Journal articles on the topic '1897-1935'

Indian taxa of the genus Cyana Walker, 1854 are reviewed. Five new species and three new subspecies are described: C. rudloffi Volynkin & N. Singh, sp. nov., C. atlanteia N. Singh et al., sp. nov., C. chrysopeleia N. Singh et al., sp. nov., C. dohertyi eirene Volynkin & N. Singh, ssp. nov., C. britomartis N. Singh & Volynkin, sp. nov., C. arama metis Volynkin & N. Singh, ssp. nov., C. dryope Volynkin & N. Singh, sp. nov. and C. conclusa nicobara N. Singh et al., ssp. nov. The replacement name for C. tripunctata Rothschild, 1936 nec. Reich, 1935 is introduced: C. arorai Volynkin et al., nom. nov. Cyana linatula (Swinhoe, 1891), stat. rev. and Cyana watsoni Hampson, 1897, stat. rev. are restored to species rank from the synonymy with Cyana subornata (Walker, 1854) and Cyana moelleri (Elwes, 1890), respectively. Cyana paeninsulana Černý, 2009 is downgraded to a subspecies of C. selangorica (Hampson, 1903): C. selangorica paeninsulana Černý, 2009, stat. nov. Cyana flavotincta (Draudt, 1914) is downgraded to a subspecies of C. coccinea (Moore, 1878): Cyana coccinea flavotincta (Draudt, 1914), stat. nov. Five new synonyms are established: C. detrita Walker, 1854 = Lyclene tripunctata Reich, 1935, syn. nov.; C. obliquilineata (Hampson, 1900) = Cyana baolini Fang, 1992, syn. nov.; C. gelida gelida (Walker, 1854) = Lithosia alborosea Walker, 1864, syn. nov.; C. khasiana Hampson, 1897 = Chionaema hampsoni Kaleka, 2003, syn. nov.; C. arama arama (Moore, 1859) = Bizone triguttata Walker, 1869, syn. nov. The lectotypes are designated for the following 30 taxa: Cyana detrita Walker, 1854, Barsine suffundens Walker, 1864 [1865], Bizone coccinea Moore, 1878, Chionaema coccinea form flavotincta Draudt, 1914, Bizone puer Elwes, 1890, Bizone linatula Swinhoe, 1891, Cyana dudgeoni Hampson, 1895, Bizone peregrina Walker, 1854, Cyana catorhoda Hampson, 1897, Bizone quadrinotata Walker, 1869, Bizone pallens Butler, 1877, Bizone amabilis Moore, 1877, Bizone harterti Elwes, 1890, Doliche gelida Walker, 1854, Lithosia alborosea Walker, 1864, Bizone mölleri Elwes, 1890, Cyana watsoni Hampson, 1897, Bizone gazella Moore, 1872, Bizone dohertyi Elwes, 1890, Bizone sikkimensis Elwes, 1890, Cyana khasiana Hampson, 1897, Bizone bellissima Moore, 1878, Bizone arama Moore, 1859, Bizone triguttata Walker, 1869, Bizone adita Moore, 1859, Bizone bifasciata Poujade, 1886, Bizone signa Walker, 1854, Bizone fasciculata Walker, 1856, Bizone perornata Walker, 1854 and Bizone conclusa Walker, 1862.

The revision of Agrilus cuprescens (Ménétriés, 1832) and its relatives A. salicis Frivaldszky, 1877; A. pecirkai Obenberger, 1916; A. paludicola Krogerus, 1922 and A. ribesi Schaefer, 1946 is given. All species are illustrated. The following taxonomic changes are proposed: A. paludicola (stat. nov.) is considered as a species; A. amethystopterus Semenov-Tian-Shanskij, 1890 is considered as a subspecies of A. cuprescens (stat. nov.); A. viridis (Linné, 1758) (= rudis Abeille de Perrin, 1897 syn. nov.; = caenus Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov.); A. cuprescens cuprescens (Ménétriés) (= lacrymans Abeille de Perrin, 1895 syn. nov.; = foveolatus Abeille de Perrin, 1897 syn. nov.; = calcicola Obenberger, 1916 syn. nov.; = altaicola Obenberger, 1935 syn. nov.; = kuznecovinus Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.). The names chalconatus Megerle and indigacellus Obenberger are unavailable. Lectotypes of 15 species are designated.

A revision of the Cenozoic Ampullinidae and Naticidae from a wide range of localities and stratigraphic units in Patagonia revealed the occurrence there of thirteen species referable to these families. Ampullinid species described are Tejonia? tapia (Feruglio, 1935); Tejonia arroyoensis n. sp. and Pseudamaura dubia (Petersen, 1946). Naticids are represented by the following valid species: “Natica”entreriana Borchert, 1901; Euspira patagonica (Philippi, 1845); Notocochlis borrelloi (Brunet, 1995); Bulbus subtenuis (Ihering, 1897); Polinices santacruzensis Ihering, 1907; Polinices puntarenasensis Ihering, 1907; “Polinices”ortmanni Ihering, 1907 (nomen dubium); Polinices mina n. sp.; Glossaulax secundum (Rochebrune and Mabille, 1885); and Darwinices claudiae n. gen. n. sp.

One hundred sixty eight taxa of the genus Agrilus (Coleoptera, Buprestidae) mostly from the Palearctic and Oriental regions are studied and their taxonomic, nomenclatural, distributional or biological data are updated. The following new taxonomic or nomenclatural acts are proposed. The status of four taxa is changed: Agrilus grandiceps hemiphanes Marseul, 1866 is changed from subspecies to species Agrilus hemiphanes stat. nov.; Agrilus lopatini Alexeev, 1964 is changed from species to subspecies Agrilus araxenus lopatini stat. nov.; the specific name hermineus Abeille de Perrin, 1907 is removed from the synonymy of A. lineola as a name of subspecies Agrilus lineola hermineus revalidated name, stat. nov.; Agrilus validiusculus Semenov, 1891 is changed from species to subspecies Agrilus transversesulcatus validiusculus stat. nov.. The following fifteen new synonyms are proposed: grusinus Obenberger, 1917 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus Reitter, 1890); hassani Théry, 1930 syn. nov. (synonym of A. proteus Abeille de Perrin, 1893); ieiunulus Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus validiusculus Semenov, 1891); italicus Obenberger, 1920 syn. nov. (synonym of A. cyanescens Ratzeburg, 1837); juxtasuturalis Abeille de Perrin, 1897 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus Reitter, 1890); niveosignatus Obenberger, 1914 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus validiusculus Semenov, 1891); panchlorus Abeille de Perrin, 1897 syn. nov. (synonym of A. curtulus Mulsant & Rey, 1863); perparvus Obenberger, 1918 syn. nov. (synonym of A. roscidus Kiesenwetter, 1857); philippovi Alexeev, 1965 syn. nov. (synonym of A. vaginalis Abeille de Perrin, 1897); populneus Schaefer, 1946 syn. nov. (synonym of A. suvorovi Obenberger, 1935); rosei Niehuis & Bernhard, 2005 syn. nov. (synonym of A. viridis Linné, 1758); shamyl Obenberger, 1922 syn. nov. (synonym of A. lineola hermineus Abeille de Perrin, 1907); suturisignatus Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus Reitter, 1890); tetrastichus Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov. (synonym of A. fissifrons Fairmaire, 1849) and tifliscus Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov. (synonym of A. transversesulcatus Reitter, 1890). Agrilus grandiceps Kiesenwetter, 1857 is a dubious name of unknown taxonomic concept due to lack of the primary type. The following twenty-seven lectotypes of nominal taxa are designated: A. affectans Obenberger, 1923; A. alacris Kerremans, 1896; A. fidjiensis Obenberger, 1924; A. grusinus Obenberger, 1917; A. hassani Théry, 1930; A. hermineus Abeille de Perrin, 1907; A. hypericicola Abeille de Perrin, 1893; A. ieiunulus Obenberger, 1936; A. limoniastri Bedel, 1886; A. mephistopheles Abeille de Perrin, 1897; A. morio Kerremans, 1895; A. beauprei mourguesi Schaefer, 1954; A. nigrivestis Abeille de Perrin, 1897; A. niveosignatus Obenberger, 1914; A. panchlorus Abeille de Perrin, 1897; A. perparvus Obenberger, 1918; A. proteus Abeille de Perrin, 1893; A. roscidus Kiesenwetter, 1857; A. rumanicus Obenberger, 1924; A. shamyl Obenberger, 1922; A. subroscidus Obenberger, 1924; A. suturisignatus Obenberger, 1924; A. suvorovi Obenberger, 1935; A. fidjiensis tetrastichus Obenberger, 1924; A. tifliscus Obenberger, 1936; A. transversesulcatus Reitter, 1890 and A. validiusculus Semenov, 1891. Additionally, the geographical range or host plant data are updated or revised for many taxa. The North American Agrilus bilineatus (Weber, 1801) is recorded from a single record from Turkey which is the first introduction of a Nearctic Agrilus to the Palearctic fauna.

Phylogenetic analyses of the Cambrian spiny oryctocephalids support the elevation to familiar rank of Oryctocephalidae Beecher, 1897 and indicate that the family can be divided into two clades, here designated as the subfamilies Oryctocephalinae Beecher, 1897 and Lancastriinae Kobayashi, 1935. Curvoryctocephaliinae Zhao and YuaninYuan et al., 2002 is considered here a junior synonym of Lancastriinae. Oryctocephalinae have tapered or parallel sided glabella and is composed of species ofOryctocephalusWalcott, 1886. The subgeneraOryctocephalus(Oryctocephalus) andO. (Eoryctocephalus) Zhao and YuaninYuan et al., 2002 do not form separate clades and are here rejected.The genera of the Lancastriinae have expanding glabellae. The subfamily is composed of a broad variety of genera that can be divided into three major subclades:Lancastria,Protoryctocephalus, andOryctocephalites. TheLancastriasubclade is composed ofLancastriaKobayashi, 1935,ChangaspisLeeinChien, 1961, andGoldfieldiaPalmer, 1964 occurring at the base of the Lancastriinae.GoldfieldiaandLancastriaform a sister group toChangaspis. The long branches in the phylograms indicated significant differences between these taxa; thus, the genusGoldfieldiais maintained. TheProtoryctocephalussubclade is monogeneric and forms a sister group to theOryctocephalitessubclade. TheOryctocephalitessubclade consists of several species of this genus and the more derived formsMetabalangiaQian and YuaninZhang et al., 1980 andTonkinellaMansuy, 1916.OryctocephaloidesYuaninZhang et al., 1980 is considered a junior synonym ofOryctocephalitesResser, 1939. The subgeneraOryctocephalites(Oryctocephalites) andO. (Parachangaspis) Zhao and YuaninYuan et al., 2002 do not form separate clades. The later subgenus occurs in the basal portion of theOryctocephalitessubclade indicating that it is a paraphyletic taxon.OpsiosoryctocephalusSundberg, 1994,OryctocephalopsLermontova, 1940, andCurvoryctocephalusZhao and YuaninYuan et al., 2002 are not consistent in their placement within the phylogenetic analyses, although they always occur in the Lancastriinae. As a result they are not placed within a subclade within Lancastriinae.The type speciesGoldfieldia pacificaPalmer, 1964 was based solely on cranidia. This species is redescribed using topotype material that includes cranidia, librigenae, hypostomes, thorax, and pygidia.

Abstract This article examines the monumental mosaics, large stained glass windows, and illustrated maps that the German painter Werner Peiner (1897–1984), now best known for his designs for the representative buildings of Hitler’s dictatorship, produced between 1931 and 1935 for Shell Oil and its German subsidiary. The discussion of these commissions, which emerged from Peiner’s social networks of the 1920s and contributed to his career as a state artist after 1933, explains their function as ideological images promoting the interests of a global corporation and affirming modern automotive technology using conservative, mythologizing tropes of paradisical nature, traditional cultural landscapes, and immutable national communities that the painter later employed in his work for Hitler’s state.

The following taxonomic or nomenclatural changes are proposed: Agrilus acastus Kerremans, 1913 (= ohbayashii Tôyama, 1987 syn. nov.); A. adonis Deyrolle, 1864 (= falsulus Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov.); A. albopunctatus Deyrolle, 1864 (= nepos Kerremans, 1900 syn. nov.); A. angustulus (Illiger, 1803) (= laeticeps Semenov, 1890 syn. nov.); A. basilewskyanus Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963 correct original spelling; A. birmanicus Kerremans, 1892 (= legitimus Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.); A. cairnensis Obenberger, 1959 correct original spelling (= cairnsensis Curletti, 2001 unjustified emendation syn. nov.); A. chekiangensis Gebhardt, 1929 (= semivittatus Tôyama, 1985 syn. nov.); A. confutus Obenberger, 1936 (= conjectus Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.); A. convergens Fisher, 1930 (= japanensis Obenberger, 1935 syn. nov.); A. croaticus Abeille de Perrin, 1897 (= serbicus Obenberger, 1927 syn. nov.); A. cyanipennis Gory & Laporte, 1837 (= ornativentris Saunders, 1866 syn. nov.; = agilis Kerremans, 1894 syn. nov.; = amabilicolor Obenberger, 1936b syn. nov.); A. decoloratus decoloratus Kerremans, 1892 (= afghanistanicus Alexeev in Alexeev, Volkovitsh & Kabakov, 1992 syn. nov.); A. dignus Kerremans, 1912 (= csikii Gebhardt, 1925 syn. nov.; = kayan Fisher, 1930 syn. nov.); A. discicollis Deyrolle, 1864 (= punctiventris Kerremans, 1900 syn. nov.); A. ecarinatus Marseul, 1866 (= gracilicornis Ganglbauer, 1890 syn. nov.); A. erythrostictus Bourgoin, 1922 (= barmensis Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.); A. fleischeri Obenberger, 1925 (= kurosawai Obenberger, 1940 syn. nov.; = tscherepanovi Stepanov, 1954 syn. nov.); A. lineariformis new replacement name (= lineatus Kerremans, 1899 syn. nov.); A. maculiventris Deyrolle, 1864 (= opulentus Kerremans, 1900b syn. nov., = woodlarkianus Kerremans, 1900c syn. nov., = viridissimus Cobos, 1964 syn. nov.); A. marginicollis Saunders, 1873 (= beppuensis Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.); A. moerens Saunders, 1873 (= araxicola Abeille de Perrin, 1897 syn. nov.); A. monogrammus Thomson, 1879 (= kabakovi Alexeev in Alexeev,Volkovitsh & Kabakov, 1992 syn. nov.); A. ocularis Deyrolle, 1864 (= bidentellus Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov.); A. paganettii Obenberger, 1913 (= pisanus Curletti, 1980 syn. nov.); A. perniciosus Deyrolle, 1864 (= perniciosus Obenberger unavailable name, = subperniciosus Obenberger, 1936 unavailable name); A. perviridis Kerremans, 1894 (= singaporensis Obenberger, 1924 syn. nov.); A. quadrisignatus Marseul, 1866 (= mongoliae Obenberger, 1922; = lama Obenberger, 1935 syn. nov.); A. sospes Lewis, 1893 (= kinoshitae Obenberger, 1936 syn. nov.; = quadristictulus Oben-

Розглянуто погляди відомих вчених у галузі палеонтології та їх порівняння з концепцією цього напряму науки О. О. Борисяка та його подвижницьку діяльність. Акцентовано вузлові дати його життя і діяльності. Обговорено нові аргументи щодо концепції палеозоології, яку розробляв О. О. Борисяк. Олексій Олексійович Борисяк (1872, Ромни, Полтавська губернія – 1944, Москва) – вчений-палеонтолог та геолог, академік АН СРСР (1929), лауреат Сталінської премії II ступеня (1943). Засновник та перший директор Палеозоологічного (з 1936 р. Палеонтологічного) інституту АН СРСР. Народився в родині межового інженера, який часто переїжджав у межах імперії. 1883 р. вступив у класичну прогімназію м. Брест-Литовська. 1892 р. закінчив самарську гімназію із золотою медаллю. 1896 р. закінчив Гірничий інститут у Санкт-Петербурзі. 1897–1898 рр. прослухав курс зоології у професора В. Т. Шевякова та пройшов великий біологічний практикум у М. М. Римського-Корсакова. Фактично це була друга вища освіта біологічного фаху. 1896–1932 рр. працював у Геологічному комітеті, де очолював палеонтологічний відділ. 1897–1899 рр. від Геологічного комітету здійснив геологічну зйомку північно-західної околиці Донецького кряжу. 1900 р. разом із К. К. Фохтом проводив дослідження Криму для укладання Кримського аркуша Міжнародної геологічної карти Європи. 1911– 1930 рр. професор та завідувач кафедри історичної геології Гірничого інституту, багато займався палеонтологічною колекцією у музеї інституту. 1930 р. з ініціативи О. О. Борисяка було створено Палеозоологічний інститут АН СРСР (з 1936 р. Палеонтологічний), директором якого вчений залишався до кінця життя. 1939 р. заснував кафедру палеонтології у Московському університеті. Керівник вітчизняної школи палеонтології хребетних. Основні праці присвячені вченню про фації, питанням загальної палеонтології, вивчення юрських молюсків, палеонтології хребетних. Розглядав історію Землі як єдиний закономірний процес розвитку фізико-географічних умов та органічного життя. Головний редактор журналів «Природа» (1931–1935) та «Доповіді Академії наук» (1933–1936).

