Suchergebnisse

This study is specifically concerned with the impact of cultural tourism on the valorisation of two African fortifications; Castelo São Jorge da Mina (Elmina Castle) in Elmina, Ghana and Casteel de Goede Hoop (Castle of Good Hope) in Cape Town, South Africa. The commodification of national and world heritage, primarily within the context of cultural tourism, is the process by which tangible and intangible heritage are transformed into cultural commodities to be bought, sold and profited from in the heritage and tourism industry. The perception, however, that these commodified heritage sites are contaminated, and less authentic, is based on an outmoded discourse. The South African government has placed a fair amount of focus on redressing highly emotive colonial or dissonant heritage sites with the intent of correcting misinterpreted Eurocentric histories or present non-represented pre-colonial history. The study is structured around addressing the issue of commodification and its impact on the understanding and interpretation of heritage both as an emotive commodity and as a means of providing economic benefit to a community. The literature review locates the research in Marx's theories on commodities together with Urry's tourist gaze. It furthermore includes an analysis on valorisation, with the focus on associative value, in the context of national and world heritage. Fortifications as fortified military architecture in an African context are considered; as is the European influence on African culture and fortifications as colonial structures. Elmina Castle, as a much-researched heritage site, is explored in detail. It includes a legislative analysis; the perspectives and interpretations of the two largest stakeholders groups, the Akan-speaking Fanti population and the African American Diaspora tourists is key to the analysis of the impact of commodification. A detailed history of Europeans on the Gold Coast, the development of Elmina Castle and the impact of trans-Atlantic slavery on the consumption of heritage is studied. The commodification of the Castle of Good Hope is written within the context of the prevailing South African heritage discourse. Much has been written on the commodification of Elmina Castle, while very little has been said about the Castle of Good Hope as a commodity. The prevailing authorised commodification of the Castle of Good Hope necessitated the analysis and comparison of the Castle with the selected comparative case and the study draws comparisons between the powerful emotive significance and contestations attached to Elmina and the contrast that this poses to the Castle of God Hope as a place of heritage significance despite the fact that it has been seen to symbolise the introduction of repressive European influence and control in South Africa. The research supports the notion that cultural tourism and events have impacted on the valorisation of cultural heritage and, in particular, the associative and emotive values. However, the cultural significance of the two African fortifications as important heritage sites are not at risk.

"The Free Sea offers a unique, single-volume analysis of incidents in American history that affected U.S. freedom of navigation at sea. The book spans more than 200 years, beginning in the Colonial era with the Quasi-War with France in 1798 and extending to contemporary Freedom of Navigation operations in the South China Sea. Through wars and numerous crises with North Korea, North Vietnam, Cambodia, Iran, Russia and China, freedom of navigation has been a persistent challenge for the United States, a nation reliant on open seas for economic prosperity, military security and global order"--

The aim of the research is to highlight the problem of the opposition of the Ottoman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire in the Central and Eastern regions of Europe and to reveal the position of the Czech szlachta. The research methodology is based on the principles of historicism, systematic, scientific, author's objectivity, based on historical sources and the chronological and problem principle, as well as on the use of general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special-historical (integrated method of analysis of sources, historical-comparative, historical-descriptive, historical-systemic, terminological analysis) methods. The scientific novelty is that for the first time in Ukrainian historical science an analysis of the role and position of the Czech szlachta concerning the problem of the Turkish threat, through the prism of rule in the Czech kingdom of the Jagiellonian dynasty, has been carried out. The Conclusions. At the end of the XVth century to the beginning of the XVIth century the international situation in the Central and Eastern regions of Europe was tense. The hostility continued between the leading monarchs of Europe. There was a direct Turkish threat to the Czech kingdom. The Papal state, the Polish kingdom and Moscow principality tried to resist the Turkish aggression. The created anti-Turkish alliance (France, Poland and the Pope of Rome) was little effective. Thus, the Hungarian kingdom, headed by King Louis II of Jagiellon, was forced to resist the Turkish Empire on its own actually. Under such circumstances, Louis II, being a Czech king, sought for support among the Czech classes. Taking into consideration the controversy between the Czech and Hungarian upper classes, it can be argued that the Czech szlachta chose a neutral, expectant position, and the Czech city estate at this stage was ignored and did not provide adequate military support to the king. During that period the cities in the Czech kingdom resisted the Czech szlachta and fought for their rights and privileges. Among the Hungarian estates there were disputes between magnates and szlachta, which greatly complicated the situation. The unsuccessful policy of the representatives of the Czech and Hungarian Jagiellon dynasty led to the loss of the support among the Czech lords, Hungarian magnates and the representatives of burghers. The culmination of the opposition was the Battle of Mohács (August 29, 1526). The Czech estates (upper classes) didn't try to give the military assistance to the King and concerned only about their own interests, which the Czech szlachta together with the Czech city upper class put above the state interest. ; The aim of the research is to highlight the problem of the opposition of the Ottoman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire in the Central and Eastern regions of Europe and to reveal the position of the Czech szlachta. The research methodology is based on the principles of historicism, systematic, scientific, author's objectivity, based on historical sources and the chronological and problem principle, as well as on the use of general scientific (analysis, synthesis, generalization) and special-historical (integrated method of analysis of sources, historical-comparative, historical-descriptive, historical-systemic, terminological analysis) methods. The scientific novelty is that for the first time in Ukrainian historical science an analysis of the role and position of the Czech szlachta concerning the problem of the Turkish threat, through the prism of rule in the Czech kingdom of the Jagiellonian dynasty, has been carried out. The Conclusions. At the end of the XVth century to the beginning of the XVIth century the international situation in the Central and Eastern regions of Europe was tense. The hostility continued between the leading monarchs of Europe. There was a direct Turkish threat to the Czech kingdom. The Papal state, the Polish kingdom and Moscow principality tried to resist the Turkish aggression. The created anti-Turkish alliance (France, Poland and the Pope of Rome) was little effective. Thus, the Hungarian kingdom, headed by King Louis II of Jagiellon, was forced to resist the Turkish Empire on its own actually. Under such circumstances, Louis II, being a Czech king, sought for support among the Czech classes. Taking into consideration the controversy between the Czech and Hungarian upper classes, it can be argued that the Czech szlachta chose a neutral, expectant position, and the Czech city estate at this stage was ignored and did not provide adequate military support to the king. During that period the cities in the Czech kingdom resisted the Czech szlachta and fought for their rights and privileges. Among the Hungarian estates there were disputes between magnates and szlachta, which greatly complicated the situation. The unsuccessful policy of the representatives of the Czech and Hungarian Jagiellon dynasty led to the loss of the support among the Czech lords, Hungarian magnates and the representatives of burghers. The culmination of the opposition was the Battle of Mohács (August 29, 1526). The Czech estates (upper classes) didn't try to give the military assistance to the King and concerned only about their own interests, which the Czech szlachta together with the Czech city upper class put above the state interest.

