Characters.

"Of the King's Party" "Of

Synopsis.

The play begins where "2 Henry VI" left off, with the victorious Yorkists (Duke of York, Edward, Richard, Warwick, Montague [i.e. Salisbury] and Norfolk) pursuing Henry and Margaret from the battlefield in the wake of the First Battle of St Albans (1455). Upon reaching the parliamentary chambers in London, York seats himself in the throne, and a confrontation ensues between his supporters and Henry's. Threatened with violence by Warwick, who has brought part of his army with him, the King reaches an agreement with York which will allow him to remain king until his death, at which time the throne will permanently pass to the House of York and its descendants. Disgusted with this decision, which would disinherit the King's son, Prince Edward, the King's supporters, led by his wife, Margaret, abandon him, and Margaret declares war on the Yorkists, supported by Clifford, who is determined to exact revenge for the death of his father at the hands of York during the battle of St Albans.  Margaret attacks York's castle at Wakefield, and the Yorkists lose the ensuing battle (1460). During the conflict, Clifford murders York's twelve-year-old son, Rutland. Margaret and Clifford then capture and taunt York himself; forcing him to stand on a molehill, they give him a handkerchief covered with Rutland's blood to wipe his brow, and place a paper crown on his head, before stabbing him to death. After the battle, as Edward and Richard lament York's death, Warwick brings news that his own army has been defeated by Margaret's at the Second Battle of St Albans (1461), and the King has returned to London, where, under pressure from Margaret, he has revoked his agreement with York. However, George Plantagenet, Richard and Edward's brother, has vowed to join their cause, having been encouraged to do so by his sister, the Duchess of Burgundy. Additionally, Warwick has been joined in the conflict by his own younger brother, Montague.  The Yorkists regroup, and at the Battle of Towton (1461), Clifford is killed and the Yorkists are victorious. During the battle, Henry sits on a molehill and laments his problems. He observes a father who has killed his son, and a son who has killed his father, representing the horrors of the civil war. Following his victory, Edward is proclaimed king and the House of York is established on the English throne. George is proclaimed Duke of Clarence and Richard, Duke of Gloucester, although he complains to Edward that this is an ominous dukedom. King Edward and George then leave the court,

Sources.

Shakespeare's primary source for "3 Henry VI" was Edward Hall's "The Union of the Two Noble and Illustre Families of Lancaster and York" (1548). As with most of his chronicle histories, Shakespeare also consulted Raphael Holinshed's "Chronicles of England, Scotland and Ireland" (1577; 2nd edition 1587). Holinshed took much of his information on the Wars of the Roses from Hall, even to the point of reproducing large portions of text from Hall verbatim. However, there are sufficient differences between Hall and Holinshed to establish that Shakespeare consulted both.  For example, when Henry is urged by Clifford, Northumberland and Westmorland to engage the Yorkists in combat in the parliamentary chambers, he is reluctant, arguing that the Yorkists have greater support in London than the Lancastrians; "Know you not the city favours them,/And they have troops of soldiers at their beck" (1.1.67–68). Both Hall and Holinshed report that the Yorkists invaded the parliament house, but only Hall reports that Henry chose not to engage them because the majority of the people supported York's claim to the throne. Rutland's death scene (1.3) is also based on Hall rather than Holinshed. Although Clifford is reported as having murdered Rutland in both Hall and Holinshed, only in Hall is Rutland's tutor present, and only in Hall do Rutland and Clifford engage in a debate about revenge prior to the murder. The depiction of Edward's initial meeting with Lady Grey (3.2) is also based on Hall rather than Holinshed. For example, Hall is alone in reporting that Edward seemingly offered to make her his queen merely from motives of lust; Edward "affirming farther that if she would thereunto condescend [to sleep with him], she might so fortune of his paramour and concubine to be changed to his wife and lawful bedfellow." Later, Holinshed does not mention any instance in which George and Richard express their dissatisfaction with Edward's decision (depicted in the play in 4.1), or their questioning of Edward as to why he is favouring the relations of his wife over his own brothers. Such a scene occurs only in Hall, who writes that Clarence declared to Gloucester that, "We would make him know that we were all three one man's sons, of one mother and one lineage descended, which should be more preferred and promoted than strangers of his wife's blood [...] He will exalt or promote his cousin or ally, which little careth for the fall or confusion of his own line and lineage." A more general aspect unique to Hall is the prominence of revenge as a motive for much of the cruelty in the play. Revenge is cited many times by different characters as a guiding force behind their actions; Northumberland, Westmorland, Clifford, Richard, Edward and Warwick all declare at some point in the play that they are acting out of a desire for vengeance on their enemies. Revenge, however, plays little part in Holinshed, who hardly mentions the word, and never offers it as a major theme of the war.  On the other hand, some aspects of the play are unique to Holinshed rather than Hall. For example, both Hall and Holinshed represent Margaret and Clifford taunting York after the Battle of Wakefield (depicted in 1.4), but Hall makes no mention of a crown or a molehill, both of which are alluded to in Holinshed (although in the chronicle, the crown is made of sedges, not paper); "The duke was taken alive and in derision caused to stand upon a molehill, on whose head they put a garland instead of a crown, which they had fashioned and made of sedges or bulrushes." More evidence that Shakespeare used Holinshed is found in the scene is which Warwick is in France after joining the Lancastrians (3.3), and King Louis assigns his Admiral, Lord Bourbon, to aid Warwick in assembling an army. In Holinshed, the Admiral is referred to as "Lord Bourbon", as he is in the play (and as he was in reality), whereas in Hall the Admiral is erroneously called "Lord Burgundy". Another aspect of the play found only in Holinshed is Edward's offer of peace to Warwick prior to the Battle of Barnet; "Now Warwick, wilt thou ope the city gates,/Speak gentle words and humbly bend thy knee?/Call Edward king, and at his hands beg mercy,/And he shall pardon thee these outrages" (5.1.21–24). This offer from Edward is not reported in Hall, who makes no reference to a Yorkist attempt to

Date and text.