O artigo relata as expedições e a trajetória do acervo de Emil-Heinrich Snethlage (1897-1939). O pesquisador alemão teve a vocação inspirada pela ornitóloga Emilie Snethlage, sua tia, que costumava enviar à família, na Alemanha, cartas nas quais contava suas experiências como pesquisadora do Museu Paraense Emílio Goeldi. Emil sentiu-se encorajado a viver aventuras como as de sua tia e escolheu a mesma carreira. Sua primeira expedição no Brasil foi realizada como ornitólogo, em estados do Nordeste, para o Museu Field de História Natural (Chicago, Estados Unidos) entre 1923 e 1926. Na segunda, entre 1933 e 1935, viajou como etnólogo para o Museu Etnográfico de Berlim, pelo rio Guaporé, em Rondônia. Apesar de seu acervo ser a fonte mais completa de informações sobre os povos indígenas dessa região no período, as pesquisas que realizou são pouco conhecidas, pois sua morte precoce impediu a publicação de seus estudos. Ele colecionou mais de 2.400 objetos etnográficos, fez escavações arqueológicas, documentou a vida dos povos indígenas em um filme mudo e em fotografias, gravou músicas e escreveu listas de palavras de diversas línguas. Ao final, são publicadas uma lista de palavras indígenas e três cartas inéditas de Curt Nimuendajú, uma para Emilie e as outras para Emil Snethlage.

In Britain, the cushion star Asterina gibbosa Pennant 1897 (Echinodermata, Asteroidea) is confined to the west coast, where it occurs on rocky shores, often sympatrically with the closely related Asterina phylactica Emson & Crump 1979 (Crump & Emson, 1983; Emson & Crump, 1984). The vertical distribution of A. gibbosa extends from about 100 m depth, into the intertidal; however, littoral cushion stars occupy rock pools and relatively damp habitats such as gulley walls, crevices, overhangs and the underside of boulders, generally on the lower shore (Emson, 1979). On shores with rock pools, cushion stars may extend their upper limits of vertical distribution but not beyond the mean high-water neap-tide level (Crump & Emson, 1978). Absence of A. gibbosa from higher shore levels has been related to intolerance to desiccation and high temperature, inadequate food supply, and complex behavioural responses to gravity and light (Crozier, 1935; Emson, 1979; Crump & Emson, 1983). Prior to the present study, it has not been possible to discuss the influence of respiratory requirements on the vertical distribution of this species.

A Balkan checklist of the millipede genus Megaphyllum Verhoeff, 1894 has been compiled on the basis of literature data, new collections, and reexamination of type and non-type material. Forty-seven species and subspecies are represented in the peninsula, including four species new to science: M. chiosense Lazanyi & Korsos sp. n. from Chios Island, M. cygniforme Lazanyi & Korsos sp. n. from East Macedonia, M. danyii Lazanyi & Korsos sp. n. and M. digitatum Lazanyi & Korsos sp. n. both from the Peloponnese, Greece. The following new synonymies are established: M. monticola (Verhoeff, 1898) syn. n. of M. carniolense (Verhoeff, 1897); M. latesquamosum (Attems, 1903) syn. n. and M. macedonicum (Strasser, 1976) syn. n. of M. montivagum (Verhoeff, 1901). M. species inquirenda is posed from Andros Island, Greece, on the basis of gonopod slide preparations, labeled by Strasser but never published. M. mueggenburgi (Verhoeff, 1901) comb. nov. is suggested, from the genus Cerabrachyiulus Verhoeff, 1901, previously Chromatoiulus Verhoeff, 1894. Species new to the fauna are: M. bosniense (Verhoeff, 1897) new to the fauna of Greece; M. imbecillum (Attems, 1935) and M. montivagum new to the Republic of Macedonia; and M. lictor (Attems, 1904) new to the fauna of Turkey (European part). The following species have been found and localities are published for the first or second time since their original description: M. euphorbiarum (Verhoeff, 1900), M. lamellifer (Strasser, 1974), M. loebli (Strasser, 1974), M. metsovoni (Strasser, 1976), M. recticauda recticauda (Attems, 1903), and M. taygeti (Strasser, 1976). Thirty-nine species and subspecies are endemic to the Balkan Peninsula, they can be grouped as: (1) species having a wide distribution range; (2) strict endemics of smaller regions; (3) species inhabiting the Peloponnese; and (4) species inhabiting the Greek islands. The Peloponnese and the Rhodopes seem to be remarkably important regions for speciation.

Case-building is energetically expensive and case-repair may be a viable alternative to rebuilding for caddisflies when the case is damaged. In this study, we damaged the larval cases of 3 Trichoptera genera: Lepidostoma spp.; Neophylax rickeri Milne, 1935; and Onocosmoecus unicolor (Banks, 1897). We manually damaged the anterior, middle, or posterior portions of the larval case. We measured case lengths before damage, immediately after damage, and after allowing 2 days for repair. Overall, 74.2% of Lepidostoma spp. (n=31), 23.5% of N. rickeri (n=34), and 50.0% of O. unicolor (n=44) repaired their cases. Lepidostoma spp. had the highest odds of repair (2.88:1), followed by O. unicolor (1:1). Neophylax rickeri (0.308:1) was unlikely to repair its case after damage. For all genera, the percentage of the damaged portion repaired by location was not statistically significant. In Lepidostoma spp., at all locations, the average percentage of the damaged portion repaired was greater than 100% (larvae repaired the damage fully and continued to add material to the anterior end of the case). The occurrence of repair across the 3 genera at all damage locations suggests that the behavior may be beneficial for protection and more energetically favorable than entirely rebuilding the case, however life history may influence the likelihood of repair.

Within Trichotichnus Morawitz, 1863, the new subgenus Parairidessus subgen. nov. is described, which includes two new species from the Western Ghats in India: T. saluki sp. nov. (type species) from Western Karnataka and T. perforatus sp. nov. from Maharashtra. Each of the species has distinctive features unusual for Trichotichnus: several setae in pronotal apical angles and tarsi densely setose dorsally in T. saluki sp. nov., and median lobe with membranous ventral side in T. perforatus sp. nov. The other subgenera of Trichotichnus (Iridessus Bates, 1883, Trichotichnus s. str., Amaroschesis Tschitschérine, 1897, and Bottchrus Jedlička, 1935) are briefly reviewed and their distinctive features are clarified. Harpalus relucens Bates, 1973 [= T. orientalis (Hope, 1845)] is considered as a type species of Iridessus Bates, 1883, which was originally designated by Tschitschérine in 1906; the more recent designation of Harpalus lucidus Morawitz, 1863 as the type species of this subgenus by Habu in 1954 is invalid. The systematic position of the Himalayan species T. tonklii Kirschenhofer, 1992 and the two North American species, T. autumnalis (Say, 1823) and T. nitidulus (Chaudoir, 1843) nom. resurr., is discussed. Harpalus fulgens Csiki, 1932 (non Dejean, 1829) is considered as an unnecessary substitute name for Harpalus nitidulus Chaudoir, 1843. A key to subgenera of Trichotichnus is provided.

The following new taxonomic and nomenclatural acts are provided: New revalidated name: the name nagaoiNakane 1983 is resurrected from the synonymy of A. maculifer Saunders 1873 as a valid specific name of Agrilusnagaoi. New synonyms: 47 new synonyms are proposed in the genus Agrilus: annoi Baudon, 1968 (synonym ofnavarrei Baudon, 1965); biasoni Baudon, 1968 (synonym of shaumaae Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963);brigitteae Baudon, 1968 (synonym of cochinchinae Obenberger, 1924); canidius Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963(synonym of coloratus Kerremans, 1894); champasak Jendek, 2000 (synonym of ardoini Descarpentries &Villiers, 1963); chounramanyi Baudon, 1965 (synonym of auripilis Deyrolle, 1864); cuneatus Jendek, 2009(synonym of palii Baudon, 1968); damoiselli Baudon, 1968 (synonym of sikkimensis Obenberger, 1928); deuveiBaudon, 1965 (synonym of perlisensis Fisher, 1936); emeritus Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963 (synonym ofperlisensis Fisher, 1936); favieri Baudon, 1961 (synonym of cochinchinae Obenberger, 1924); forquerayi Baudon,1968 (synonym of inops Kerremans, 1892); gagneuxi Baudon, 1968 (synonym of beatissimus Descarpentries &Villiers, 1963); gardneri Théry, 1928 (synonym of mixtus Kerremans, 1892); giraudi Baudon, 1965 (synonym ofbirmanicus Kerremans, 1892); goichetae Baudon, 1965 (synonym of rivalieri Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963);gouyei Baudon, 1965 (synonym of inops Kerremans, 1892); haniquei Baudon, 1965 (synonym of weyersiKerremans, 1900); jarrensis Baudon, 1968 (synonym of coloratus Kerremans, 1894); kandyanus Théry, 1904(synonym of repercussus Kerremans, 1893); korbi Abeille de Perrin, 1897 (synonym of auricollis Kiesenwetter,1857); laurenconi Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963 (synonym of auroapicalis Kurosawa, 1957); lebisiDescarpentries & Villiers, 1963 (synonym of ardoini Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963); legrosi Descarpentries &Villiers, 1963 (synonym of tsacasi Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963); leguayi Baudon, 1965 (synonym of simplexKerremans, 1894); lessei Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963 (synonym of colasi Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963);lindryi Baudon, 1968 (synonym of loupyi Baudon, 1968); lloydae Baudon, 1968 (synonym of miwai Obenberger,1936); lukesi Obenberger, 1936 (synonym of modicus Kerremans, 1892); minusculus Marseul, 1866 (synonym ofotiosus Say, 1833); morelae Baudon, 1968 (synonym of milo Obenberger, 1936); moreli Baudon, 1968 (synonymof coomani Bourgoin, 1925); mouricouae Baudon, 1965 (synonym of inops Kerremans, 1892); nginni Baudon,1968 (synonym of cochinchinae Obenberger, 1924); parizotae Baudon, 1968 (synonym of syrphus Descarpentries& Villiers, 1963); roscidulus Abeille de Perrin, 1897 (synonym of elegans Mulsant & Rey, 1863); rousselataeBaudon, 1968 (synonym of lacroixi Obenberger, 1936); ruteri Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963 (synonym ofjarrigei Descarpentries & Villiers, 1963); samyi Baudon, 1968 (synonym of suturaalba Deyrolle, 1864);sedonensis Baudon, 1968 (synonym of sommailae Baudon, 1965); siva Obenberger, 1916 (synonym of repercussusKerremans, 1893); souvannavongsi Baudon, 1968 (synonym of perlisensis Fisher, 1936); syrdarjensis Obenberger,1928 (synonym of vaginalis Abeille de Perrin, 1897); theodasi Baudon, 1968 (synonym of simoninaeDescarpentries & Villiers, 1963); thevadensis Baudon, 1968 (synonym of truncatipennis Descarpentries & Villiers,1967); tokatensis Obenberger, 1924 (synonym of auricollis Kiesenwetter, 1857); ukrainensis Obenberger, 1936(synonym of croaticus Abeille de Perrin, 1897).Lectotype designations: 43 lectotype designations are proposed (types are cited in the original combination and rank):Agrilus ambiguus Kerremans, 1895; A. amphion Obenberger, 1935; A. ampliatus Kerremans, 1900; A. anachlorusObenberger, 1924; A. angustulus variety bicoloratus Abeille de Perrin, 1893; A. atomus Kerremans, 1914; A. atratulus Obenberger, 1924; A. balnearis Kerremans, 1914; A. belides Obenberger, 1936; A. brahma Obenberger, 1916; A.

A brief friendship kindled in 1930s New York between the Trinidadian novelist and short-story writer of Portuguese Creole ancestry, Alfred Hubert Mendes (1897–1991) and the late modernist English author, Malcolm Lowry (1909–57), which forged a personal and literary camaraderie, revealing significant rapport reflected in the intersection of their lives. Certain important, mutually enabling parallels between their experiences, political affinities, and literary influences can assist us in making better sense of their relationship. Though Mendes was shaped by adventures in Britain and the United States, his writings were rooted in the concerns of everyday existence and in the cultural traditions of his native island of Trinidad. His realist short stories – and novels like Pitch Lake (1934) and Black Fauns (1935) – helped pioneer West Indian literature and attracted praise from Aldous Huxley. Lowry was inspired by visits to the Far East (1927), Germany (1928), Norway (1931), France (1932), Spain (1933–34), the United States (1934–36), and Mexico (1936–38 and 1945–47), where his masterpiece, Under the Volcano (1947), was set. These countries exerted a long-lasting impression on his literary imagination, which encompassed a kaleidoscopic range of influences from East and West, including esotericism. It was his trajectory toward the New World that was conducive to his acquaintance with Mendes in New York in 1936.

The article focuses on the only novels by Alvils Ceplis (1897–1938): “Kalpi” (1933) and the dilogy “Zeme” (1935–1936). Ceplis is a Soviet Latvian poet and prose writer who made his literary debut during the First World War. In the 1920s, Ceplis’ work was strongly influenced by the dominant tendencies in literature in the USSR. In poetry, he experiments with form, fascinated by the ideas of the Proletkult and the Left Front of the Arts, also features of futurism and expressionism can be seen in his poems. In turn, the prose is dominated by an exaggerated positive attitude towards the revolution and glorification of the realities of the USSR. A certain breakthrough occurs in the 1930s. Even though the totalitarian regime is intensifying its influence on art processes and socialist realism is becoming the only legitimate direction of art creation in the USSR, Ceplis’ work is moving away from glorifying Soviet realities. Both novels of Ceplis are unfinished; they are interrupted when the events of the 1917 revolution should be depicted according to the chronology of the plot. Analyzing the content, form, correspondence of socialist realism, as well as the feedback of contemporaries, the article attempts to understand whether the avoidance of depicting the events of the 1917 revolution is a coincidence, an ideological impasse, or a deliberate artistic technique.

This paper reappraises the work of the German sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld, MD (1868– 1935), an early campaigner for “gay rights”avant la lettre. In 1897 he founded the Scientific Humanitarian Committee, with the motto “justice through science”, which sought scientific evidence for the emancipation of sexual minorities, and he petitioned to repeal “Paragraph 175” – the law that criminalised homosexuality in Germany. In spite of increasing consensus for this campaign, Hirschfeld and his group were targeted by the National Socialist movement. Their Institute of Sex Research, established in 1919, was destroyed by the Nazi police in 1933 while Hirschfeld was abroad on a lecture-tour. He never returned to Germany and died two years later in France.Hirschfeld challenged the dichotomous conceptualisation of both sex and sexuality: he proposed that all individuals had different proportions of “masculinity” and “femininity” – sexual minorities would not be so much the “third sex” that Hirschfeld became associated with in popularisations of his work – butZwischenstufen(intermediate stages). While this conceptualisation arguably predates social constructionism by decades, the biological evidence sought for these stages has resonance in contemporary positivist research on the psychobiology of sexual orientation. In conclusion, Hirschfeld’s work, in line with a Nietzschean view of history as serving present action – is “interpellated” in contemporary research on sex(uality) stemming from different epistemologies, as well as inviting present-day social scientists to interrogate ways of doing science, doing history and activism.

