorian Press.” Casebook 15 July 2012. 18 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.casebook.org/dissertations/rippercussions.html›. London, Jack. The People of the Abyss. New York: Lawrence Hill, 1905. Mayhew, Henry. London Labour and the London Poor, Volume 1. London: Griffin, Bohn and Co, 1861. Moore, Alan, Campbell, Eddie. From Hell: Being a Melodrama in Sixteen Parts. London: Knockabout Limited, 1999. Morrison, Arthur G. “Whitechapel.” The Palace Journal. 24 Apr. 1889. Odell, Robin. Ripperology: A Study of the World’s First Serial Killer and a Literary Phenomenon. Michigan: Sheridan Books, 2006. Paulden, Arthur. “Sensationalism and the City: An Explanation of the Ways in Which Locality Is Defined and Represented through Sensationalist Techniques in the Gothic Novels The Beetle and Dracula.” Innervate: Leading Undergraduate Work in English Studies 1 (2008-2009): 245. Phillips, Lawrence, and Anne Witchard. London Gothic: Place, Space and the Gothic Imagination. London: Continuum International, 2010. Poe, Edgar Allen. “The Man of the Crowd.” The Works of Edgar Allen Poe. Vol. 5. Raven ed. 15 July 2012. 18 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.gutenberg.org/files/2151/2151-h/2151-h.htm›. Punter, David. A New Companion to the Gothic. Sussex: Blackwell Publishing, 2012. Stead, William Thomas. “The Maiden Tribute of Modern Babylon.” The Pall Mall Gazette, 6 July 1885. Sugden, Peter. The Complete History of Jack the Ripper. London: Robinson Publishing, 2002. Walkowitz, Judith R. City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late-Victorian London, London: Virago, 1998. Woodford, Elizabeth. “Gothic City.” 15 July 2012. 18 Aug. 2014 ‹http://courses.nus.edu.au/sg/ellgohbh/gothickeywords.html›.