Date.

"The True Tragedie of Richard Duke of Yorke, and the death of good King Henrie the Sixt, with the Whole Contention betweene the two Houses Lancaster and Yorke" (referred to hereafter as "True Tragedy") was published in octavo in 1595 by the bookseller Thomas Millington and printed by Peter Short. It has been theorised that the "True Tragedy" is a reported text of a performance of "3 Henry VI", and if so, "3 Henry VI" was written by 1595 at the latest.  However, there is evidence that the play may have been written several years earlier and was on stage by September 1592. Robert Greene's pamphlet "A Groatsworth of Wit" (registered on 20 September 1592)

Text.

The 1595 octavo text of the "True Tragedy" was reprinted in quarto in 1600 by William White for Millington. It was reprinted in folio in 1619 as part of William Jaggard's False Folio, printed for Thomas Pavier. This text was printed together with a version of "2 Henry VI" which had been printed in quarto in 1594 under the title "The First part of the Contention betwixt the two famous Houses of Yorke and Lancaster, with the death of the good Duke Humphrey: And the banishment and death of the Duke of Suffolke, and the Tragicall end of the proud Cardinal of Winchester, with the notable Rebellion

Analysis and criticism.

Critical history.

Some critics argue that the "Henry VI" trilogy were the first ever plays to be based on recent English history, and as such, they deserve an elevated position in the canon, and a more central role in Shakespearean criticism. According to F.P. Wilson for example, "There is no certain evidence that any dramatist before the defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 dared to put upon the public stage a play based upon English history [...] so far as we know, Shakespeare was the first." However, not all critics agree with Wilson here. For example, Michael Taylor argues that there were at least thirty-nine history plays prior to 1592, including the two-part Christopher Marlowe play "Tamburlaine" (1587), Thomas Lodge's "The Wounds of Civil War" (1588), the anonymous "The Troublesome Reign of King John" (1588), "Edmund Ironside" (1590 – also anonymous), Robert Greene's "Selimus" (1591) and another anonymous play, "The True Tragedy of Richard III" (1591). Paola Pugliatti, however, argues that the case may be somewhere between Wilson and Taylor's argument; "Shakespeare may not have been the first to bring English history before the audience of a public playhouse, but he was certainly the first to treat it in the manner of a mature historian rather than in the manner of a worshipper of historical, political and religious myth."  Another issue often discussed amongst critics is the quality of the play. Along with "1 Henry VI", "3 Henry VI" has traditionally been seen as one of Shakespeare's weakest plays, with critics often citing the amount of violence as indicative of Shakespeare's artistic immaturity and inability to handle his chronicle sources, especially when compared to the more nuanced and far less violent second historical tetralogy ("Richard II", "1 Henry IV", "2 Henry IV" and "Henry V"). For example, critics such as E.M.W. Tillyard, Irving Ribner and A.P. Rossiter have all claimed that the play violates neoclassical precepts of drama, which dictate that violence and battle should never be shown mimetically on stage, but should always be reported diegetically in dialogue. This view was based on traditional notions of the distinction between high and low art, a distinction which was itself based partly upon Philip Sidney's "An Apology for Poetry" (1579). Based on the work of

Language.

Language has an extremely important role throughout the play, especially in terms of repetition. Several motifs, words and allusions occur time and again, serving to contrast characters and situations, and to foreground certain important themes. Perhaps the most obvious recurring linguistic motif in the play is that of state power as specifically represented by the crown and the throne. Both words occur multiple times throughout the play. For example, in Act 1, Scene 1 (which is set in parliament, with York spending most of the scene sitting on the throne), Warwick introduces the imagery, saying to York "Before I see thee seated in that throne,/Which now the House of Lancaster usurps,/I vow by heaven these eyes shall never close" (ll.22–24). He then introduces the word "crown"; "Resolve thee Richard, claim the English crown" (l.49). Immediately after York sits in the throne, Henry enters, exclaiming, "My lords, look where the sturdy rebel sits,/Even in the chair of state. Belike he means,/Backed by the power of Warwick, that false peer,/To aspire unto the crown and reign as king" (ll.50–54). During the subsequent debate over legitimacy, Exeter tells York "Thy father was a traitor to the crown" (l.80), to which York replies "Exeter, thou art a traitor to the crown" (l.81). Also during the debate, Henry asks York, "And shall I stand, and thou sit in my throne?" (l.85). York next asks Henry, "Will you we show our title to the crown? (l.103), to which Henry says "What title hast thou, traitor, to the crown?" (l.105). As the debate reaches an impasse, Richard urges York, "Father, tear the crown from the usurper's head" (l.115). Henry refuses to yield however, declaring "Think'st thou that I will leave my kingly throne?" (l.125). Subsequently, during the debate about the conflict between Henry Bolingbrook and Richard II, York asks Exeter if Richard's abdication "was prejudicial to his crown?"

Themes.

Revenge.

One of the most obvious themes in the play is revenge, which is cited numerous times by various different characters as the driving force for their actions. At different points in the play, Henry, Northumberland, Westmorland, Clifford, Richard, Edward and Warwick all cite a desire for revenge as a major factor in guiding their decisions, and revenge becomes a shared objective between both sides of the conflict, as each seek to redress the apparent wrongs perpetrated by the other; "In "3 Henry VI", we witness the final degradation of chivalry: this play contains some of the most horrific scenes in the canon as England's warlords sacrifice honour to a remorseless ethic of revenge."  The theme of revenge is introduced in the opening scene. Upon seeing York seated on the royal throne, Henry reminds his allies of their conflict with the Yorkists in an attempt to motivate them; "Earl of Northumberland, [York] slew thy father,/And thine Lord Clifford, and you both have vowed revenge/On him, his sons, his favourites and his friends" (1.1.54–56). Northumberland responds to this with "If I be not, heavens be revenged on me" (1.1.57). Later, after Henry has resigned the crown to the House of York and has been abandoned by Clifford, Westmorland and Northumberland, Exeter explains, "They seek revenge and therefore shall not yield" (1.1.191). Later, after Edward has been installed as king, Oxford refuses to acknowledge him, arguing "Call him my king, by whose injurious

Power and barbarism.