El presente artículo tiene como objetivo dar a conocer la producción de algunos libelos que adquieren formas literarias en el periodo del Porfiriato, así como autores de los mismos que han sido poco valorados desde la literatura. Principalmente se rescata la figura y la obra de Adolfo Carrillo (1855-1926) y sus falsas memorias, o memorias-libelo, que puso a circular para atacar a actores políticos del periodo e, indirectamente, al régimen de Díaz: Memorias del Marqués de San Basilisco (1897) y especialmente las entonces populares Memorias de Sebastián Lerdo de Tejada (1890). Se presenta, además, una red de complicidad y alianzas entre este y otros periodistas mercenarios del periodo, contemporáneos y cómplices periodistas, como José Negrete (1855-1883) y Salvador Quevedo y Zubieta (1859-1935). Siguiendo de cerca las teorizaciones que sobre el libelo ha hecho el historiador Robert Darnton, se contextualiza su impacto y circulación en la coyuntura política del fin de siglo xix en México. Se observa el libelo como un modelo textual flexible que sigue el ritmo y el tiempo inmediatista de la prensa y se vale de ésta y de sus estrategias para circular y construir un público ávido de morbo y escándalo en el terreno de la esfera pública y que toma muchas veces la forma de géneros literarios prestigiosos y con audiencia. Se desmonta y cuestiona la idea de la prensa de oposición del periodo estudiado gracias a obras literarias cuya intención diluye los pactos de veracidad y rechazo al régimen.

O objetivo deste trabalho é verificar a variação diária da zonação da macrofauna bentônica nas praias de Tramandaí, Harmonia e Jardim do Éden, Rio Grande do Sul. As coletas foram feitas ao longo de cinco dias consecutivos, utilizando-se um tubo de PVC de 20 cm de diâmetro. Foram demarcadas três transversais distantes 50 m uma da outra, com 4 estações de coleta e três amostras cada. As estações se estenderam desde 8 m acima do limite superior da zona de varrido (definida a cada dia) até 1 m de profundidade. Também foram coletados diariamente dados dos perfis topográficos de cada praia. Os resultados mostraram que a macrofauna bentônica apresenta um padrão de zonação regular ao longo dos dias. O intermareal foi marcado pela presença do isópode Excirolana armata (Dana, 1853) e do poliqueta Euzonus furciferus (Ehlers, 1897). A zona de varrido apresentou grande abundância do caranguejo hipídeo Emerita brasiliensis (Schmitt, 1935), do bivalvo Donax hanleyanus (Philippi, 1842) e do poliqueto Scolelepis gaucha (Orensanz & Gianuca, 1974). As zonas de "surf" e arrebentação interna não apresentaram diferenças na composição de espécies, sendo dominantes os juvenis de D. hanleyanus, Mesodesma mactroides (Deshayes, 1854), o anfípode Phoxocephalopsis zimmeri (Schellenberg, 1931), o poliqueto Hemipodus olivieri (Orensanz & Gianuca, 1974), além do bivalve Donax gemmula (Morrison, 1971). Os resultados indicaram que, apesar do padrão de zonação da macrofauna ter sido regular ao longo do estudo, algumas mudanças na posição vertical das espécies foram observadas, principalmente em função da variação da zona de varrido.

This year we celebrate the 110th anniversary of Bronius Sidaravičius’s (1897–1969) birth. He was a renowned Lithuanian dermato-venereologist, professor, head of the Department of Skin and Venereal Diseases at Vytautas Magnus University (1935–1946, 1956–1969), the founder and the chair of the Lithuanian Society of Dermato-venereologists, coeditor of the prewar journal “Medicina.” He is an author of more than 100 articles and the very first course book on dermato-venereology in Lithuanian. He completed a part of his medical studies at universities in Germany. In Vienna University (1930), B. Sidaravičius performed clinical and experimental studies on the passive transmission of skin allergy, which had a major impact on the diagnostics of allergic skin diseases and specific desensibilization. He published the results of his study in the foreign literature and in the doctoral dissertation “Skin allergy and its treatment” in 1931. Thanks to the efforts of B. Sidaravičius and his colleagues, a progressive Law on Control and Prevention of Venereal Diseases was enacted in Lithuania. According to this Law, examinations and treatment of venereal diseases became compulsory and free of charge at state- or municipality-financed venereal outpatient units. This article was prepared on the basis of primary sources: protocols of the Council (the Faculty of Medicine, the University of Lithuania; since 1930 – Vytautas Magnus University) kept at the Museum of the History of Lithuania Medicine and Pharmacy as well as documents preserved at the Lithuanian State Archives and also scientific journals and periodicals both in Lithuanian and foreign languages.

Abstract The well-known Russian ornithologist Prof. Peter Sushkin described it as a distinct species from Bashkortostan (Bashkiria) in 1897, a highly acclaimed discovery. However, its breeding grounds never been discovered. Since then, there has been a long-standing debate over the taxonomic position of Anser neglectus. Taxonomists have argued that Anser neglectus belongs to the group of A. fabalis Lath. because of its close resemblance with A. f. fabalis. At the beginning of the 20th century, large numbers of the Sushkin’s goose were observed in three winter quarters: on two lakes in the Republic of Bachkortostan, in the surroundings of the town of Tashkent in the Republic Uzbekistan, and in the puszta Hortobágy in eastern Hungary. It is a pity that taxonomists did not thoroughly compare the Russian and Hungarian ornithological papers concerning the former presence of Anser neglectus in these areas, because these rich sources refer to characteristics that would cast serious doubt on the classification of Anser neglectus as a subspecies, an individual variation or mutation of A. f. fabalis. Sushkin’s goose, though a typical Taiga Bean Goose, distinguished itself from other taxa of the Bean Goose by its plumage, its field identification, by its specific “Gé-gé” call, the size of its bill, and by its preference for warm and dry winter haunts. A. neglectus should therefore be considered a separate, fully distinct species, sensu Stegmann (1935) and Stegmann in Schenk (1931/34), if we follow the established criteria in bird systematics of Tobias et al. (2010). Between 1908 and 1911, an estimation of up to 150.000 individuals of A. neglectus wintered in the Hortobágy puszta. Approximate counts for both other winter quarters are not available. The last living birds were seen in the zoological garden of Budapest in 1934. Since then, A. f. fabalis and A. s. rossicus “Type neglectus” (i.e. A. f. fabalis and A. s. rossicus with a color of the bill and the legs, similar to the former A. neglectus) have been observed sporadically on the breeding grounds and in the winter quarters of both taxa. However, the true A. neglectus seems to be extinct. Its sudden disappearance may be related to the Tunguska event, the catastrophe in 1908 that may have caused genetic mutations. This hypothesis is considered to be the most likely, among other available hypotheses about its extinction.

A new genus in the spider family Ctenidae Keyserling, 1877 is described from Asia: Bowie gen. nov. belongs to the subfamily Cteninae and all members formerly described were placed so far in the genus Ctenus Walckenaer, 1805. After morphological as well as preliminary molecular characters were checked, it was clear that a new genus had to be erected to accommodate this predominantly Asian lineage of ground-dwelling spiders. As is the case in most Ctenidae generally, it was not easy to find apomorphic characters diagnosing this new taxon. Therefore, a combination of morphological characters is used to define all congeners. An important and newly introduced character in this respect is –among others– the fused patellar crack of the male palp. Forty-nine valid species are transferred to the new genus (first country/province records of particular species underlined): Bowie martensi (Jäger, 2012) comb. nov. (Nepal), B. bomdilaensis (Tikader & Malhotra, 1981) comb. nov. (India), B. indicus (Gravely, 1931) comb. nov. (India), B. cladarus (Jäger, 2012) comb. nov. (Myanmar), B. pingu (Jäger & Minn, 2015) comb. nov. (Myanmar), B. natmataung (Jäger & Minn, 2015) comb. nov. (Myanmar), B. sikkimensis (Gravely, 1931) comb. nov. (India), B. ramosus (Thorell, 1887) comb. nov. (Myanmar), B. goaensis (Bastawade & Borkar, 2008) comb. nov. (India), B. himalayensis (Gravely, 1931) comb. nov. (India), B. meghalayaensis (Tikader, 1976) comb. nov. (India), B. narashinhai (Patel & Reddy, 1988) comb. nov. (India), B. ceylonensis (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Sri Lanka), B. andamanensis (Gravely, 1931) comb. nov. (Andaman Islands), B. kapuri (Tikader, 1973) comb. nov. (Andaman Islands), B. cochinensis (Gravely, 1931) comb. nov. (India), B. thorelli (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Sri Lanka), B. lishuqiang (Jäger, 2012) comb. nov. (China: Sichuan), B. banna (Yao & Li in Chu et al. 2022) comb. nov. (China: Yunnan), B. theodorianum (Jäger, 2012) comb. nov. (Thailand, Laos, Vietnam), B. robustus (Thorell, 1897) comb. nov. (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos), B. yaeyamensis (Yoshida, 1998) comb. nov. (Taiwan), B. yulin (Yao & Li in Chu et al. 2022) comb. nov. (China: Yunnan), B. simplex (Thorell, 1897) comb. nov. (Myanmar, Thailand, Laos), B. bayeri (Jäger 2012) comb. nov. (Laos), B. holthoffi (Jäger, 2012) comb. nov. (Laos), B. saci (Ono, 2010) comb. nov. (Vietnam), B. floweri (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. argentipes (Hasselt, 1893) comb. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula, Singapore, Indonesia: Sumatra), B. palembangensis (Strand, 1906) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra), B. angigitanus (Roewer, 1938) comb. nov. (Papua New Guinea), B. pulvinatus (Thorell, 1890) comb. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak), B. hosei (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak, Brunei), B. monaghani (Jäger, 2013) comb. nov. (Laos), B. javanus (Pocock, 1897) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra, Java, Bali), B. fungifer (Thorell, 1890) comb. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. valvularis (Hasselt, 1882) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra), B. bicostatus (Thorell, 1890) comb. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak), B. bantaengi (Merian, 1911) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sulawesi), B. bowonglangi (Merian, 1911) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sulawesi), B. celebensis (Pocock, 1897) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sulawesi), B. sagittatus (Giltay, 1935) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Sulawesi), B. kochi (Simon, 1897b) comb. nov. (Indonesia: West Papua), B. sarawakensis (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak), B. philippinensis (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1897) comb. nov. (Philippines), B. aruanus (Strand, 1911) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Maluku), B. angularis (Roewer, 1938) comb. nov. (Indonesia: Maluku), B. rufisternis (Pocock, 1898) comb. nov. (Papua New Guinea: New Britain), and B. corniger (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1898) comb. nov. (South Africa). For thirty-two species, illustrations of their respective copulatory organs, as well as habitus photos, are provided. Fifty-five new species are described, these are listed, together with the already described species, according to their geographic occurrence and to their affiliation to species groups as far as the latter could be recognised (type species indicated by an asterisk): Bowie hunkydory spec. nov. (Nepal), B. ziggystardust spec. nov. (Nepal), B. ladystardust spec. nov. (Nepal), B. aladdinsane spec. nov. (India), B. majortom spec. nov. (Nepal), B. jeangenie spec. nov. (India), B. heroes spec. nov. (India), B. fascination spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. low spec. nov. (Thailand), B. dodo spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. stationtostation spec. nov. (Myanmar), B. candidate spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. diamonddogs spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. yassassin spec. nov. (Taiwan), B. bemywife spec. nov. (Thailand), B. subterraneans spec. nov. (Thailand), B. afterall spec. nov. (Thailand), B. warszawa spec. nov. (Thailand), B. artdecade spec. nov. (Cambodia), B. bigbrother spec. nov. (Vietnam), *B. rebelrebel spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. youngamericans spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. right spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. stay spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. fame spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. win spec. nov. (Vietnam), B. joethelion spec. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. mossgarden spec. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. neukoeln spec. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. scarymonsters spec. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra), B. teenagewildlife spec. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra), B. letsdance spec. nov. (Indonesia: Java), B. crystaljapan spec. nov. (Indonesia: Sumatra), B. tonight spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak), B. catpeople spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. ricochet spec. nov. (Indonesia: Kalimantan), B. fashion spec. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. withinyou spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sarawak), B. abdulmajid spec. nov. (Singapore), B. blackout spec. nov. (Malaysia Peninsula), B. modernlove spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. chinagirl spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. withoutyou spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. magicdance spec. nov. (Indonesia: Sulawesi), B. bluejean spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. criminalworld spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. shakeit spec. nov. (Malaysia: Sabah), B. ashestoashes spec. nov. (Indonesia: Kalimantan), B. underground spec. nov. (Indonesia: Kalimantan), B. lodger spec. nov. (Philippines), B. redsails spec. nov. (Philippines), B. thenextday spec. nov. (Indonesia: Papua), B. lazarus spec. nov. (Papua New Guinea), B. thiesi spec. nov. (Papua New Guinea) and B. blackstar spec. nov. (Papua New Guinea). Formerly unknown sexes are described for the first time for the following species: Bowie martensi comb. nov. (female), B. indicus comb. nov. (only male RTA tip), B. narashinhai comb. nov. (male), B. argentipes comb. nov. (female) and B. celebensis comb. nov. (male). Fourteen species groups are proposed on the basis of morphological characters: cladarus-species group (17 species), robustus-species group (14 species), bemywife-species group (2 species), rebelrebel-species group (10 species), youngamericans-species group (3 species), floweri-species group (3 species), scarymonsters-species group (2 species), teenagewildlife-species group (2 species), argentipes-species group (10 species), javanus-species group (5 species), chinagirl-species group (11 species), shakeit-species group (5 species), lodger-species group (3 species) and blackstar-species group (7 species). Thus, 93 species are grouped, leaving 11 species without a current assignment to any of these groups. Ctenus kandyensis Kim & Ye, 2014 syn. nov. is recognised as a junior synonym of Bowie thorelli comb. nov., and C. calcarifer F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1902 syn. nov. as junior synonym of B. sarawakensis comb. nov. Five species previously placed in Ctenus are considered nomina dubia, four of them are transferred to Bowie gen. nov., one to Nilus: Bowie barbatus (Thorell, 1895) comb. nov., B. tumidulus (Simon, 1887b) comb. nov., B. flavidus (Hogg, 1922) comb. nov., B. pollii (Hasselt, 1893) comb. nov. and Nilus marginatus (Walckenaer, 1847) comb. nov. Beside the latter species, three species are transferred from Ctenus, all of them to Anahita: A. periculosa (Bristowe, 1931) comb. nov., A. dangsa (Reddy & Patel, 1994) comb. nov. and A. tuniensis (Patel & Reddy, 1988) comb. nov. All in all, Bowie gen. nov. is the second largest genus within the family Ctenidae, with 108 species in total including nomina dubia. It occurs from Nepal in the Himalayas and South India across large parts of South and South East Asia to Papua New Guinea. One undescribed species is known from northern Australia (Queensland). Representatives are known to live in the leaf litter of forests, with most species having small distribution ranges, usually occurring within a 100 km radius. With this revision, the family Ctenidae contains now 586 species and 48 genera, and the number of species assigned to the genus Ctenus, so far used as nomenclatural “waste bin”, is reduced to 164.