1 broadside. ; Reproduction of original in the British Library. ; "Given at our court at Hampton Court, the two and twentieth day of April, 1700, in the twelfth year of our reign." ; Pertains to: An Act for the further preventing the growth of popery.

Description based on: Year ending 30th June 1910. ; Mode of access: Internet.

В статье, основанной на архивных материалах, рассматривается история создания и начальный этап деятельности Продовольственной комиссии Военного Совета Ленинградского фронта. На сегодняшний день работа этой Комиссии не получила всестороннего освещения в исторической литературе. Авторы показывают, как в наиболее драматический период блокады Ленинграда зимой 1941/1942 гг. осуществлялось распределение скудных продовольственных запасов в осажденном вражескими войсками городе. В статье приводится персональный состав Продовольственной комиссии, в которую в момент ее создания в январе 1942 г. вошли: второй секретарь горкома партии А. А. Кузнецов, уполномоченный Государственного комитета обороны по продовольственному снабжению войск Ленинградского фронта и населения города Д. В. Павлов, председатель Ленинградского городского совета П. С. Попков и председатель Ленинградского областного совета Н. В. Соловьев. Комиссия получила право рассматривать все вопросы, связанные с увеличением расхода продовольствия как для гражданских и военных организаций в целом, так и для отдельных лиц. При этом Комиссия должна была исходить из лимита, установленного Военным Советом Ленинградского фронта. На протяжении 1942 г. в заседаниях Комиссии принимали участие секретарь Ленинградского горкома по торговле и промышленности П. Г. Лазутин, а также заместитель председателя Ленинградского городского совета и заведующий отделом торговли И. А. Андреенко. По мнению авторов статьи, деятельность Продовольственной комиссии в 1942 г. была направлена на поддержку тех социальных и профессиональных групп населения, от которых зависела судьба осажденного города: рабочих промышленных предприятий, руководителей заводов и фабрик. Одновременно Комиссия оказывала поддержку и узкому слою выдающихся ученых и деятелей культуры. ; In the article based on archival materials, it is considered the history of creation and the initial phase of functioning of the Food Commission of the Military Council of the Leningrad front. The work of the Commission has not received full coverage in the historical literature up to present day. The authors show how in the most dramatic period of the siege of Leningrad in the winter 1941/1942 the distribution of scarce food supplies in the besieged by enemy troops city was carried out. The article presents the personnel of the Food Commission, which at its inception in January 1942 included: the Second Secretary of the City Party Committee A. A. Kuznetsov; authorized representative of the State Defense Committee on the food supply of the Leningrad front and the city's population D.V Pavlov, the Chairman of the Leningrad City Council P. S. Popkov, and the Chairman of the Leningrad Regional Council N. V. Solovyov. The Commission received the right to deal with all issues related to the increase in the consumption of food for both civilian and military organizations as a whole, and individuals. At the same time, the Commission was to proceed from the limit set by the Military Council of the Leningrad front. Throughout 1942, the Commission meetings were attended by the Secretary for Trade and Industry of the Leningrad Party Council P. G. Lazutin, as well as Deputy Chairman of the Leningrad City Council and head of the Department of trade I. A. Andreenko. According to the authors, the activity of the Food Commission in 1942 was aimed at supporting the social and professional groups vitally important in the city's surviving; those whose work had great impact on the fate of the besieged city: industrial workers, managers of plants and factories. At the same time, the Commission gave support to a rather narrow layer of prominent scientists and cultural figures.

Includes index. ; Publisher varies. ; Report year begins in April. ; Mode of access: Internet.

As the Gulf war enters its seventh year, the combatants' vital oil installations are again a prime target, the author analyses this conflict in which neither party dares surrender military or economic advantage. A return to stalemate on the battlefront is viewed as a return to "normality" - and the war again becomes the world's most costly but least-reported conflict. (DÜI-Asd)

1 broadside. ; "Given at our court at Whitehall, the twelfth day of September 1690. In the second year of our reign." ; Reproduction of original in the Harvard University Library.