Despite the prevalence of revenge in the earlier parts of the play, it loses significance as a motivating factor as the nature of the conflict changes and develops into a pursuit of power, without recourse to past antagonisms. Revenge ceases to be the primary driving force for many of the characters, with lust for power taking over, and past conflicts rendered unimportant as each side desperately races for victory; "the revenge ethic has been outstripped by expedient violence with no aim other than the seizure of power."  For example, when Edward and Richard are urging York to break his oath to Henry, Edward says, "But for a kingdom, any oath may be broken;/I would break a thousand oaths to reign one year" (1.2.16–17), thus

Family conflict and family dissolution.

Just as revenge gives way to a desire for power, so too does national political conflict give way to a petty interfamily feud. For example, the play opens in the aftermath of the First Battle of St Albans (1455), and immediately dramatises the agreement between Henry and York that the House of Lancaster will cede the throne to the House of York upon Henry's death. However, in reality, this agreement was brought about not by the First Battle of St Albans but by the Battle of Northampton in 1460, which Shakespeare chose not to dramatise. Furthermore, the legal settlement whereby Henry agreed to relinquish the crown to the House of York upon his death came about due to lengthy parliamentary debate, not a personal agreement between Henry and York, as it is depicted in the play. As such, a wide-ranging political debate spanning five years, and involving virtually every peer in the country is telescoped in the play to an immediate agreement between two men, thus illustrating the personal nature of the conflict.  Another example of a character who also personalises the national conflict and turns it from a political struggle into a personal quest is Clifford, whose desire for revenge for the death of his father seems to be his only reason for fighting. Clifford seems unconcerned with Henry's ability to lead the country, and his desire for personal vengeance seems to outweigh any sense he has of aiding the House of Lancaster because he believes it to be the right thing to do. Similarly, Warwick's later actions in the play, as he himself acknowledges, have nothing to do with ensuring Henry remain king, but are based wholly on his personal feelings towards Edward; he is more concerned with bringing down the House of York than elevating the House of Lancaster. As such, "the York-Warwick alliance degenerates into an inter-family feud, even more petty in its tit-for-tat predictability than York and Lancaster's squabbles." Although the conflicts depicted in the play "are" national, they are treated by many of the characters as personal quarrels.  This concentration on the personal and familial aspects of the war leads to another major theme in the play; the dissolution of Family. Throughout the play, family ties are shown to be fragile and constantly under threat. The first breach of familial bonds comes when Henry agrees to pass the crown to the House of York after his death. This disinherits his son and renders the crown a piece of transferable property, rather than a symbol of dynastic heritage or monarchic succession. All of Henry's followers are aghast at this decision, none more so than Margaret, who exclaims, Ah, wretched man, would I had died a maid And never seen thee, never borne thee son, Seeing thou hast proved so unnatural a father. Hath he deserved to lose his birthright thus? Hadst thou but loved him half so well as I, Or felt that pain which I did for him once, Or nourished him as I did with my blood, Thou wouldst have left thy dearest heart-blood there, Rather than have made that savage Duke thine heir And disinherited thine only son. Margaret is not alone in her efforts to convince Henry that his decision is wrong. Clifford also attempts to persuade him, arguing that fathers who do not pass on their successes to their sons are unnatural; Ambitious York, did level at thy crown, Thou smiling, while he knit his angry brows. He but a duke would have his son a king And raise his issue like a loving sire, Thou being a king, blessed with a goodly son Didst yield consent to disinherit him, Which argued thee a most unloving

Performance.

After the original 1592 performances, the complete text of "3 Henry VI" seems to have been very rarely acted. The first definite performance in England after Shakespeare's day did not occur until 1906, when F. R. Benson presented the play at the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre in a production of Shakespeare's two tetralogies, performed over eight nights. As far as can be ascertained, this was not only the first performance of the octology, but was also the first definite performance of both the tetralogy and the trilogy. Benson himself played Henry and his wife, Constance Benson, played Margaret.  In 1952, Douglas Seale directed a production of "3 Henry VI" at the Birmingham Repertory Theatre, following a successful production of "2 Henry VI" in 1951. "1 Henry VI" would follow in 1953. All three plays starred Paul Daneman as Henry and Rosalind Boxall as Margaret, with "3 Henry VI" featuring Alan Bridges as Edward and Edgar Wreford as Richard. Although little was removed from the text, it did end differently from the written play. After Edward has spoken his last lines, everyone leaves the stage except Richard, who walks towards the throne, then turns and looks out to the audience, speaking the first thirty lines of his opening speech from "Richard III" (from "Now is the winter of our discontent" to "I am determin'd to prove a villain"), at which point the curtain falls. Additionally, in this production, Boxall as Margaret fully participated in the Battle of Tewkesbury, which was considered a bold move at the time. A production which made much of its unedited status came in 1977, at the Royal Shakespeare Theatre, where Terry Hands presented all three "Henry VI" plays with Alan Howard as Henry and Helen Mirren as Margaret. Although the production was only moderately successful at the box office, it was critically lauded at the time for Alan Howard's unique portrayal of Henry. Howard adopted historical details concerning the real Henry's madness into his performance, presenting the character as constantly on the brink of a mental and emotional breakdown. Possibly as a reaction to a recent adaptation of the trilogy under the general title "Wars of the Roses", which was strongly political, Hands attempted to ensure his own production was entirely apolitical; ""Wars of the Roses" was a study in power politics: its central image was the conference table, and Warwick, the scheming king-maker, was the central figure. But that's not Shakespeare. Shakespeare goes far beyond politics. Politics is a very shallow science." Aside from Howard and Mirren, the production starred Alfred Lynch as Edward and Anton Lesser as Richard.  In 1994, Katie Mitchell directed the play as a stand-alone piece for the Royal Shakespeare Company (RSC) at The Other Place theatre in Stratford, under the title "Henry VI: The Battle for the Throne". Starring Jonathan Firth as Henry, Ruth Mitchell as Margaret, Tom Smith as Richard and Lloyd Owen as Edward, the play added dialogue (primarily anti-war material) from "Gorboduc", "Richard II", "2 Henry VI" and "Richard III". Mitchell cut all on-stage violence, resulting in York, Rutland, Prince Edward and Henry all being killed off-stage. The introduction of the head of Somerset was also removed, with the play beginning instead at line 25, "This is the palace of the fearful king." Also removed was much of Margaret's speech to rouse her army prior to Tewkesbury.  Under the direction of Michael Boyd, the play was presented at the Swan Theatre in Stratford in 2000, with David Oyelowo as Henry, Fiona Bell as Margaret, Tom Beard as Edward and Aidan McArdle as Richard. The play was presented with the other five history plays ("Richard II", "1