Twenty-one new species of Scolytodes Ferrari are described from Central and South America: Scolytodes cavus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes excavatus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes speculofrons Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes potens Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes minimus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes setosicauda Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes monticola Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes aureifrons Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes piliscapus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes curvicostatus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes vellus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes granulatus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes bipilosus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes asperatus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes flavifrons Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes capillus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes rufus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes johnsoni Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes longipilus Jordal, sp. nov., Scolytodes prolatus Jordal, sp. nov., and Scolytodes bicarinatus Jordal, sp. nov. Females of two species were associated with males and described for the first time: Scolytodes pelicipennis (Schedl, 1952) from Mexico, and Scolytodes venustulus Wood, 1967 from Costa Rica. New synonymies were inferred in four species: Scolytodes bolivianus Eggers, 1928 (=Scolytodes aequipunctatus Eggers, 1943 syn. nov.); Scolytodes major Eggers, 1928 (=Scolytodes argentinensis Eggers, 1943 syn. nov.; =Scolytodes boliviensis Eggers, 1928; =Scolytodes similis Eggers, 1928 syn. nov.); Scolytodes ingae (Blackman, 1943), stat. nov. (=Scolytodes trigonus Jordal, 2013 syn. nov.); Scolytodes canalis Wood, 1974 (=Scolytodes amabilis Wood, 1975 syn. nov.). New country records are reported for 13 species: S. alni Wood, 1969 (Panama), S. bolivianus (Brazil), S. canalis Wood, 1974 (Guatemala), S. chapuisi Wood, 1977 (Peru, Brazil), S. costabilis Wood (Costa Rica), S. elongatus Schedl, 1935 (Panama), S. immanis Wood, 1969 (Panama), S. ingae (Blackman, 1943) (Panama), S. irazuensis Wood, 1969 (Panama), S. major (Honduras, Brazil), S. pelicipennis (Schedl, 1952) (Mexico), S. triangulus Jordal, 1998 (Panama), S. unipunctatus (Blandford, 1897) (Panama, Venezuela), S. venustulus Wood, 1967 (Costa Rica).

The world-wide fauna of the genus Cardiocondyla is assessed to have 79 currently recognized species and is subdivided into 14 informal species groups plus three monotypical clades. It is argued that the phylogenetic placement of Cardiocondyla next to the genus Ocymyrmex Emery, 1886 as proposed by Blaimer et al. (2018) is doubtful. The main body of the paper is a species-level taxonomic revision of those six species groups and the one monotypical clade which have their centers of origin in the Oriental and Australasian regions. The fauna of this area comprises 26 species eleven of which are described as new: Cardiocondyla schulzi n.sp., C. argentea n.sp., C. semiargentea n.sp., C. argyrotricha n.sp., C. latifrons n.sp., C. micropila n.sp., C. allonivalis n.sp., C. excavata n.sp., C. goroka n.sp., C. subspina n.sp. and C. sulcata n.sp. Recognized as junior synonyms were: Cardiocondyla tsukuyomi Terayama, 1999 and C. breviscapus Seifert, 2003 of C. minutior Forel, 1899 and C. brevispinosa (Donisthorpe, 1948) of C. paradoxa Emery, 1897. Each confirmed species is characterized by verbal descriptions, 18 numerically recorded phenotypic characters, z-stack images in three viewing positions, the key, a differential diagnosis and, if available, a brief life history. Exploratory and hypothesis-driven data analyses of phenotypic characters support the separation of the cryptic species Cardiocondyla minutior Forel, 1899, C. goa Seifert, 2003 and C. tjibodana Karavajev, 1935, two of which have dispersed as tramp species to the New World. Missing development of postzygotic isolation due to very strong prezygotic barriers is indicated in the closely related species Cardiocondyla latifrons n.sp. and C. micropila n.sp. which produce fertile hybrids in laboratory rearings but apparently do not hybridize in a natural context even if nesting in close neighborhood. The strong prezygotic isolation is supposed to be generated by the prevalence of intranidal mating and the difficulty for a mated heterospecific gyne to become accepted in a foreign colony.

Abstract After the First World War, Serbia was facing the lack of hospitals and physicians, and organization of the health care system was a real challenge. Both problems were closely associated with dermatovenereology. Between the two world wars, a great contribution to the development of Serbian dermatovenereology as a current discipline was given by Prof. Dr. Đorđe Đorđević, who was the first director of the Clinic for Skin and Venereal Diseases in Belgrade (1922 - 1935), and by his closest associate Prof. Dr. Milan Kićevac (1892 - 1940) who was his successor at the position of the director of the Clinic (1935 - 1940). In 1922, Prof. Dr. Đorđe Đorđević was the founder of two institutions significant for Serbian dermatovenereology: Clinic for Skin and Venereal Diseases, where he also acted as a director, and the Department of Dermatovenereology at the School of Medicine in Belgrade, where he was the first teacher of dermatovenereology. In 1927, Prof. Dr. Đorđe Đorđević initiated the foundation of the Dermatovenereology Section of the Serbian Medical Society, and he and his associate and successor, Prof. Dr. Milan Kićevac were the main organizers of the Association of Dermatovenereologists of Yugoslavia. With this Association, all other regional dermatovenereology sections in the County became parts of the Pan-Slavic Dermatovenereology Association. Prof. Dr. Đorđe Đorđević and Prof. Dr. Milan Kićevac also organized the First, Second and the Third Yugoslav Dermatovenereology Congresses (1927, 1928, and 1929), and in 1931, the Second Congress of Pan-Slavic Dermatovenereology Association. Their teamwork resulted in legislation concerned with health care, eradication of venereal diseases and prostitution, and finally with setting the foundation for professional and scientific dermatovenereology in Serbia. Prof. Đ. Đorđević investigated current problems of venereal diseases and organized professional expeditions in Serbia and Montenegro studying the expansion of syphilis. However, in his experimental work, Prof. M. Kićevac investigated photo-dermatoses and the IV venereal disease, at the same time pointing to immunological phenomena in streptococcal and staphylococcal infections. Dr. Vojislav Mihailović (1879 - 1949) was a significant figure in Serbian dermatovenereology and acted as the Chief of the Department of Skin and Venereal Diseases within the General Public Hospital in Belgrade. His scientific papers and books on the history of dermatovenereology and general medicine had a great impact on the Serbian dermatovenereology. His books dealing with the history of dermatovenereology: “The History of Venereal Diseases till 1912” and “Out of the History of Sanitary Health Care in the Rebuilt Serbia from 1804 - 1860”. Associate Professor Dr. Sava Bugarski (1897 - 1945), a student of Prof. Dr. Kićevac and later the director of Clinic for Skin and Venereal Diseases in Belgrade (1940 - 1945), was engaged in the field of experimental dermatovenereology. Dr. Jovan Nenadović (1875 - 1952), one of the most eminent physicians in Novi Sad, took part in the foundation and work of the Dermatovenereology Section of the Serbian Medical Society as well as its honorary life president. In 1919, he founded the Dermatovenereology Department within the Novi Sad Hospital, as well as an Outpatient Dermatovenereology Clinic, outside the Hospital, although he was the director of both institutions. In the period between the two world wars, among the most prominent physicians of the Military Sanitary Headquarters who contributed the development of dermatovenereology were the chiefs of the Dermatovenereology Department of the General Military Hospital in Belgrade: Major, later on, Brigadier General, Dr. Božidar Janković (1874 - 1936), and the Sanitary Brigadier General, Dr. Milivoje Pantić (1885 - 1959). Dr. B. Janković wrote important professional papers, among which the following are most significant: ”Fight against Venereal Diseases in the Army” and ”Treatment of Syphilis with Silber-Salvarsan.” Distinguished physicians of the military sanitary service, such as Dr. Petar Davidović, made significant contributions to the work of civilian dermatovenereology institutions of that time. In 1921, Dr. Petar Davidović was the director of the newly founded Venereal Department of the Niš Public Hospital, which was on a high professional level.

The systematics of the fossil representatives of Ranina Lamark, 1810, has been discussed by several authors in the last century, showing some problematics above all due to the lack of a close diagnosis of the type species (<em>R. ranina</em>) and to the scarce number of well-preserved type series of each fossil species. However, based upon a close comparison among the type series of each species, authors’ original descriptions, and the main diagnostic characters of <em>Ranina</em>, this preliminary review finds that twelve species have to be considered as doubtful species within <em>Ranina</em>, as follows: <em>?Ranina americana</em> Withers, 1924, <em>?R. berglundi</em> Squires &amp; Demetrion, 1992,<em> ?R. bouilleana</em> A. Milne Edwards, 1872, <em>?R. brevispina</em> Lőrenthey, 1898,<em> ?R. granulosa</em> A. Milne Edwards, 1872, <em>?R. griesbachi</em> Noetling, 1897, <em>?R. haszlinskyi</em> Reuss, 1859, <em>?R. libyca</em> (Van Straelen, 1935),<em> ?R.</em> <em>molengraaffi</em> Van Straelen, 1924,<em> ?R. oblonga</em> (von Münster, 1840), <em>?R. ornata</em> De Angeli &amp; Beschin, 2011, and<em> ?R. speciosa</em> (von Münster, 1840). Four species have to be considered as <em>Ranina nomina dubia</em>, as follows: <em>Ranina elegans</em> Rathbun, 1945, <em>R. hirsuta</em> (Schafhäutl, 1863), <em>R. lamiensis</em> Rathbun, 1945, and<em> R. tejoniana</em> Rathbun, 1926. <em>Ranina</em> <em>bavarica</em> Ebert, 1887,<em> R. fabri</em> Schafhäutl, 1863, and<em> R. helii</em> Schafhäutl, 1863, have to be assigned to Lophoranina Fabiani, 1910. <em>Ranina</em> <em>cuspidata</em> Guppy, 1909, has to be assigned to Calappa Weber, 1795 (Calappidae De Haan, 1833). Finally,<em> R. burleighensis</em> Holland in Holland &amp; Cvancara, 1958, has to be considered as doubtful species within Decapoda.

The taxonomy of the Palearctic genusMegacraspedusZeller, 1839 (Lepidoptera, Gelechiidae) is revised, based on external morphology, genitalia and DNA barcodes. An integrative taxonomic approach supports the existence of 85 species which are arranged in 24 species groups (disputed taxa from other faunal regions are discussed). Morphology of all species is described and figured in detail. For 35 species both sexes are described; for 46 species only the male sex is reported, in one species the male is unknown, whereas in three species the female adult and/or genitalia morphology could not be analysed due to lack of material.DNA barcode sequences of the COI barcode fragment with &gt; 500 bp were obtained from 264 specimens representing 62 species or about three-quarters of the species. Species delimitation is particularly difficult in a few widely distributed species with high and allegedly intraspecific DNA barcode divergence of nearly 14%, and with up to 23 BINs in a single species. Deep intraspecific or geographical splits in DNA barcode are frequently not supported by morphology, thus indicating a complex phylogeographic history or other unresolved molecular problems.The following 44 new species (22 of them from Europe) are described:Megacraspedusbengtssonisp. n.(Spain),M.junnilainenisp. n.(Turkey),M.similellussp. n.(Bulgaria, Romania, Turkey),M.golestanicussp. n.(Iran),M.tokarisp. n.(Croatia),M.nelisp. n.(France, Italy),M.faunierensissp. n.(Italy),M.gredosensissp. n.(Spain),M.bidentatussp. n.(Spain),M.fuscussp. n.(Spain),M.trineaesp. n.(Portugal, Spain),M.skouisp. n.(Spain),M.spinophallussp. n.(Spain),M.occidentellussp. n.(Portugal),M.granadensissp. n.(Spain),M.heckfordisp. n.(Spain),M.tenuiuncussp. n.(France, Spain),M.devoratorsp. n.(Bulgaria, Romania),M.brachypterissp. n.(Albania, Greece, Macedonia, Montenegro),M.barcodiellussp. n.(Macedonia),M.sumpichisp. n.(Spain),M.tabellisp. n.(Morocco),M.gallicussp. n.(France, Spain),M.libycussp. n.(Libya, Morocco),M.latiuncussp. n.(Kazahkstan),M.kazakhstanicussp. n.(Kazahkstan),M.knudlarsenisp. n.(Spain),M.tenuignathossp. n.(Morocco),M.glaberipalpussp. n.(Morocco),M.nupponenisp. n.(Russia),M.pototskiisp. n.(Kyrgyzstan),M.feminensissp. n.(Kazakhstan),M.kirgizicussp. n.(Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan),M.ibericussp. n.(Portugal, Spain),M.steinerisp. n.(Morocco),M.gibeauxisp. n.(Algeria, Tunisia),M.multipunctellussp. n.(Turkey),M.teriolensissp. n.(Croatia, Greece, Italy, Slovenia),M.korabicussp. n.(Macedonia),M.skuleisp. n.(Spain),M.longivalvellussp. n.(Morocco),M.peslierisp. n.(France, Spain),M.pacificussp. n.(Afghanistan), andM.armatophallussp. n.(Afghanistan).NevadiaCaradja, 1920,syn. n.(homonym),CauloecistaDumont, 1928,syn. n.,ReichardtiellaFilipjev, 1931,syn. n., andVadeniaCaradja, 1933,syn. n.are treated as junior synonyms ofMegacraspedus. Furthermore the following species are synonymised:M.subdolellusStaudinger, 1859,syn. n.,M.tuttiWalsingham, 1897,syn. n., andM.grossisquammellusChrétien, 1925,syn. n. ofM.lanceolellus(Zeller, 1850);M.culminicolaLe Cerf, 1932,syn. n.ofM.homochroaLe Cerf, 1932;M.separatellus(Fischer von Röslerstamm, 1843),syn. n.andM.incertellusRebel, 1930,syn. n.ofM.dolosellus(Zeller, 1839);M.mareotidellusTurati, 1924,syn. n.ofM.numidellus(Chrétien, 1915);M.litovalvellusJunnilainen, 2010,syn. n.ofM.imparellus(Fischer von Röslerstamm, 1843);M.kaszabianusPovolný, 1982,syn. n.ofM.leuca(Filipjev, 1929);M.chretienella(Dumont, 1928),syn. n.,M.halfella(Dumont, 1928),syn. n., andM.arnaldi(Turati &amp; Krüger, 1936),syn. n.ofM.violacellum(Chrétien, 1915);M.escalerellusSchmidt, 1941,syn. n.ofM.squalidaMeyrick, 1926.Megacraspedusribbeella(Caradja, 1920),comb. n.,M.numidellus(Chrétien, 1915),comb. n.,M.albella(Amsel, 1935),comb. n.,M.violacellum(Chrétien, 1915),comb. n., andM.grisea(Filipjev, 1931),comb. n.are newly combined inMegacraspedus.

An ongoing review of the fishes of the basal percoid family Acropomatidae has revealed that the genus Synagrops Günther, 1887 as it is currently understood is not a natural group. Species with a serrated pelvic-fin spine are here placed in the resurrected genus Parascombrops Alcock, 1889 (type-species: Parascombrops pellucidus Alcock, 1889), and the new, monospecific genus Caraibops n. gen. (type-species: Synagrops trispinosus Mochizuki & Sano, 1984). Parascombrops is unique amongst Acropomatidae in the combination of the presence of vacant 8th interneural space, a predorsal formula /0+0/0+2/ and an epaxialis attachment type 1. Caraibops n. gen. shares none of these characters and further differs from Parascombrops by an anal-fin formula of III + 9 (vs II + 7 or III + 6), and the absence of denticles on the ectopterygoid. Parascombrops is revised and now contains a total of 13 species, including 7 new: P. analis (Katayama, 1957), P. argyreus (Gilbert & Cramer, 1897), P. glossodon n. sp., P. madagascariensis n. sp., P. mochizukii n. sp., P. nakayamai n. sp., P. ohei n. sp., P. parvidens n. sp., P. pellucidus Alcock, 1889, P. philippinensis (Günther, 1880), P. serratospinosus (Smith & Radcliffe, 1912), P. spinosus (Schultz, 1940) and P. yamanouei n. sp. Synagrops adeni Kotthaus, 1970 and S. malayanus Weber, 1913 are treated as synonyms of P. pellucidus and P. philippinensis, respectively. Lectotypes are designated for P. philippinensis and S. malayanus. The main characters used to distinguish between the species of Parascombrops are: serration of other fin spines, number of gill rakers and pseudobranchial filaments, head profile, presence or absence of ridges on the preopercle, shape of 1st anal-fin pterygiophore, dentition on vomer, palatines and ectopterygoids, orbit diameter, pectoral-fin length, maximal body depth and otolith morphology. The genus Synagrops is here confined to two species, S. japonicus (Döderlein, 1883) and S. bellus (Goode & Bean, 1896), characterized by the apomorphic character of an otic capsule with a posteriorly open myodome, a basioccipital fossa and a very specialized otolith morphology. Synagrops is also characterized by the absence of pelvic-fin spine serrations. Two other species without a serrated pelvic-fin spine, originally described in Synagrops, are removed from this genus. Synagrops microlepis Norman, 1935 is separated into the monotypic Kaperangus n. gen., the only genus in the family with two supraneurals (cf. three in all other taxa). The second, Synagrops pseudomicrolepis Schultz, 1940 is re-assigned to the genus Verilus. The geographic distribution of Parascombrops as currently composed is discussed, and is shown to be primarily of West Pacific nature, with few species in the Indian Ocean and one in the tropical West-Atlantic (P. spinosus). The West Atlantic species Parascombrops spinosus is very closely related to P. mochizukii from the tropical northwestern Pacific, and the implications of this disjunct distribution are discussed. The high degree of speciation now recognized in Parascombrops species of the West-Pacific indicates that a diverse ecological adaptation within an overall pseudoceanic habitat may have played a major role in speciation, which would have remained obscured without adequate taxonomic resolution. Fossil, otolith-based records are also briefly discussed in the context. The extant Parascombrops argyreus and P. ohei are reported from the Pliocene of Japan, and Caraibops trispinosus has been recorded from the Pliocene of Venezuela.