Adaptations.

Theatrical.

Evidence for the first adaptation of "3 Henry VI" is found during the Restoration, when, in 1681, John Crowne created a two-part play entitled "Henry the Sixth, The First Part" and "The Misery of Civil War". "Henry" comprised Acts 1–3 of "2 Henry VI" focusing on the death of Gloucester, "Misery" adapted the last two acts of "2 Henry VI" and much of "3 Henry VI". Writing at the time of Popish Plot, Crowne, who was a devout royalist, used his adaptation to warn about the danger of allowing England to descend into another civil war, which would be the case should the Whig party rise to power. Changes to the text include a new, albeit silent scene just prior to the Battle of Wakefield where York embraces Rutland before heading out to fight; an extension of the courtship between Edward and Lady Grey, and the edition of two subplots; one concerning a mistress of Edward's whom he accidentally kills in battle (an allusion to Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher's "Philaster"), the other involving an attempt by Warwick to seduce Lady Grey after her husband's death at the Second Battle of St. Albans (this is later used as a rationale for why Warwick turns against Edward). Also worth noting is that the role of Margaret in "3 Henry VI" was removed almost entirely, reducing her to two scenes; the death of York and the death of Prince Edward.  "3 Henry VI" was also partly incorporated into Colley Cibber's "The Tragical History of King Richard the Third, containing the Distresses and Death of King Henry the Sixth" (1699), one of the most successful Shakespearean adaptations of all time. The play was half Shakespeare, half new material. "3 Henry VI" was used as the source for Act 1, which dramatised Henry's lamentation about the burdens of Kingship (2.5), the battle of Tewkesbury (Act 5 – although Margaret's speech in Act 5, Scene 1 was replaced with Henry V's "once more unto the breach" speech from "Henry V" and is spoken by Warwick) and Richard's murder of Henry in the tower (5.6). Richard's soliloquy in Act 2 of "Tragical History" was also based upon his soliloquy in

Film.

Although "3 Henry VI" itself has never been adapted directly for the cinema, extracts from it have been used in many of the cinematic adaptations of "Richard III".  The first such adaptation was 1911 twenty-two-minute silent version of "Richard III", directed by and starring F.R. Benson. Filmed as part of a series intended by Benson to promote the Shakespeare Memorial Theatre at Stratford, the piece was pure filmed theatre, with each scene shot on-stage in a single take by an unmoving camera. Each single shot scene is prefaced by a scene-setting intertitle and a brief quotation from the text. Of thirteen scenes in total, the first two are taken from "3 Henry VI"; the murder of Prince Edward and the banishment of Queen Margaret (Act 5, Scene 5) and Richard's murder of Henry in the Tower (Act 5, Scene 6). Similarly, the 1912 American adaptation, directed by James Keane and André Calmettes, and starring Frederick Warde as Richard, opened with the same two scenes; the murder of Prince Edward and the murder of Henry VI.  The play was also used in one of the earliest sound films; the 1929 John G. Adolfi movie "The Show of Shows"; a revue-style production featuring extracts from numerous plays, musicals and novels. Richard's soliloquy from Act 3, Scene 2 was used in the film, recited by John Barrymore

Television.

The first television adaptation of the play was in 1960 when the BBC produced a serial entitled "An Age of Kings". The show comprised fifteen sixty- and seventy-five-minute episodes which adapted all eight of Shakespeare's sequential history plays. Directed by Michael Hayes and produced by Peter Dews, with a script by Eric Crozier, the production featured Terry Scully as Henry, Mary Morris as Margaret, Julian Glover as Edward and Paul Daneman as Richard. The twelfth episode, covers Acts 1, 2 and Act 3, Scenes 1 and 2, concluding with Richard's soliloquy wherein he vows to attain the crown. The thirteenth episode,, presents everything from Act 3, Scene 3 onwards, beginning with Margaret's visit to Louis XI in France. With each episode running one hour, a great deal of text was necessarily removed, but aside from truncation, only minor alterations were made to the original. For example, in "The Morning's War", the character of Edmund, Earl of Rutland is played by an adult actor, whereas in the text, he is a child and Margaret is present during the murder of Rutland, and we see her wipe his blood on the handkerschief which she later gives to York. Additionally, Richard fights and kills Clifford during the Battle of Towton. In the text, they fight, but Clifford flees and is mortally wounded off-stage when hit by an arrow. In "The Sun in Splendour", Edward is rescued from his imprisonment by Richard and Lord Stafford, whereas in the play, he is rescued by Richard, Lord Hastings and William Stanley. Also, the end of the episode differs slightly from the end of the play. After Edward expresses his wish that all conflict has ceased, a large celebration ensues. As the credits role, Richard and George stand to one side, and George almost slips into a barrel of wine, only to be saved by Richard. As George walks away, Richard thinks to himself and then smiles deviously at the camera.  In 1965, BBC 1 broadcast all three plays from John Barton and Peter Hall's "The Wars of the Roses" trilogy ("Henry VI", "The Rise of Edward IV" and "Richard III") with David Warner as Henry and Peggy Ashcroft as Margaret. Directed for television by Robin Midgley and Michael Hayes, the plays were presented as more than simply filmed theatre, with the core idea being "to recreate theatre production in televisual terms – not merely to observe it, but to get to the

Radio.

In 1923, extracts from all three "Henry VI" plays were broadcast on BBC Radio, performed by the Cardiff Station Repertory Company as the third episode of a series of programs showcasing Shakespeare's plays, entitled "Shakespeare Night". In 1947, BBC Third Programme aired a one-hundred-and-fifty-minute adaptation of the trilogy as part of their "Shakespeare's Historical Plays" series, a six-part adaptation of the eight sequential history plays, with linked casting. Adapted by Maurice Roy Ridley, "King Henry VI" starred John Byron as Henry, Gladys Young as Margaret, Francis de Wolff as York and Stephen Murray as Richard. In 1952, Third Programme aired an adaptation of the tetralogy by Peter Watts and John Dover Wilson under the general name "The Wars of the Roses". The tetralogy was adapted into a trilogy but in an unusual way. "1 Henry VI" was simply removed, so the trilogy contained only "2 Henry VI", "3 Henry VI" and "Richard III". The reason for this was explained by Dover Wilson, who argued that "1 Henry VI" is "patchwork in which Shakespeare collaborated with inferior dramatists." The adaptation starred Valentine

Manga.

Aya Kanno's Japanese manga comic "Requiem of the Rose King"

References.

Citations.

All references to "Henry VI, Part 3", unless otherwise specified, are taken from the

Henry VI, Part 3 (often written as 3 Henry VI) is a history play by William Shakespeare believed to have been written in 1591 and set during the lifetime of King Henry VI of England. Whereas "1 Henry VI" deals with the and the political machinations leading up to the Wars of the Roses and "2 Henry VI" focuses on the King's inability to quell the bickering of his nobles, and the inevitability of armed conflict, "3 Henry VI" deals primarily with the horrors of that conflict, with the once stable nation thrown into chaos and barbarism as families break down and moral codes are subverted in the pursuit of revenge and power.

Jindřich VI. (3. část) je historická hra Williama Shakespeara napsaná zřejmě v roce 1591. Hra se odehrává v době vlády anglického krále Jindřicha VI.


Etymology.

The noun "Targum" is derived from the early semitic quadriliteral root "trgm", and the Akkadian term "targummanu" refers to "translator, interpreter". It occurs in the Hebrew Bible in Ezra 4:7 "... and the writing of the letter was written in the Syrian tongue and interpreted ("tirgam") in the Syrian tongue." Besides denoting the translations of the Bible, the term Targum also denote the oral rendering of Bible lections in synagogue, while the translator of the Bible was simply called "hammeturgem" (he who translates). Other than the meaning "translate" the verb "Tirgem" also means "to explain". The word "Targum" refers to "translation" and argumentation or "explanation".

Two major targumim.

The two most important targumim for liturgical purposes are: These two targumim are mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud as "targum dilan" ("our Targum"), giving them official status. In the synagogues of talmudic times, Targum Onkelos was read alternately with the Torah, verse by verse, and Targum Jonathan was read alternately with the selection from Nevi'im (i.e., the Haftarah). This custom continues today in Yemenite Jewish synagogues. The Yemenite Jews are the only Jewish community to continue the use of Targum as liturgical text, as well as to preserve a living tradition of pronunciation for the Aramaic of the targumim (according to a Babylonian dialect).  Besides its public function in the synagogue, the Babylonian Talmud also mentions "targum" in the context of a personal study requirement: "A person should always review his portions of scripture along with the community, reading the scripture twice and the "targum" once" (Berakhot 8a–b). This too refers to Targum Onkelos on the public Torah reading and to Targum Jonathan on the haftarot from Nevi'im.  Medieval biblical manuscripts of the Tiberian mesorah sometimes contain the Hebrew text interpolated, verse-by-verse, with the "targumim". This scribal practice has its roots both in the public reading of the Targum and in the private study requirement.  The two "official" "targumim" are considered eastern (Babylonian). Nevertheless, scholars believe they too originated in the Land of Israel because of a strong linguistic substratum of Western Aramaic. Though these "targumim" were later "orientalised", the substratum belying their origins still remains.  When most Jewish communities had ceased speaking Aramaic, in the 10th century CE, the public reading of Targum along with the Torah and Haftarah was abandoned in most communities, Yemen being a well-known exception.  The private study requirement to review the Targum was never entirely relaxed, even when Jewish communities had largely ceased speaking Aramaic, and the Targum never ceased to be a major source for Jewish exegesis. For instance, it serves as a major source in the Torah commentary of Shlomo Yitzhaki, "Rashi", and has always been the standard fare for Ashkenazi (French, central European, and German) Jews onward.  For these reasons, Jewish editions of the Tanakh which include commentaries still almost always print the Targum alongside the text, in all Jewish communities. Nevertheless, later halakhic authorities argued that the requirement to privately review the "targum" might also be met by reading a translation in the current vernacular in place of the official Targum, or else by studying an important commentary containing midrashic interpretation (especially that of Rashi).

Targum Ketuvim.