Like other empires in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, expansion and slavery went hand in hand in Ethiopia, contrary to imperial justifications based on the abolition of the slave trade and slavery. Towards the end of the nineteenth century, the Ethiopian empire incorporated the northwestern border enclaves of Bela-Shangul and Gumuz into greater Ethiopia. Having obtained the subordination of the local Muslim warlords, the emperor then demanded tribute from them in slaves, ivory and gold. Slaves were used as domestics in the imperial palace at Addis Ababa and the houses of state dignitaries and as farm labor on their farms elsewhere in the country. Responding to the demands of the central government as well as their own needs, borderland chiefs raided local villages and neighbouring chiefdoms for slaves. Expanding state control thus led to intensified slave raiding and the extension of the slave trade from the borderlands into the centre of the empire in spite of Ethiopia's public commitment to end slavery and the slave trade as a member of the League of Nations. The end of slavery in Ethiopia only came with the Italian occupation in 1935.

Andreas Fülberth, "Riga. Kleine Geschichte der Stad"At the beginning of 2014, the book „Riga. Kleine Geschichte der Stadt” (Riga. A short history of the town) was issued. The author is Andreas Fülberth, a young historian from Germany, who is a lecturer of the history of Eastern Europe in the University of Kiel. He has already published several works about the Baltic states (in German: “Baltikum”), the most important of them being „Tallinn – Riga – Kaunas. Ihr Ausbau zu modernen Hauptstädten 1920-1940". Köln u. a. 2005 (Das Baltikum in Geschichte und Gegenwart, Bd. 2), which is dedicated to the plans of architectural rebuilding of the Baltic capitals (Kaunas – Riga – Tallinn) during the time of the first independence (1918-1940).The history of Riga by Andreas Fülberth begins – very traditionally – with the establishing of the town by Bishop Albert of Riga in 1201. Actually we can learn not only about the history of the town. The book by Andreas Fülberth provides a quite long trip through the history of Livonia (now a part of Latvia).For Polish readers very important and interesting piece of Riga’s history could be so called “Polish times” (to be more precise: “Polish-Lithuanian”) in Livonia – which used to be seen quite critical by Latvian historians before the war. We can learn also about Ignacy Mościcki who studied in Riga, the treaty of Riga from March 1921, as well as the Polish academic fraternities in Livonia (Arcadia and Welecja).Maybe the most important part of the book begins in 1918 – when Latvia gained independence for the first time in her history. We can learn not only about Kārlis Ulmanis and the Soviet-Latvian government of Pēteris Stučka, but also about the activities of Andrievs Niedra, a pro-German prime minister of Latvia. Andreas Fülberth, as a passionate lover of architecture, provides an interesting piece of information about the architectural rebuilding of Riga during the time of Ulmanis – we can learn the history of the Freedom Monument (1935), old town, which gained a new shape during the thirties. The Latvinization of the town during the first independence and Sovietization during the occupation (1940-1990) is also an interesting fact.The book can be recommended for all readers who do not have broad knowledge of the history of Latvia, but it is still a very interesting journey also for those interested in the Baltic states who want to learn about some curiosities from the history of the town. Do you know why the Freedom Monument was not destroyed during the Soviet time? Do you know the history of Riga’s tube that has been never built? Do you know the mathematician Ilja Rips? If not, you should read the book of Andreas Fülberth. Andreas Fülberth, „Riga. Kleine Geschichte der Stadt”. Ciekawy przewodnik nie tylko po Rydze, ale także po historii ŁotwyNa początku 2014 roku do rąk czytelnika niemieckiego trafiła książka autorstwa Andreasa Fülbertha „Riga. Kleine Geschichte der Stadt”. Jest to już kolejna niemiecka publikacja o stolicy Łotwy, jednak warto podkreślić, że ostatnią znaczącą pracę ujmującą historię Rygi całościowo wydano w 1897 roku, jeszcze wtedy kiedy Inflanty stanowiły obszar niemieckiego osadnictwa. Niemcy, podobnie jak Polacy, mają problem z holistycznymi opracowaniami na temat Łotwy. Przynależność kraju do Związku Sowieckiego po 1940 roku również i Niemcom utrudniała badania historyczne, w związku z czym byli oni skazani – podobnie jak Polacy na Manteuffla – na opracowania pochodzące jeszcze z przełomu XIX i XX wieku. Książka Andreasa Fülbertha ukazała się w prestiżowym wydawnictwie Böhlau Verlag, które od lat interesuje się historią miast europejskich mających w historii związki z niemczyzną. Od strony warsztatu historycznego autorowi nie można niczego zarzucić. Jest świetnym znawcą historii nie tylko Rygi, ale także regionu, który Niemcy określają jako Baltikum. Napisana językiem naukowym (choć przystępnym dla czytelnika) praca może być uzupełnieniem do polskiej wiedzy na temat miasta Rygi, a dla niektórych – z tej racji, że ani Łotwa ani Ryga nie doczekały się w języku polskim swojej całościowej historii – pracą „pierwszego kontaktu”.

The genus Brueelia Kéler, 1936a forms the core of the so-called “Brueelia-complex”, one of the largest and most heterogeneous groups of lice (Phthiraptera). Here we introduce the taxonomic history and present a revision of this group. The limits of the Brueelia-complex are discussed. We resurrect the genera Acronirmus Eichler, 1953, Corvonirmus Eichler, 1944, Guimaraesiella Eichler, 1949, Maculinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964a, Meropsiella Conci, 1941a, Olivinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964a, Osculonirmus Mey, 1982a, Rostrinirmus Złotorzycka, 1964a, Traihoriella Ansari, 1947, and Turdinirmus Eichler, 1951. We describe the following new genera: Anarchonirmus n. gen., Aporisticeras n. gen., Aratricerca n. gen., Buphagoecus n. gen., Ceratocista n. gen., Sychraella n. gen., Couala n. gen., Harpactrox n. gen., Hecatrishula n. gen., Indoceoplanetes n. gen., Manucodicola n. gen., Mirandofures n. gen., Nemuus n. gen., Priceiella n. gen., Psammonirmus n. gen., Resartor n. gen., Saepocephalum n. gen., Schizosairhynchus n. gen., Teinomordeus n. gen., Titanomessor n. gen., and Turdinirmoides n. gen.; and the following new subgenera: Camurnirmus n. subgen., Thescelovora n. subgen., Torosinirmus n. subgen., and Capnodella n. subgen. The following 37 new species are described: Anarchonirmus albovittatus n. sp. ex Pomatostomus temporalis strepitans (Mayr & Rand, 1935); Brueelia aguilarae n. sp. ex Euplectes franciscanus pusillus (Hartert, 1901); Brueelia phasmasoma n. sp. ex Coereba flaveola luteola (Cabanis, 1850); Brueelia pseudognatha n. sp. ex Pycnonotus nigricans superior Clancey, 1959; Sychraella sinsutura n. sp. ex Pomatostomus isidorei isidorei Lesson, 1827; Couala dodekopter n. sp. ex Coua cristata pyropyga Grandidier, 1867; Guimaraesiella pandolura n. sp. ex Pericrocotus flammeus semiruber Whistler & Kinnear, 1933; Harpactrox geminodus n. sp. ex Harpactes erythorcephalus erythrocephalus (Gould, 1834); Harpactrox loeiensis n. sp. ex Harpactes erythrorhynchus annamensis (Robinson & Kloss, 1919); Harpactrox pontifrons n. sp. ex Harpactes ardens ardens (Temminck, 1824); Indoceoplanetes (Capnodella) loboccupatrix n. sp. ex Lobotos oriolinus Bates, 1909; Indoceoplanetes (Capnodella) laurocorythes n. sp. ex Edolisoma holopolium holopolium (Sharpe, 1888); Maculinirmus ljosalfar n. sp. ex Oriolus chinensis diffusus Sharpe, 1877; Manucodicola acantharx n. sp. ex Manucodia ater ater (Lesson, 1830); Manucodicola semiramisae n. sp. ex Phonygammus keraudrenii purpureoviolaceus (Meyer, 1885); Meropoecus balisong n. sp. ex Merops americanus Muller, 1776; Meropoecus bartlowi n. sp. ex Merops ornatus Latham, 1802; Mirandofures altoguineae n. sp. ex Oreostruthus fuliginosus De Vis, 1898; Mirandofures kamena n. sp. ex Erythrura trichroa sigillifer (De Vis, 1897); Nemuus hoedhri n. sp. ex Artamus fuscus Vieillot, 1817; Nemuus imperator n. sp. ex Artamus maximus Meyer, 1874; Priceiella (Camurnirmus) hwameicola n. sp. ex Garrulax taewanus Swinhoe, 1859; Priceiella (Camurnirmus) paulbrowni n. sp. ex Garrulax leucolophus diardi (Lesson, 1831); Priceiella (Thescelovora) alliocephala n. sp. ex Platylophus galericulatus ardesiacus (Bonaparte, 1850); Priceiella (Torosinirmus) koka n. sp. ex Turdoides tenebrosa (Hartlaub, 1883); Psammonirmus lunatipectus n. sp. ex Serilophus lunatus lunatus (Gould, 1834); Aratricerca cirithra n. sp. ex Ptiloprora guisei guisei (De Vis, 1894); Saepocephalum stephenfryi n. sp. ex Corcorax melanoramphos (Vieillot, 1817); Schizosairhynchus erysichthoni n. sp. ex Aplonis metallica metallica (Temminck, 1824) and Aplonis metallica nitida (Grey, 1858); Schizosairhynchus minovenator n. sp. ex Mino dumontii Lesson, 1827; Sturnidoecus australafricanus n. sp. ex Corvinella melanoleuca expressa Clancey, 1961; Sturnidoecus mon n. sp. ex Euplectes hordeaceus (Linnaeus, 1758); Sturnidoecus porphyrogenitus n. sp. ex Cinnyricinclus leucogaster verreauxi (Bocage, 1870); Sturnidoecus somnodraco n. sp. ex Quelea quelea quelea (Linnaeus, 1758) and Qualea quelea lathami (Smith, 1836); Teinomordeus entelosetus n. sp. ex Eurocephalus rueppelli Bonaparte, 1853; Titanomessor sexloba n. sp. ex Laniarius erythrogaster (Cretzschmar, 1829); and Turdinirmus australissimus n. sp. ex Zoothera lunulata lunulata (Latham, 1802). The name Olivinirmus paraffinis nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement for the preoccupied Brueelia affinis Carriker, 1963. We place 23 names in synonymy, and we consider 6 species as incertae sedis, 2 names as nomina nuda, and transfer 14 species names to genera not belonging to the Brueelia-complex. We redescribe and illustrate most of the type species of the genera or subgenera included in this revision. Keys to genera, subgenera, and species groups are given, together with updated louse-host and host-louse checklists for 426 species of lice currently placed in the Brueelia-complex, including 183 new host-louse records.