The Talmud explicitly states that no official "targumim" were composed besides these two on Torah and Nevi'im alone, and that there is no official "targum" to Ketuvim ("The Writings"). The Talmud (Megilah 3a) states The Targum of the Pentateuch was composed by Onkelos the proselyte from the mouths of R. Eleazar and R. Joshua. The Targum of the Prophets was composed by Jonathan ben Uzziel under the guidance of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (Jonathan b. Uzziel was a disciple of Hillel, so he had traditions handed down from them-Maharsha), and the land of Israel [thereupon] quaked over an area of four hundred parasangs by four hundred parasangs, and a Bath Kol (heavenly voice) came forth and exclaimed, Who is this that has revealed My secrets to mankind? Jonathan b. Uzziel thereupon arose and said, It is I who have revealed Thy secrets to mankind. It is fully known to Thee that I have not done this for my own honour or for the honour of my father's house, but for Thy honour l have done it, that dissension may not increase in Israel. He further sought to reveal [by] a targum [the inner meaning] of the Hagiographa, but a Bath Kol went forth and said, Enough! What was the reason? Because the date of the Messiah is foretold in it". [A possible reference to the end of the book of Daniel.] But did Onkelos the proselyte compose the targum to the Pentateuch? Has not R. Ika said, in the name of R. Hananel who had it from Rab: What is meant by the text, Neh. VIII,8 "And they read in the book, in the law of God, with an interpretation. and they gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading? And they read in the book, in the law of God: this indicates the [Hebrew] text; with an interpretation: this indicates the targum..." (which shows that the targum dates back to the time of Ezra).  Nevertheless, most books of Ketuvim (with the exceptions of Daniel and Ezra-Nehemiah, which both contain Aramaic portions) have "targumim", whose origin is mostly western (Land of Israel) rather than eastern (Babylonia). But for lack of a fixed place in the liturgy, they were poorly preserved and less well known. From Palestine, the tradition of "targum" to Ketuvim made its way to Italy, and from there to medieval Ashkenaz and Sepharad. The targumim of Psalms, Proverbs, and Job are generally treated as a unit, as are the targumim of the five scrolls (Esther has a longer "Second Targum" as well.) The targum of Chronicles is quite late, possibly medieval, and is attributed to a Rabbi Joseph.

Other Targumim on the Torah.

There are also a variety of western "targumim" on the Torah, each of which was traditionally called "Targum Yerushalmi" ("Jerusalem Targum"), and written in Western Aramaic. An important one of these was mistakenly labeled "Targum Jonathan" in later printed versions (though all medieval authorities refer to it by its correct name). The error crept in because of an abbreviation: the printer interpreted the abbreviation "T Y" (ת"י) to stand for "Targum Yonathan" (תרגום יונתן) instead of the correct "Targum Yerushalmi" (תרגום ירושלמי). Scholars refer to this "targum" as Targum Pseudo-Jonathan. To attribute this "targum" to Jonathan ben Uzziel flatly contradicts the talmudic tradition (Megillah 3a), which quite clearly attributes the "targum" to Nevi'im "alone" to him, while stating that there is "no" official "targum" to Ketuvim. In the same printed versions, a similar fragment "targum" is correctly labeled as "Targum Yerushalmi".  The Western Targumim on the Torah, or Palestinian Targumim as they are also called, consist of three manuscript groups: Targum Neofiti I, Fragment Targums, and Cairo Geniza Fragment Targums.  Of these Targum Neofiti I is by far the largest. It consist of 450 folios covering all books of the Pentateuch, with only a few damaged verses. The history of the manuscript begins 1587 when the censor Andrea de Monte (d. 1587) bequeathed it to Ugo Boncompagni—which presents an oddity, since Boncompagni, better known as Pope Gregory XIII, died in 1585. The route of transmission may instead be by a certain "Giovan Paolo Eustachio romano neophito." Before this de Monte had censored it by deleting most references to idolatry. In 1602 Boncompagni's estate gave it to the Collegium Ecclesiasticum Adolescentium Neophytorum (or Pia Domus Neophytorum, a college for converts from Judaism and Islam) until 1886, when the Vatican bought it along with other manuscripts when the Collegium closed (which is the reason for the manuscripts name and its designation). Unfortunately, it was then mistitled as a manuscript of Targum Onkelos until 1949, when Alejandro Díez Macho noticed that it differed significantly from Targum Onkelos. It was translated and published during 1968–79, and has since been considered the most important of the Palestinian Targumim, as it is by far the most complete and, apparently, the earliest as well.  The Fragment Targums (formerly known as Targum Yerushalmi II) consist of many fragments that have been divided into ten manuscripts. Of these P, V and L were first published in 1899 by M Ginsburger, A, B, C, D, F and G in 1930 by P Kahle and E in 1955 by A Díez Macho. Unfortunately, these manuscripts are all too fragmented to confirm what their purpose were, but they seem to be either the remains of a single complete targum or short variant readings of another targum. As a group, they often share theological views and with Targum Neofiti, which has led to the belief that they could be variant readings of that targum.  The Cairo Genizah Fragment Targums originate from the Ben-Ezra Synagogues genizah in Cairo. They share similarities with The Fragment Targums in that they consist of many fragmented manuscripts that have been collected in one targum-group. The manuscripts A and E are the oldest among the Palestinian Targum and have been dated to around the seventh century. Manuscripts C, E, H and Z contain only passages from Genesis, A from Exodus while MS B contain verses from both as well as from Deuteronomium.  The Samaritan community has their own Targum to their text of the Torah. Other Targumim were also discovered among the Dead Sea Scrolls.

Peshitta.

The Peshitta is the traditional Bible of Syriac-speaking Christians (who speak several different dialects of Aramaic). The translation of the Peshitta is usually thought to be between 1 and 300 CE.

References.

Tadmor, H., 1991. "On the role of Aramaic in the Assyrian empire", in M. Mori, H. Ogawa and M. Yoshikawa (eds.), Near Eastern Studies Dedicated to H.I.H. Prince Takahito Mikasa on the Occasion of his Seventy-Fifth Birthday, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 419–426

The targumim (singular targum, ; interpretation, translation, version) were originally spoken translations of the Jewish scriptures (also called the Tanakh) that a "meturgeman" (professional interpreter) would give in the common language of the listeners when that was not Hebrew. This had become necessary near the end of the 1st century BCE, as the common language was Aramaic and Hebrew was used for little more than schooling and worship. The "meturgeman" frequently expanded his translation with paraphrases, explanations and examples so that it became a kind of sermon.

Targum (, „překlad“) je označení pro aramejský převod hebrejského textu Bible. Nezbytnost používání targumu se objevila v době po zničení jeruzalémského Chrámu v roce 586 př. n. l. a odvedení židovského obyvatelstva do babylonského exilu, kde byla aramejština jazykem každodenního používání. Po návratu ze zajetí měli mnozí židé problém s porozuměním hebrejskému textu, a proto bylo knězem Ezdrášem (Ezrou) při předčítání Tóry zavedeno, že levité „četli z knihy Božího zákona po oddílech a vykládali smysl, aby lid rozuměl tomu, co četli“. Původně při této praktice stál vedle toho, kdo četl stanovený oddíl hebrejského textu Tóry, ten, kdo ho překládal do aramejštiny a zároveň vysvětloval. Později začaly vznikat překlady v písemné formě a týkaly se nejen textu Pěti knih Mojžíšových. Babylónský talmud se např. zmiňuje o targumu ke knize Job (Šabat 115a). K význačným targumům, které jsou používány i v současné době, patří Targum Onkelos a Targum Jonatan.


History.

Self-portraits.

In 1839, Robert Cornelius, an American pioneer in photography, produced a daguerreotype of himself which ended up as one of the first photographs of a person. Because the process was slow he was able to uncover the lens, run into the shot for a minute or more, and then replace the lens cap. He recorded on the back "The first light picture ever taken. 1839." A copy of his "first selfie" graces his tombstone at Laurel Hill Cemetery in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  In 1900, the debut of the portable Kodak Brownie box camera led to photographic self-portraiture becoming a more widespread technique. The method was usually by mirror and stabilizing the camera either on a nearby object or on a tripod while framing via a viewfinder at the top of the box. Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia, at the age of 13, was one of the first teenagers to take her own picture using a mirror to send to a friend in 1914. In the letter that accompanied the photograph, she wrote, "I took this picture of myself looking at the mirror. It was very hard as my hands were trembling."  During the 1970s, photographic self-portraiture flourished when affordable instant cameras birthed a new medium of self-expression, capturing uncharacteristically personal insight into otherwise conservative individuals and allowing amateurs to learn photography with immediate results. This practice transitioned naturally across to digital cameras as they supplanted film cameras around the turn of the millennium.

Japanese selfie culture.

The modern selfie has origins in Japanese kawaii (cute) culture, which involves an obsession with beautifying self-representation in photographic forms, particularly among females. By the 1990s, self-photography developed into a major preoccupation among Japanese schoolgirls, who took photos with friends and exchanged copies that could be pasted into kawaii albums. This inspired a young photographer, Hiromix (Hiromi Toshikawa), to publish a photo diary album called "Seventeen Girl Days", which included a number of self-posing photos. One of these was a pioneering selfie that was shot while holding the camera in front of herself. She rose to fame in Japan when her album received recognition from camera manufacturer Canon in 1995.  The 1983 Minolta Disc-7 camera had a convex mirror on its front to allow the composition of self-portraits, and its packaging showed the camera mounted on a stick while used for such a purpose. A "telescopic extender" for compact handheld cameras was patented by Ueda Hiroshi and Mima Yujiro in 1983, and a selfie stick was featured in a 1995 book of "101 Un-Useless Japanese Inventions". While dismissed as a "useless invention" at the time, the selfie stick later gained global popularity in the early 21st century.  The digital selfie originates from the purikura (Japanese shorthand for "print club"), which are Japanese photo sticker booths, introduced by the Japanese video game arcade industry in the mid-1990s. It was conceived in 1994 by Sasaki Miho, inspired by the popularity of girl photo culture and photo stickers in 1990s Japan. She worked for a game company, Atlus, where she suggested the idea, but it was initially rejected by her male bosses. Atlus eventually decided to pursue Miho's idea, and developed it with the help of a leading Japanese video game company, Sega, which later became the owner of Atlus. Sega and Atlus introduced the Print Club (Purinto Kurabu), the first purikura, in February 1995, initially at game arcades, before expanding to other popular culture locations such as fast food shops, train stations, karaoke establishments, and bowling alleys. The success of the original Sega-Atlus machine led to other Japanese arcade game companies producing their own purikura, including SNK's Neo Print in 1996 and Konami's Puri Puri Campus (Print Print Campus) in 1997.  Purikura produced what would later be called selfies. A purikura is essentially a cross between a traditional license/passport photo booth and an arcade video game, with a computer that is connected to a colour video camera and colour printer, and which allows the manipulation of digital images. It involves users posing in front of a camera within the compact booth, having their images taken, and then printing the photos with various effects designed to look kawaii. It presents a series of choices, such as desired backdrops, borders, insertable decorations, icons, text writing options, hair extensions, twinkling diamond tiaras, tenderized light effects, and predesigned decorative margins. Purikura became a popular form of entertainment among youths in Japan, and then across East Asia, in the 1990s. These photographic filters were similar to the Snapchat filters that later appeared in the 2010s. Photographic features in purikura were later adopted by smartphone apps such as Instagram and Snapchat, including scribbling graffiti or typing text over selfies, adding features that beautify the image, and photo editing options such as cat whiskers or bunny ears.  To capitalize on the purikura phenomenon in East Asia, Japanese mobile phones began including a front-facing camera, which facilitated the creation of selfies. The first front-facing camera phone was the Kyocera Visual Phone VP-210, released in Japan in May 1999. It was called a "mobile videophone" at the time. It stored up to 20 JPEG images, which could be sent over e-mail, or the phone could send up to two images per second over Japan's Personal Handy-phone System (PHS) wireless cellular network. This led to a transition in Japanese selfie culture from purikura to mobile phones.

International popularization.