Письма А.И. Тереножкина 1939–1941 гг. относятся к периоду поиска ученым своего научного пути и началу его работы в Узбекистане. В них он делится с В.А. Городцовым первыми результатами исследований в зоне строительства Большого Ташкентского канала и на городище Ак-Тепе, знакомит учителя с Чимбайлыкским кладом и советуется по поводу его хронологии. Послания 1941–1942 гг. написаны с фронтовых дорог, но их главной темой по-прежнему является археология. В.А. Городцов в своих письмах отмечает важность новейших археологических открытий в Туркестане, делится новостями о ходе работы над 2 томом «Археологии», призывает бить врага. Публикуемая переписка приоткрывает для нас завесу в диалоге Учителя и ученика. Библиографические ссылки Аржанцева И.А. Хорезм. История открытий и исследований. Этнографический альбом. Ульяновск: Артишок, 2016. 288 с., 654 илл. Археологические экспедиции Государственной Академии истории материальной культуры и Института археологии Академии наук СССР (1919–1956 гг.): Указатель / Ред. Н.Н. Воронин, М.А. Тиханова. М.: АН СССР, 1962. 264 с. Балахонова Е.И. В.В. Троицкий и его коллекция в Музее антропологии // Вестник МГУ. Сер. XXIII: Антропология. 2009. № 3. С. 55–65. Балабина В.И. О прекрасной даме, ее рыцарях и бардах (Т.С. Пассек, Б.А. Латынин и А.А. Потапов) // Stratum plus. 2001–2002. № 2. С. 14–31. Белозëрова И.В., Гайдуков П.Г., Кузьминых С.В. К юбилею Института археологии РАН: Московская секция РАИМК–ГАИМК, Московское отделение ГАИМК–ИИМК // РА. 2019. № 4. С. 102–117. Белозёрова И.В., Кузьминых С.В. Жизненный и научный путь В.А. Городцова (по архивным документам и воспоминаниям) // Городцов В.А. Дневники. 1928–1944: в 2 кн. Кн. 1: 1928–1935 / Сост. И.В. Белозёрова, С.В. Кузьминых. М.: Триумф принт, 2015. С. 12–72. Бернштам А.Н. Археологические работы в Казахстане и Киргизии // ВДИ. 1939. № 4. С. 169–181. Бернштам А.Н., Бибиков С.Н. Н.И. Репников (1882–1940) [Некролог] // КСИИМК. 1941. Вып. IX. С. 121–123. Болелов С.Б. Толстов Сергей Павлович // БРЭ. 2016. Т. 32. С. 240. Борисковский П.И., Окладников А.П. Д.Н. Лев (1905–1969) [Некролог] // СА. 1970. № 3. С. 298–299. Бочкарев В.С. Этапы развития металлопроизводства эпохи поздней бронзы на юге Восточной Европы // Stratum plus. 2017. № 2. С. 159–204. Буряков Ю.Ф. Пскентские наусы // СА. 1968. № 3. С. 131–136. Буряков Ю.Ф. Генезис и этапы развития городской культуры Ташкентского оазиса. Ташкент: Фан, 1982. 212 с. Василий Афанасьевич Шишкин как ученый-археолог и общественный деятель (к 70-летию со дня рождения) // История материальной культуры Узбекистана. Вып. 6. / Отв. Ред.. Б.В. Лунин. Ташкент: Наука, 1965. С. 5–16. Васильев И.Б. К вопросу о двух ямно-полтавкинских поселениях в Куйбышевском Заволжье // Очерки истории и культуры Поволжья. Вып. 2. / Отв. ред. Е.И. Медведев. Куйбышев: Куйбышев. гос. ун-т, 1976. С. 97–112. Виноградов А.В. Неолитические памятники Хорезма. М.: Наука, 1968. 180 с. Гольмстен В.В. Археологические памятники Самарской губернии // В.А. Городцову – XL / ТСА РАНИОН. Т. IV. / Ред. В.М. Фриче и др. М.: РАНИОН, 1928. С. 125–137. Городцов В.А. Бытовая археология. Курс лекций, читанных в Московском Археологическом Институте. М.: Печ. А.И. Снегиревой, 1910. 474 с. Городцов В.А. Культуры бронзовой эпохи в Средней России // ОИРИМ за 1914 год. М.: Синод. тип., 1915. С. 121–226. Городцов В.А. Археология. Т. 1. Каменный период. М.–Пг.: Гос. изд-во, 1923. 397 с. Городцов В.А. Бронзовый век на территории СССР // БСЭ. 1927. Т. VII. Стлб. 610–626. Городцов В.А. К вопросу о киммерийской культуре // ТСА РАНИОН. М.: РАНИОН, 1928. Т. II. С. 46–60. Городцов Василий Алексеевич. Дневники (1928–1944): в 2-х кн. Кн. 1: 1928–1935 / Сост. И.В. Белозёрова, С.В. Кузьминых. М.: ИД Триумф принт, 2015а. 687 с. Городцов Василий Алексеевич. Дневники (1928–1944): в 2-х кн. Кн. 2: 1936–1944 / Сост. И.В. Белозёрова, С.В. Кузьминых. М.: ИД Триумф принт, 2015б. 695 с. Граков Б.Н. Работы в районе проектируемых южно-уральских гидроэлектростанций // Археологические работы Академии на новостройках 1932–1933 гг. Вып. 2. / Известия ГАИМК Вып. 110. / Отв. ред. И. Мещанинов. М.-Л.; Соцэкгиз, 1935.С. 91–119. Граков Б.Н. Археологические раскопки близ Никополя // ВДИ. 1939. № 1. С. 271–276. Гремяцкий В.А. Памяти В.В. Троицкого // Вопросы антропологии. 1963. Вып. 14. С. 112–114. Григорьев Г.В. Поселения древнего Согда: (По данным исследования городищ Самаркандского района) // КСИИМК. 1940. Вып. 6. С. 24–34. Григорьев Г.В. Находка мустьерского остроконечника в Самарканде // КСИИМК. 1940а. Вып. 8. С. 89–90. Джуракулов М.Д. Самаркандская стоянка и проблемы верхнего палеолита в Средней Азии. Ташкент: Фан, 1987. 171 с. Итина М.А. К 90-летию С.П. Толстова и 60-летию Хорезмской археолого-этнографической экспедиции // РА. 1997. № 4. С. 189–199. Канторович А.Р. Заметки о преподавательской деятельности В.А. Городцова в Московском университете // Хорошие дни. Памяти Александра Степановича Хорошева / Сост. А.Е. Мусин. М.: ЛеопАрт, 2009. С. 309–313. Каргин Ю.Ю. Полевые археологические исследования И.В. Синицына: (К 110-летию со дня рождения) // Археология Восточно-Европейской степи. Вып. 8. / Отв. ред. В.А. Лопатин. Саратов: ИЦ «Наука», 2010. С. 7–29. Китова Л.Ю. История сибирской археологии (1920–1930-е годы): изучение памятников эпохи металла. Новосибирск: ИАЭТ СО РАН, 2007. 272 с. Клюшкина И.В. (сост.). Отдел археологических памятников Государственного исторического музея: краткая историческая хроника. Часть первая: 1873–1935 гг. // Государственный исторический музей и отечественная археология. К 100-летию отдела археологических памятников / Тр. ГИМ. Вып. 201. / Отв. ред. Д.В. Журавлев, Н.И. Шишлина. М.: ГИМ, 2014. С. 232–288. Козенкова В.И. Евгений Игнатьевич Крупнов (к 90-летию со дня рождения) // РА. 1994. № 1. С. 191–196. Конопацкий А.К. Прошлого великий следопыт. Академик А.П. Окладников: страницы биографии. Кн. 1. Новосибирск: Сиб. хронограф, 2001. 492 с. Конопацкий А.К. Прошлого великий следопыт. Академик А.П. Окладников: страницы биографии. Кн. 2. М.: АИРО-XXI, Нов. хронограф, 2009. 549 с. Крайнов Д.А. Памяти В.А. Городцова // Проблемы изучения древних культур Евразии / Отв. ред. Д.А. Крайнов. М.: Наука, 1991. С. 12–27. Крупнов Е. К 50-летнему юбилею научной деятельности проф. В.А. Городцова // ВДИ. 1938. № 3. С. 236–238. Кузьминых С.В. Граков Борис Николаевич // БРЭ. 2007. Т. 7. С. 611. Кузьминых С.В., Сафонов И.Е., Сташенков Д.А. Вера Владимировна Гольмстен: материалы к биографии. Самара: Офорт, 2007. 168 с. Кызласова И.Л. Об археологе В.П. Левашевой и ее отце, протоиерее П.Н. Левашеве // Человек и древности: памяти Александра Александровича Формозова (1928–2009) / Отв. ред. И.С. Каменецкий, А.Н. Сорокин. М.: Гриф и К, 2010. С. 751–769. Лев Д.Н. Самаркандская палеолитическая стоянка (предварительное сообщение) // История материальной культуры Узбекистана. Вып. 6. / Отв. ред. Б.В. Лунин. Ташкент: Наука, 1965. С. 22–29. Лунин Б.В. В.А. Шишкин [Некролог] // СА. 1967. № 2. С. 301. Максимов Е.К., Малов Н.М. Профессор Иван Васильевич Синицын – советский археолог XX века // Взаимодействие и развитие древних культур южного пограничья Европы и Азии / Ред. Е.К. Максимов и др. Саратов: СГУ, 2000. С. 9–19. Мелюкова А.И., Свиридов А.В. Борис Николаевич Граков (1899–1970) // Портреты историков. Время и судьбы. Т. 3: Древний мир и Средние века / Отв. ред. Г.Н. Севостьянов, Л.Т. Мильская. М.: Наука, 2004. С. 45–63. Мизинова В.П., Сальников К.В. Памяти В.В. Гольмстен // СА. 1962. № 4. С. 121–123. Молодин В.И. Академик Окладников – страницы творчества (в честь 105-юбилея). Новосибирск: НГУ, 2013. 96 с. Молодин В.И. Окладников Алексей Павлович // БРЭ. 2014. Т. 24. С. 26–27. Мунчаев Р.М. Евгений Игнатьевич Крупнов: к столетию со дня рождения // РА. 2004. № 1. С. 5–14. Найденко А.В. Старейший археолог Северного Кавказа: (Памяти Т. М. Минаевой, 1896–1973) // МИСК. 1976. Вып. 14. С. 327–332. Неразлик Е.Е. Сергей Павлович Толстов // Портреты историков. Время и судьбы. Т. 4: Новая и новейшая история / Отв. ред. Г.Н. Севостьянов. М.: Наука, 2004. С. 462–484. Окладников А.П. Неандертальский человек и следы его культуры в Средней Азии. (Предварительные данные и выводы о раскопках в гроте Тешик-Таш) // СА. 1940. T. VI. С. 5–19. Отрощенко В. Проблема формування наукових шкіл на прикладі відділу археології енеоліту та бронзового віку ІА АН УРСР // Наукові студії: Збірник наукових праць. Львів-Винники: Апріорі, 2013. Вип. 6. С. 3–12. Отрощенко В.В. О.І. Тереножкін як дослідник бронзової доби в Степовій Україні // Ранній залізний вік Євразії: до 100-річчя від дня народження О.І. Тереножкіна / Відп. ред. С.А. Скорий. Київ–Чигирин: Формат, 2007. С. 13–14. И жизнь, и слезы, и любовь / сост. Плешивенко А.Г. Запорожье: ООО «ЛИПС» ЛТД, 2011. 368 с. Потапов А.А. Обзор тепе среднего течения Чирчика / Архив ГУОПМК УзССР. Ташкент, 1929. Д. 96. Потапов А.А. Пскентский курганный могильник / Архив ГУОПМК УзССР, 1930. Д. 31. Равдоникас В.И. Неолитический могильник на Онежском озере: (Предварительное сообщение) // СА. 1940. Т. VI. С. 46–62. Рапопорт Ю.А., Левина Л.М., Неразик Е.Е., Гертман А.Н., Болелов С.Б. Приложение 1. Хроника работ Хорезмской археолого-этнографической экспедиции // Аржанцева И.А. Хорезм. История открытий и исследований. Этнографический альбом. Ульяновск: Артишок, 2016. С. 198–234. Саєнко В. Порівняльні життєписи: Борис Миколайович Граков та Олексій Іванович Тереножкін // МДАПВ. 2015. Вип. 19: Історія археології: міжособистісні та інституціональні комунікації. С. 123–135. Сафонов И.Е. Подготовка В.А. Городцовым второго тома серии «Археология» // Археология в российских университетах / Отв. ред. А.Д. Пряхин. Воронеж: ВГУ, 2002. С. 62–70. Синицын И.В. Кремневые орудия с дюнных стоянок Калмыцкой области // ИНВИК. 1931. Т. IV. С. 81–91. Скаков А.Ю. Крупнов Евгений Игнатьевич // БРЭ. 2010. Т. 16. С. 128–129. Смирнов А.П. М. В. Городцов [Некролог] // СА. 1969. № 4. С. 320. Сташенков Д.А., Кочкина А.Ф. Страницы истории самарской археологии: к юбилею В.В. Гольмстен. Самара: СОИКМ, 2020. 48 с. Столяр А.Д. Деятельность Владислава Иосифовича Равдоникаса // Тихвинский сборник. Вып. 1: Археология Тихвинского края / Науч. ред. Г.С. Лебедев. Тихвин, 1988. С. 8–30. Тереножкин А.И. Памятники материальной культуры на Ташкентском канале // ИУзФАНСССР. 1940а. № 9. С. 30–36. Тереножкин А.И. Археологические разведки в Хорезме // СА. 1940б. Т. VI. C. 168–189. Тереножкин А.И. О древнем гончарстве в Хорезме // ИУзФ АН СССР. 1940в. № 6. С. 54–64. Тереножкин А.И. Жилые постройки XI–XII вв. н. э. в Кара-Калпакской АССР // ИУзФ АН СССР. 1940г. № 7. С. 58–73. Тереножкин А.И. Раскопки холма Ак-Тепе близ Ташкента в 1940 г. // ИУзФ АН СССР. 1941. № 3. С. 30–36. Тереножкин А.И. Холм Ак-Тепе Ташкента (раскопки 1940 г.) // ТИИА АН УзССР. 1948. Т. І. С. 71–133. Тереножкин А.И. Согд и Чач (Автореф. канд. дисс.) // КСИИМК. 1950. Вып. 33. С. 152–169. Тереножкин А.И. Основы хронологии предскифского периода // СА. 1965. № 1. С. 63–85. Тереножкин А. И. Киммерийцы. Киев: Наукова думка, 1976. 223 с. Тереножкин А.И. Из жизни Алексея Тереножкина (написано его рукой, собрано его сыном). Киев: Корвин пресс, 2006. 112 с. Тихонов И.Л. Равдоникас Владислав Иосифович // БРЭ. 2015. Т. 28. С. 113. Толстов С.П. Древний Хорезм. Опыт историко-археологического исследования. М.: МГУ, 1948. 433 с. Тункина И.В. Репников Николай Иванович / Биобиблиографический словарь членов РАО (1846–1924) // С.А. Жебелёв. Русское археологическое общество за третью четверть века своего существования. 1897–1921: Исторический очерк. Изд. 2. М.: Индрик, 2017. С. 512–513. Формозов А.А. К столетнему юбилею В.И. Равдоникаса // РА. 1996. № 3. С. 197–202. Черных Е.Н. Древняя металлообработка на Юго-Западе СССР. М.: Наука, 1976. 302 с. Шишкин В.А. Исследование городища Варахша и его окрестностей // КСИИМК. 1941. Вып. 10. С. 3–15. Шишкин В.А. Варахша. Опыт исторического исследования. М.: АН СССР, 1963. 250 с. Щапов А.П. Историко-географическое распределение русского народонаселения // Русское Слово. 1865. №№ 6, 7, 8, 9.

AbstractFor more than a century the only eyewitness account of Rembrandt's Portrait of an old woman (fig. 1) was a description made by Wilhelm Bode in 1883. At the time, he was unable to decipher the date, 1632; nor did he know anything about Aeltje Uylenburgh or the history of the panel. However, the painting's provenance has since been revealed, and it can be traced back in an almost unbroken line to its commission, a rare occurrence in Rembrandt's oeuvre. A pendant portrait, now lost, featured the preacher Johannes Sylvius, who is also the subject of an etching by Rembrandt dating from 1633 (fig. 2). Rembrandt had a close relationship with the Sylvius couple and he married their cousin Saskia Uylenburgh in 1634. After Aeltje's death in 1644, the couple's son Cornelis Sylvius inherited the portraits. We know that Cornelis moved to Haarlem in 1647, and that in 1681 he made a will bequeathing the pendants to his son Johannes Sylvius Junior. For the most part of a century they remained in the family. We lose track of the portrait of Johannes Sylvius when, in 1721, Cornelis II Sylvius refurbishes a house on the Kruisstraat in Haarlem. However, thanks to a handful of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century copies, it has been possible to reconstruct the trail followed by Aeltje. In 1778, a copy from Dessau turned up at auction in Frankfurt. It was bought under the name of Johann Heinrich Roos by Henriette Amalie von Anhalt-Dessau. There is a copy of this copy in the museum of Marseilles, attributed Ferdinand Bol (fig. 3). In 2000 an article in the Tribune de Genève revealed that the original had belonged to the Burlamacchi Collection in the eighteenth century, and was then thought to be a portrait of Rembrandt's mother. Jean-Jacques Burlamacchi (1694-1748), a prominent Geneva collector, acquired major works of art, including probably the Rembrandt portrait, while travelling in Holland and Britain around 1720. It was the heirs of Burlamacchi, the Misses de Chapeaurouge, who opened the famous collection to the public. In 1790 or thereabouts, the Swiss portrait painter Marc-Louis Arlaud produced a copy, now in the museum at Lausanne (fig. 4), which for many years was thought to be an autograph work by Rembrandt. The painter Georges Chaix also made a copy, which he exhibited in Geneva in 1823. This work still belongs to the artist's family; unfortunately it has not been possible to obtain an image. After the Burlamacchi Collection was sold in about 1825, the painting was referred to somewhat nostalgically as 'Un Rembrandt "genevois"'. It was bought for 18,000 francs by the Paris art dealer Dubois, who sold it to the London banker William Coesvelt. In 1828, Coesvelt in turn sold the portrait through the London dealer John Smith, who described it as 'the painter's mother, at the age of 62'. We know that the picture was subsequently acquired from Albertus Brondgeest by the banker James de Rothschild (1792-1868) for his country house at Boulogne, as this is mentioned in the 1864 description of Rothschild's collection by Charles Blanc. Baron James's widow, Betty de Rothschild, inherited the portrait in 1868 and it was in Paris that the Berlin museum director Wilhelm Bode (fig. 5) first saw the painting. In his description of 1883 he states that the woman was not, in his opinion, Rembrandt's mother. In 1886 the portrait fell to Betty's son, Baron Alphonse (1827-1905). Bode published a heliogravure of the work in 1897, which remained for many years the only available reproduction (fig. 6). Rembrandt's portrait of a woman was a showpiece in Baron Alphonse's Paris smoking room (fig. 7). Few art historians came to the Rothschild residence and neither Valentiner nor Bredius, who published catalogues of Rembrandt in 1909 and 1935, respectively, had seen the painting. Alphonse's heir was Baron Edouard de Rothschild, who in 1940 fled to America with his daughter Bethsabée. The Germans looted the painting, but immediately after the war it was exhibited, undamaged, in a frame carrying the (deliberately?) misleading name 'Romney' (fig. 8). In 1949, Bethsabée de Rothschild became the rightful owner of the portrait. She took it with her when she moved to Israel in 1962, where under the name of Bathsheva de Rothschild she became a well-known patron of modern dance. In 1978, J. Bruyn en S. Levie of the Rembrandt Research Project (RRP) travelled to Tel Aviv to examine the painting. Although the surface was covered with a thick nicotine film, they were impressed by its condition. Bruyn and Levie were doubtful, however, that the panel's oval format was original, as emerges from the 'Rembrandt-Corpus' report of 1986. Not having seen the copies mentioned earlier, they were unaware that one nineteenth-century replica was also oval (fig. 9). Their important discovery that the woman's age was 62 was not further investigated at the time. Baroness Bathsheva de Rothschild died childless in 1999. On 13 December 2000 the painting was sold by Christie's, London, after a surprising new identity for the elderly sitter had been put forward. It had long been known that Rembrandt painted portraits of Aeltje Uylenburgh and her husband, the minister Cornelis Sylvius. Aeltje, who was a first cousin of Rembrandt's wife, Saskia Uylenburgh, would have been about 60 years old at the time. Given that the age of the woman in the portrait was now known to be 62, it was suggested that she could be Aeltje. The portrait was acquired for more than 28 million US dollars by the art dealer Robert Noortman, who put it on the market as 'Aeltje' with a question mark. In 2005, Noortman sold the portrait for 36.5 million to the American-Dutch collectors Mr and Mrs De Mol van Otterloo. At the time, the Mauritshuis in The Hague felt that trying to buy the portrait would be too extravagant, while the Rijksmuseum was more interested in acquiring a female portrait from Rembrandt's later period. Aeltje was thus destined to leave the Netherlands for good. A chronicle of the Sylvius family published in 2006 shows that Aeltje Uylenburgh would have been born in 1570 (fig. 10), demonstrating that she could indeed be the 62-year-old woman depicted by Rembrandt in 1632. We know that Aeltje was godmother to Rembrandt's children and that Saskia was godmother to Aeltje's granddaughter. Further evidence of the close ties between the two families is provided by Rembrandt's etching of Aeltje's son Petrus, produced in 1637. It is now generally accepted that the woman in the portrait is Aeltje. She was last shown in the Netherlands at the 'Dutch Portraits' exhibition in The Hague. In February 2008 the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston announced that it had received on long-term loan one the finest Rembrandts still in private ownership.

Ramps and scaffoldsThe lifting of large stones during antiquityUntil well into the 18th century, many scholars thought that megaliths were erected by giants. Less supernatural theories did not occur in print until the 19th century. One of these was expressed in a small pamphlet from 1857, “On the Building Manner of the Passage Graves of the Antiquity”, written by the Danish King Frederik the Seventh. Earlier (1853), the king had been convinced that first the capstones had been placed on a mound and then the uprights had been placed in holes dug out under the capstone (fig. 7). When all uprights were in place, the remaining earth was removed. This so-called mound theory is almost completely forgotten, but it surfaced sporadically in the 20th century, last when J. Osenton was reconstructing dolmens in the Cotswold Hill Quarry by Cheltenham in England in 1996-97.In 1857, Frederik the Seventh put forward the ramp theory, according to which the capstone is pulled up on a ramp to the already finished chamber (fig. 7-8). According to Frederik the Seventh’s proposal, the ramp was built from earth lengthwise covered with timber, on top of which the capstone would have been pulled up on rolls.However, the king had not invented this theory. It was known in Scandinavia and Holland already around 1800. In 1815, N. Westendorf in Holland suggested the use of earth ramps, and the following years the Dutch developed the ramp theory further.Both the early Dutch antiquarians and others referred to the fact that from the 16th to the 19th century (after the Spanish conquest), Inca workers in Peru, when erecting large buildings, used earth ramps for pulling large stones in place. During their golden age (1300-l500 AD), the Incas were masters in building with large stones that weighed up to well over 200 metric tons. Perhaps the know ledge of Inca earth ramps inspired the early European antiquarians to suggest that the megaliths had also been pulled in place by the use of ramps.In 1983, an experiment was carried out in Skånes Djurpark (Scania’s Animal Park) under G. Burenhuldt’s supervision: the building of a long barrow. The capstone was mounted on a wooden sledge and pulled in place using a rope and a 16-m long earth ramp covered with timber lengthwise (fig. 9). The gradient of the ramp was 5 degrees. It took fourteen men a mere twelve seconds to pull op the capstone.In Indonesia, the use of wooden ramps for pulling up grave capstones is well known. Such a situation was docu mented in 1910, when four hundred people pulled the stone in place without the use of rolls (fig. 10-11). In Holland, postholes suggesting the use of a similar method have been found in connection with some megalith graves (fig. 12).When using the scaffold method, one end of the stone is lifted using one or more levers while timber is being pushed under the stone. Then the other end is lifted and timber pushed underneath. The stone is then lifted again, and timber is pushed under in the opposite direction of the previous layer of timber – and so forth, until the stone has reached the planned height (fig. 13-14). The stone is lifted up on a steadily growing scaffold, so to speak. When the lever is high up, ropes are attached to it for pulling. This method was used in Denmark during the 19th century, when the National Museum was placing capstones that had fallen from their original position back onto the megalith graves. In 1897, the Danish archaeologist Sophus Müller suggested that the capstones of the megalith graves had origin ally been positioned in this way. In 1979, J.P. Mohen initiated an experiment in Bougon, France, involving the lifting of a 32-tons copy of a capstone (fig. 15).The lifting was carried out using three levers, each operated by twenty men. By pushing timber under the stone, it was easily lifted one meter. During the same experiment, twenty men easily lifted the stone using a single lever. In 1994, in Ramioul in Belgium, the scaffold method was also used for placing a capston e on a newly built alleé couverte. In Cotswold’s Hill Quarry, England, J. Osenton built three dolmens in 1996-97. A five-ton capstone was lifted one meter by two persons, one using a 3.5-meter long lever, the other pushing timber underneath.Levers are thus very effective, as heavy loads may be lifted using small effort. According to the lever principle, Kl x L1 = K2 x L2, where L1 and L2 are the long and short arm (divided by the fulcrum) respectively, Kl is the force used for pulling, and K2 is the force, which in combination with L2 has an effect on the stone itself. If using a completely regular stone, like an over-sized brick, it will be merely half of the stone’s weight that is lifted, as its edge is resting on the support. However, as the stones are usually irregular, the lifted weight in the following calculations is estimated to be 60% of the total weight.At Cotswold Hill Quarry, the relation between effort and load was 1:100, hence, one man had to pull with a mere power of 30 kg in order to lift the heavy stone. At Bou­gon, each of the 60 persons had to pull with a force of 32 kilos, if the relation was 1:10, in order to lift the 32-tons block. A capstone in the Spanish passage grave Cueva de Menga weighs 180 metric tons. It could be lifted by 72 men each pulling 50 kg, if the relation was 1:30.It appears that capstones may be easily lifted using a scaffold. When the stones reached the level of the top of the uprights, they could be pulled in over the chamber. At the experiment at Ramioul, Poissonier and Collin used a method in spired by the transportation of stones in a quarry. In the ends of the round timber just under the stone were drilled holes, in which sticks were placed. When the sticks were turned, the stones could be rolled in position over the chamber (fig. 16 ). The use of Stone’s A-frame, which will be mentioned later, would have been very effective indeed, even when very large stones had to be moved from the scaffold onto the chamber.At Stonehenge, the large sarsen stones were erected 2400 BC towards the end of the late Stone Age (fig. 17). The lintels of the large circle weigh approximately seven tons and are positioned at 4.3 meters above the earth. In the middle of the circle is the “horse shoe” consisting of five thrilitons (a thriliton is a pair of uprights carrying a lintel). These lintels weigh up to 16.5 metric tons and are raised seven meters above ground level.In 1924, the engineer E.H. Stone suggested that the lintels had been pulled up an earth ramp that had been so large that it had a platform on top. Here the final adjustment of the lintel could take place using levers.In 1935, another – simpler – technique, the scaffold method, was suggested by colonel R.H. Cunnington. The engineer C.A. Gauld later developed his idea further. He advocated the use of a rather complicated scaffold, which completely surrounded the uprights (fig. 19).In 1991, the engineer P. Pavel carried out an experiment by Strakonice in the Czech Republic (fig. 20). A copy of two uprights in the Stonehenge circle had been erected, and a lintel was to be put in position. The height was 3.5 meters, and the lintel weighed five metric tons. The procedure was surprisingly simple. Using levers and ropes, the stone was pulled up a ramp made from two heavy stems. The pulling was done in 30-cm tugs, and behind the lintel was a“brake rod”, which was moved along to prevent th e stone from sliding down. The levers were of spruce, 4.5 m long and 25 cm in diameter. The ropes were 3 cm thick. The stone was pulled up in three days by ten men.In 1994, M. Whitby was carryin g out experiments near Stonehenge. They included the placin g of lintels using both ramp and scaffold. For this purpose, concrete copies of two uprights and a lintel had been made. The lintel weighed ten metric tons and had to be lifted seven meters. First, it was lifted using the scaffold method. As this went easily, and it was obvious that it could be easily lifted in place, the experiment was called off The scaffold was a simple one, which did not surround the uprights. The lintel was pulled up a metal ramp, which served as an earth ramp. On the surface, the ramp had three tracks of timber lengthwise, and 90 people pulled up the stone in three ho urs. T he pu llin g was don e usin g an A-frame, which works as anupright lever (fig. 21). E.H. Stone had suggested this method in 1924 when the uprights were erected (fig. 22). Whitby’s experiment had the special point that the timber on the ramp surface was separated at the top, so that it would tip with the stone when it reached the top.One or the other? A ramp or a scaffold? The huge disadvantage of the earth ramp is that it would have taken a very long time to both build it and remove it. It would be faster and easier to use Pavel’s wooden ramp, strengthened and supported by timber and then pull up the stone either using Pavel’s method or an A-frame. Finally, there is the scaffold method, which Whitby and Richards found very rewarding. However, this method seems too simple and undramatic as opposed to the ramps. At any rate, many scholars have become obsessed by the ramps and will not consider the scaffold as an alternative. The theories of how Egypt’s large pyramids were erected are a fine example of this.The Great Pyramid was build for the Pharaoh Cheops, who died around 2580 BC. It is an impressive monument, which was originally 146.5 meters high, with each side measuring 230 meters. It was built from 2.300.000 box-shaped stones, each weighing approximately 2.5 metric tons or less.How the Egyptian pyramids were built is still a matter of speculation. The many suggested methods can be divided into two groups: ramps or gradual raising using levers (the scaffold method). The ramp method is preferred by most, but the shape of the ramps remains a mystery (fig. 23). Ramps have been found next to some very small and unfinished pyramids, but they were less than seven meters high. These ramps were made from limestone rubble, sand, gypsum, and clay. It seems obvious that ramps may have been used for the building of small pyramids and for the lower parts of larger pyramids. However, in the case of the great pyramids, the ramps would gradually become very steep and very long, or both, when the pyramid rose upwards.In his book, “The Complete Pyramids” (1997), Mark Lehner, one of the leading pyramid scholars, strongly advocates the ramp theory. In 1996, he took part in the building of a 6-m high pyramid “to test some of the current theories of armchair pyramid builders and try out ancient theories”. The small pyramid was built using a ramp. The scaffold method was also tested for the raising of a stone weighing two metric tons. The experiment was unsuccessful and therefore dismissed. However, elementary mistakes were made, as for instance using boards stacked in layers as a substitute for heavy timber.In spite of this, there are in fact numerous advantages of lifting the stones step by step. For instance,several teams can work simultaneously on each step; the distance is shorter; there is no long return with an empty sledge; and huge ramps do not have to be built and removed again .When Herodotus visited The Great Pyramid around 440 BC, he was told that it had been built by lifting the stones step- by-step using special devices (mechania). This information was omitted in “The Complete Pyramids”.The method used for building a large pyramid could have been a combination of the two techniques. Ramps were used at first, until they became too large or steep or both, then stones were lifted step- by-step using levers. This change may well have taken place at a height of 50 meters, when 72% of the stone mass was already in place. Also, the use of ramps and scaffolds does not have to be an either/or. Perhaps both methods were used.The heavy bluestones at Stonehenge, each weighing between 3 and 4 metric tons, were quarried in antiquity in the Preseli Mountains in Wales. The 80 bluestones were transported more than 350 km across land and water. In 2000, a group of volunteers wanted to repeat this great achievement of the past by transporting a 3-ton stone along the same route. The project, called The Millenium Stone, was a total failure and had to be given up. The participants met too many obstacles on the way and had to use modern techniques; the stone was transported far shorter distances a day than expected; a crane had to be used for lifting the stone on to a vessel, which later sank in 17 meters of water. One important reason for the poor out come was not just the lack of technical skills, but also lack of planning, expertise, and motivation among the participants. These factors are indeed the prerequi site for a successful implementation, in the past as well as now.The experiments at Bougon, Cotswold, and Strakonice showed that a few people were able to lift the stones. However, in the antiquity this would have taken place at community events, which gathered huge crowds. This was certainly the case when dolmens were built in Indonesia in modern time. Here, the presence of many people gave prestige to the organizers, who in return demonstrated their wealth and hospitality by throwing large parties where the guests were lavishly entertained. For both organizers and participants these occasions offered the possibility of making or renewing agreements and alliances.One of the many reasons behind the erection of the megalith graves was its stabilizing effect on society. The megalith builders would have been highly motivated and very determined, as the balance of their social and spiritual universe depended on a successful completion of the work with the huge stones. The muscle power of hundreds of men is not enough; it also takes a foreman with ingenuity, coordination and determination (fig. 24). The foremen of the English archaeologist, C.L. Woolley, were good at moving large stones. Once, Woolley showed his foreman, the Arab Hamoudi, the large stone, measuring 21.5 x 4.3 x 4.2 meters, which during the first century AD was placed at seven meter’s height in the wall of Acropolis in Baalbek in Syria. “He sat in silence, looking at it for perhaps twenty minutes, and then rose to his feet.‘I must go away,᾿ he said,‘my head aches᾿; and as he went, I heard him murmur: ‘By Allah, what a foreman!᾽”In this context, Woolley mentions that at his time (1953), such a stone could not be lifted that high by machines, but that the people of the antiquity were able to do it because they lacked machines!Palle EriksenRingkøbing MuseumTranslated by Annette Lerche Trolle

Mečys Mačernis (1897–1968) taught elementary Mathematics and Didactics at the Republican Pedagogical Institute of Klaipėda during the years 1935–1939. He studied at universities of Berlin and Königsberg, during the period of time from 1926 to 1934 he worked as a head master of teachers’ seminary in Tauragė. In 1935–1935 M. Mačernis worked as a vice-director of the Republican Pedagogical Institute of Klaipėda and since 1937 he worked there in the position of a director. Even in 1926 for students of the Teachers’ seminary, he published a methodical textbook of teaching Arithmetics. During 1925–1928 he published 3 articles about mathematics didactics. During his activity in Klaipėda, M. Mačernis prepared and in 1940 published for students of the institute a methodical textbook of teaching Arithmetics and Geometry. In 1938–1939 he completed a work about pedagogy of the Middle Ages and a large, three volume work titled ‘Didactics’. Together withthe Institute, M.Mačernis left Klaipėda that was separated from Lithuania by Hitler and went to Panevėžys, and later to Vilnius that was returned back to Lithuania. When Lithuania was occupied by the Bolsheviks, M. Mačernis was dismissed from the director position. In 1941 he was arrested and deported to far inland Russia. After the World War II he worked as a teacher of Mathematics in the Karaganda region. When M. Mačernis returned to Lithuania after deportation, he worked as a teacher of Mathematics at school in Plungė. After the year 1940 M. Mačernis did not write any scientific pedagogical work. Methodical textbooks of teaching Mathematics written by M. Mačernis presented the teachers of Lithuania actual ideas of connections established between teaching and practice, internal and inter-subjective integration that were widely discussed in Western Europe of that time.

Ethnic Transformations on the Latvian Territory in the 20th Century and at the Beginning of the 21st CenturyThis paper presents demographic and ethnic transformations in the territory of Latvia. First, information is provided on the origins of the population of Latvian nationality. Then, ethnic composition of the population inhabiting the present-day Latvian territory at the end of the 19th century is characterised. The basis for the respective statistical analysis is constituted by the results of the Russian census of 1897. This census showed, side by side with the Latvian population, also important German, Russian, Jewish, and Polish minorities. The subsequent part of the paper is devoted to the ethnic situation in the interwar period. Here, the census carried out in 1935 is the main source of information. Essential demographic transformations took place during World War II. The paper accounts for the war losses, which in ethnic terms had a selective character. Latvian Jews were exterminated, while the remaining groups also suffered great losses. Then, the paper takes up the subject of the demographic-ethnic situation during the post-war Soviet occupation and the existence of the Latvian Soviet Socialist Republic. In this period, numerous migrants from the farther-off territories of the Soviet Union moved to Latvia, these Russian-speaking migrants being primarily of Russian nationality. This resulted in the essential shift in the ethnic composition of the population in Latvia. The effects are reflected in the data from the Soviet censuses of 1959 and 1989. The results of these censuses are subject to interpretation in the paper. The last part of the article is devoted to ethnic changes in the sovereign Latvian state. Statistical and substantive analysis was carried out using the census data of the year 2000, and the estimated data from the year 2014. The contemporary ethnic structure of the entire country and in individual provinces was established. Przemiany narodowościowe na ziemi łotewskiej w XX i na początku XXI wiekuW artykule przedstawiono przemiany demograficzno-etniczne na ziemi łotewskiej. We wstępie podano informacje o rodowodzie ludności narodowości łotewskiej. Następnie zaprezentowano i scharakteryzowano skład narodowościowy na współczesnym terytorium państwa łotewskiego w końcu XIX wieku. Podstawą analizy statystycznej były rezultaty spisu rosyjskiego z 1897 roku. Ujawnił on oprócz Łotyszy liczną mniejszość niemiecką, rosyjską, żydowską i polską. Kolejna część publikacji poświęcona jest sytuacji narodowościowej w okresie międzywojennym w niepodległym państwie łotewskim. Wykorzystano tu głównie spis przeprowadzony w 1935 roku. Poważne przeobrażenia demograficzne miały miejsce w latach II wojny światowej. Określono straty wojenne, które miały charakter selektywny w ujęciu narodowościowym. Przyniosły one eksterminację łotewskich Żydów oraz duże straty wśród pozostałych grup etnicznych. Dalsza część artykułu dotyczy sytuacji demograficzno-narodowościowej w okresie powojennej okupacji sowieckiej i istnienia Łotewskiej SRS. W tym czasie napłynęło na terytorium Łotwy wielu migrantów z głębi ZSRR. Była to ludność rosyjskojęzyczna, głównie narodowości rosyjskiej. Doprowadziło to do istotnej zmiany składu narodowościowego kraju. Odnotowały to spisy sowieckie z lat 1959 i 1989. Ich wyniki poddano interpretacji. Ostatnia część artykułu poświęcona jest zmianom narodowościowym zachodzącym już w suwerennym państwie łotewskim. Przeprowadzono analizę statystyczną i merytoryczną, korzystając z danych spisowych z 2000 roku oraz danych szacunkowych z 2014 roku. Określono współczesną strukturę narodowościową w skali całego kraju i wybranych prowincji.

The article considers the life and work of one of the poets of literature of the early twentieth century, Baybatyr Yerzhanuly, whose years of birth and death have not yet been fully specified and defined. Based on the available archival documents and reasonable information provided by the descendants of the poet, it was found that Baybatyr was born in 1897 in the former Kyzylzhar (now North Kazakhstan Region) and died in 1939. It was revealed that in 1935 the poet was arrested by the East Kazakhstan Military District (Military Commissariat of the regional administration), and an investigation was carried out on him. In a collection of literature of the early twentieth century, published in 1994, in an article about Baybatyr Yerzhanov, the scientist Zh. Tilepov, referring to the opinion of the journalist Seyten Sauytbekov, claims that Baybatyr was born in the South Kazakhstan region. It was found that this idea was presented a bit hastily. Archival data and manuscripts relating to the life and work of the writer are submitted to the public for the first time. For example, the original manuscript of his such books as “Get up, Kazakh!”, “Love for learning”, were found in the written letter based on the Arabic script “It is embraced with death” together with one chapter of the work “For the Collective Farm”, death certificate, questionnaire, completed by the poet’s handwriting during the investigation. Based on the collected material, the biography of the poet was supplemented. The article found and revealed that the poet had two sons and one daughter, as well as his wife Marjan, and that along with teaching and editorial work, he combined poetry, writing and journalistic skills.

The National Pedagogical Institute (NPI), established in 1935, ensured the progress of education in Lithuania. NPI being one of the newest schools of higher education in the period of independent Lithuania committed itself not only to practical activity, i.e. preparing high professional quality teachers for primary schools, but to development of scientific activity, too. The Ministry of Education invited an experienced pedagogue, famous in preparing future teachers and the author of texts designed for teachers’ professional development, Mečislovas (Mečys) Mačernis who would work alongside with other founders of NPI for implementation of its double mission. M. Mačernis was born in the vicinity of the town Seda (Gedrimai village in Alsėdžiai parish) in Lithuania’s region Samogitia. In 1919, M. Mačernis finished Vilnius Lithuanian Gymnasium, and in 1920–1923 he studied mathematics and physics at Berlin University and Königsberg University. Later M. Mačernis was a teacher and director at Tauragė Teacher Training School. In 1930, he obtained the right, which was equivalent to the right of higher school graduates, to work as a teacher at high school. M. Mačernis could teach introductory subjects into philosophy and pedagogy. In 1935, M. Mačernis was invited to work as an inspector at NPI, and in 1937 he became NPI Director. In the period from 1935 to 1940, which was full of changes, M. Mačernis taught general methods (didactics), methods of geography, history and nature studies, methods of calculus and geometry, mathematics. Alongside with teaching a number of subjects to future teachers, M. Mačernis was active in science and development of pedagogical process. It is testified by M. Mačernis texts, i.e. scientific articles in NPI research collection “Pedagogical Chronicle”, the journal “Works of Education”, the books “Didactics” (3 parts, 1939–1940), and “Methods of Calculus and Geometry” (1940). Since 1928 M. Mačernis, following his own idea that the aim of the school is to prepare citizens who will be able to carry out their duties, strived to prepare teachers in specialized high schools in the same way as in Germany. The vision of a new school model was based on the experience of Western world that he familiarized himself with during studies. That is why the course of didactics designed by M. Mačernis generalizes not only the achievements of Lithuanian schools but it also includes modern pedagogy. M. Mačernis promoted the idea of the exemplary school where future teachers could have school placement. In future teachers’ education M. Mačernis always highlighted the necessity to understand the history of the subject because “the process of finding the truth is the most important element in understanding the truth”. M. Mačernis invited the graduates to be creative, do not follow blindly textbooks but evaluate them critically. In teaching methods of mathematics M. Mačernis paid a lot of attention to overviewing the methods of teaching this subject. After psychological analysis of lesson components, he also created a new type of lesson, i.e. problem based lesson structure, which was new at that time in Lithuania. M. Mačernis thought that mathematics at school should be oriented towards its practical application insuring school mathematics integrity and relation to high school. Spreading of scientific ideas of modern didactics which were already popular in Western world but not in Lithuania could be considered as the biggest V. Mačernis’s input into education in Lithuania of the first half of the 20th century.

The Tallahatta Formation, Lisbon Formation, and Gosport Sand are the three lithostratigraphic units that make up the lower-to-middle Eocene Claiborne Group. In Alabama, these marine units are among the most fossiliferous in the state and a long history of scattered reports have attempted to document their fossil diversity. In this study, we examined 20931 elasmobranch and bony fish elements, including otoliths, derived from Claiborne Group units in Alabama and identified 115 unequivocal taxa. Among the taxa identified, one new species is described, Carcharhinus mancinae sp. nov., and Pseudabdounia gen. nov. is a new genus erected to include two species formerly placed within Abdounia Capatta, 1980. New taxonomic combinations proposed include Pseudabdounia claibornensis (White, 1956) gen. et comb. nov., Pseudabdounia recticona (Winkler, 1874) gen. et comb. nov., Physogaleus alabamensis (Leriche, 1942) comb. nov., and Eutrichiurides plicidens (Arambourg, 1952) comb. nov. We also report the first North American paleobiogeographic occurrences of Aturobatis aff. A. aquensis Adnet, 2006, Brachycarcharias atlasi (Arambourg, 1952), Eutrichiurides plicidens comb. nov., Galeorhinus louisi Adnet & Cappetta, 2008, Ginglymostoma maroccanum Noubhani & Cappetta, 1997, Gymnosarda sp., Mennerotodus sp., Rhizoprionodon ganntourensis (Arambourg, 1952), Stenoscyllium aff. S. priemi Noubhani & Cappetta, 1997, Trichiurus oshosunensis White, 1926, and the first North American occurrence for a fossil member of the Balistidae Risso, 1810. Our sample also included 26 taxa that represented first paleobiogeographic occurrences for Alabama, including Abdounia beaugei (Arambourg, 1935), Albula eppsi White, 1931, Ariosoma nonsector Nolf & Stringer, 2003, Anisotremus? sp., Anomotodon sp., Brachycarcharias twiggsensis (Case, 1981), Burnhamia daviesi (Woodward, 1889), Eoplinthicus yazooensis Capetta & Stringer, 2002, Galeorhinus ypresiensis (Casier, 1946), Gnathophis meridies (Frizzell & Lamber, 1962), Haemulon? obliquus (Müller, 1999), Hypolophodon sylvestris (White, 1931), Malacanthus? sulcatus (Koken, 1888), Meridiania cf. M. convexa Case, 1994, Palaeocybium proosti (Storms, 1897), Paraconger sector (Koken, 1888), Paralbula aff. P. marylandica Blake, 1940, Phyllodus toliapicus Agassiz, 1844, Propristis schweinfurthi Dames, 1883, Pycnodus sp., Pythonichthys colei (Müller, 1999), Scomberomorus stormsi (Leriche, 1905), Signata stenzeli Frizzell & Dante, 1965, and Signata nicoli Frizzell & Dante, 1965, and the first Paleogene occurrences in Alabama of a member of the Gobiidae Cuvier, 1816. A biostratigraphic analysis of our sample showed stratigraphic range extensions for several taxa, including the first Bartonian occurrences of Eoplinthicus yazooensis, Jacquhermania duponti (Winkler, 1876), Meridiania cf. M. convexa, Phyllodus toliapicus, and “Rhinobatos” bruxelliensis (Jaekel, 1894), range extensions into the late Ypresian and Bartonian for Tethylamna dunni Cappetta & Case, 2016 and Scoliodon conecuhensis Cappetta & Case, 2016, the first late Ypresian records of Galeorhinus louisi, the first Lutetian occurrence of Gymnosarda Gill, 1862, and a range extension for Fisherichthys aff. F. folmeri Weems, 1999 into the middle Bartonian. Larger biostratigraphic and evolutionary trends are also documented, such as the acquisition of serrations in Otodus spp., possible population increases for the Rhinopterinae Jordan & Evermann, 1896 and Carcharhiniformes Compagno, 1973 in the Bartonian, and the apparent diversification of the Tetraodontiformes Berg, 1940 during the same stage. This study helps better our understanding of early-to-middle Eocene elasmobranch and bony fish diversity, paleobiogeography, and biostratigraphy in the Gulf Coastal Plain of North America.

The emergence of diplomatic protocol service within the structure of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) of Estonia (1918–40) is a subject that has hitherto not been researched. This is illustrated by the fact that even the complete list of chiefs of protocol (chef du protocole) of the MFA of Estonia has been missing until now. The strengthening of Estonia’s statehood by its international recognition, the accreditation of foreign envoys, and the first state visits brought about the need for a thorough understanding of all nuances of diplomatic protocol and ceremonial. Nevertheless, the office of a separate chief of protocol was created in the structure of the MFA of Estonia only according to the new Foreign Service Act, decreed by the Head of State Konstantin Päts on 13 March 1936; i.e. more than 18 years after the declaration of Estonia’s independence. Prior to 1936, the functions of protocol officers were usually fulfilled by the head of the MFA’s administrative or political department. This article focuses on three core issues: 1) who were the chiefs of protocol? 2) their functions and how diplomatic protocol was regulated in the MFA; 3) the reason why a separate office of the chief of protocol was not created earlier than 1936. The key source for this research is the MFA collection in the Estonian National Archives (RA, ERA.957). There are no clear sources regarding the functions of the chief of protocol before 1922. The field was most probably shaped and shared by several officials, including the head of the political department Hermann Karl Hellat (1872–1953) and William Tomingas (1895–1972), the junior private secretary of Foreign Minister Jaan Tõnisson (1868–1941?). Everything connected to international practices was probably influenced by the most experienced diplomats of the young state, namely the members of Estonia’s foreign delegation, which had already been created in 1917. Another major influence was Foreign Minister Jaan Poska (1866–1920), who as a former mayor of Tallinn, the former governor of the autonomous Governorate of Estonia, and the head of Estonia’s delegation at the peace talks with Soviet Russia, had extensive experience in protocol-related matters. Hans Johannes (Johan) Ernst Markus (1884–1969) can be deemed the first chief of protocol to be mentioned in the hitherto known sources of the MFA. According to an MFA report to the Estonian government from July of 1922, Markus was the head of the MFA’s Western political department and performed the duties of ‘master of ceremonies’ as well. In January of 1923, Markus was appointed head of the MFA’s administrative department. He remained in this office until April of 1927, coordinating the state visits of the President of Latvia Jānis Čakste (February of 1924), the Secretary General of the League of Nations Eric Drummond (February of 1924), and the President of Finland Lauri Kristian Relander (May of 1925), as well as the state visits of Estonia’s Head of State, the presentation of credentials, and day-to-day work regarding diplomatic privileges and immunities. Since the chief of protocol was responsible for organising ceremonies connected to the Head of State (Riigivanem), Markus could be considered not only as a coordinator of the MFA’s protocol matters, but as the chief of state protocol. Markus certainly did not work alone. He could rely on the administrative department and basically the whole MFA in fulfilling his functions, while also counting on the support of the aide-de-camp to the Head of State. Nevertheless, it was Markus who laid the ’cornerstone’ for the best practices that could be systematised and used by his successors. In April of 1927, the functions of the chief of protocol were taken over by Johan Leppik (1894–1965), the former Envoy to Poland and Romania, and Chargé d’Affaires in Czechoslovakia. In August of 1927, Leppik was appointed head of the MFA’s political department. According to the MFA’s working arrangement, Leppik retained the functions of chef du protocole in his new office starting from January of 1928. Since the grand, first-ever state visit of a monarch to Estonia, by King Gustaf V of Sweden in June of 1929, and the visit of the President of Poland Ignacy Mościcki in August of 1930 (which were preceded by the state visits of Estonia’s Head of State to those countries) required extensive preparations, Leppik could rely on the work of his subordinate, the head of the political bureau and deputy chief of protocol Elmar-Johann Kirotar (1899–1985). In June of 1931, Leppik was succeeded by the director of the bureau of law Artur Haman (Tuldava) (1897–1942) in his office as chief of protocol. Haman (Tuldava) put great effort into systematising existing practices related to protocol (incl. Presentation of credentials, and receptions) into a comprehensive compendium, which has been preserved to this day. The efficient work of Kirotar and Tuldava was probably noted by Estonia’s leadership, since once the separaate office of the chief of protocol had been created within the structure of the MFA, the position was filled first by Kirotar (1936–9) and then by Tuldava (1939–40). The quest for stability was most probably connected to the strong presidential power that shaped Estonia’s political life in the latter half of the 1930s. The personal influence of the head of state became more important in filling high-ranking positions in the state structure. According to the Foreign Service Act adopted by Parliament (Riigikogu) on 30 May 1930, departmental directors were appointed by the Foreign Minister. The Foreign Service Act decreed by the Head of State on 13 March 1936 changed this procedure. According to the latter, departmental directors (incl. the chief of protocol) were appointed and dismissed by the Head of State (upon taking into consideration proposals from the Foreign Minister). There is no clear answer to the question of why there was no separate office of the chief of protocol in the 1920s, since these functions needed to be fulfilled anyway. This was most probably connected to budgetary restrictions i.e. the need to avoid all kinds of ’unnecessary’ expenses. In the 1930s, the director of the administrative department Jaan Mölder (1880–1942, in office 1935–6) and the head of the consular bureau August Koern (1900–89, in office 1936) also briefly fulfilled the functions of the chief of protocol. The latter was especially involved in systematising the rules and regulations of diplomatic practices. Like his predecessors and successors, he sent numerous inquiries to Estonia’s representations abroad to collect information on matters connected to privileges and immunities, decorations, preseance, organisation of state funerals, etc. According to sources at the Estonian National Archives, Estonia’s MFA collected information on international diplomatic practice everywhere that it was represented by its missions abroad. Already during the first years of Estonia’s independence, the MFA possessed the popular Guide to Diplomatic Practice by Sir Ernest Mason Satow (first issued in 1917) and several protocol-related compendiums from Finland, the United States of America, Great Britain, etc. It can be concluded that without a rich heritage of diplomatic practice of its own, Estonia was quickly able to successfully adapt to the international environment in matters of diplomatic protocol.