Outside of East Asia, the concept of uploading group self-taken photographs to the Internet, albeit with a disposable camera instead of a smartphone, dates back to a webpage created by Australians in September 2001, including photos taken in the late 1990s (captured by the Internet Archive in April 2004).  On 13 September 2002, the first known use of the word "selfie" in any paper or electronic medium appeared in an Australian internet forum – Karl Kruszelnicki's 'Dr Karl Self-Serve Science Forum' – in a post by Nathan Hope. Although Hope later dismissed the notion that he coined the term, describing it as "something that was just common slang at the time, used to describe a picture of yourself", he wrote the following: ""Um, drunk at a mates 21st, I tripped ofer [sic] and landed lip first (with front teeth coming a very close second) on a set of steps. I had a hole about 1cm long right through my bottom lip. And sorry about the focus, it was a selfie.""  The Sony Ericsson Z1010 mobile phone, released in late 2003, introduced to Western markets the concept of a front-facing camera, which could be used for selfies and video calls. These cameras became common on mobile devices, such as the iPhone 4 (2010). The iPhone 4, which adopted the front-facing camera feature from earlier Japanese and Korean phones, helped popularize the selfie internationally, outside of East Asia.  In 2011, the Instagram photo-sharing and social networking service introduced auto filters, allowing users to easily alter their photos. In 2013, the word "selfie" was added to the Oxford English Dictionary.

Popularity.

Although the widespread use of the term is fairly new, photos in the selfie genre have existed for much longer. Selfie culture became popular in Japan and then other East Asian countries in the 1990s, starting with purikura booths and then front-facing camera phones. However, it was not until the 2000s that selfie culture was popularized outside of East Asia.  In the early 2000s, before Facebook became the dominant online social network, self-taken photographs were particularly common on MySpace. However, writer Kate Losse recounts that between 2006 and 2009 (when Facebook became more popular than MySpace), the "MySpace pic" (typically "an amateurish, flash-blinded self-portrait, often taken in front of a bathroom mirror") became an indication of bad taste for users of the newer Facebook social network. In 2009 in the image hosting and video hosting website Flickr, Flickr users used'selfies' to describe seemingly endless self-portraits posted by teenagers. According to Losse, improvements in design—especially the front-facing camera of the iPhone 4 (2010), mobile photo apps such as Instagram and Snapchat led to the resurgence of selfies in the early 2010s. Social media apps like Instagram and Snapchat encourage people to take selfies with features like Geofilters, hashtag linking of related topics, and picture stories. Geofilters allow people to take selfies with overlays that can be comedic, altering your selfie image with the ability to show where you are located. In September 2017, Instagram boasted 500 million daily active users of its self-promotion, selfie-sharing app and 800 million monthly active users. Snapchat reports 178 million daily active users of its service. As of July 2017, in order of popularity, the four most popular social networking services are Facebook, Facebook Messenger, Instagram, and Snapchat.  Initially popular with young people, selfies gained wider popularity over time. Life and business coach Jennifer Lee, in January 2011, was the first person to coin it as a hashtag on Instagram. By the end of 2012, "Time" magazine considered selfie one of the "top 10 buzzwords" of that year; although selfies had existed long before, it was in 2012 that the term "really hit the big time". According to a 2013 survey, two-thirds of Australian women age 18–35 take selfies—the most common purpose for which is posting on Facebook. A poll commissioned by smartphone and camera maker Samsung found that selfies make up 30% of the photos taken by people aged 18–24.  By 2013, the word "selfie" had become commonplace enough to be monitored for inclusion in the online version of the Oxford English Dictionary. In November 2013, the word "selfie" was announced as being the "word of the year" by the Oxford English Dictionary, which gave the word itself an Australian origin.  In August 2014, "selfie" was officially accepted for use in the word game Scrabble.  Selfies have also been taken beyond Earth. Selfies taken in space include those by astronauts, an image by NASA's Curiosity rover of itself on Mars, and images created by an indirect method, where a self-portrait photograph taken on Earth is displayed on a screen on a satellite, and captured by a camera.  In 2011, a crested black macaque pressed a trigger on a wildlife photographer's camera, set up in an Indonesian jungle for that specific purpose; when the camera was later recovered it was found to contain hundreds of selfies, including one of a grinning female macaque. This incident set off an unusual debate about copyright. In 2016, a federal judge ruled that the monkey cannot own the copyright to the images.  In October 2013, Imagist Labs released an iOS app called Selfie, which allows users to upload photos only from their front-facing smartphone camera. The app shows a feed of public photos of everyone's selfies and from the people they follow. The app does not allow users to comment and users can only respond with selfies. The app soon gained popularity among teenagers.  In describing the popularity of the "foot selfie", a photograph taken of one's feet while sunbathing at exotic locations, "The Hollywood Reporter" said that it could be "2014's social media pose to beat".  In January 2014, during the Sochi Winter Olympics, a "Selfie Olympics" meme was popular on Twitter, where users took self-portraits in unusual situations. The spread of the meme took place with the usage of the hashtags "#selfiegame" and "#selfieolympics".  In April 2014, the advertising agency iStrategyLabs produced a two-way mirror capable of automatically posting selfies to Twitter, using facial recognition software.  Selfies have been popular on social media. Instagram has over 53 million photos tagged with the hashtag #selfie. The word "selfie" was mentioned in Facebook status updates over 368,000 times during a one-week period in October 2013. During the same period on Twitter, the hashtag #selfie was used in more than 150,000 tweets.  The pop-up museum called The Museum of Selfies is scheduled to open its doors to all selfie lovers in the year 2018 in Glendale, a suburb of Los Angeles County, California.

Sociology.

The appeal of selfies comes from how easy they are to create and share, and the control they give people over how they present themselves. Many selfies are intended to present a flattering image of the person, especially to friends whom the photographer expects to be supportive. Those selfies would be taken on trips, during activities that are considered interesting or as a group selfie with interesting or attractive people. However, a 2013 study of Facebook users found that posting photos of oneself correlates with lower levels of social support from and intimacy with Facebook friends (except for those marked as Close Friends). The lead author of the study suggests that "those who frequently post photographs on Facebook risk damaging real-life relationships." The photo messaging application Snapchat is also largely used to send selfies. Some users of Snapchat choose to send intentionally-unattractive selfies to their friends for comedic purposes.  Posting intentionally unattractive selfies has also become common in the early 2010s—in part for their humor value, but in some cases also to explore issues of body image or as a reaction against the perceived narcissism or over-sexualization of typical selfies.  The practice of taking selfies has been criticised not only for being narcissistic, preventing assessment and appreciation of what is happening in the present, but also for being mindlessly conformist behaviour, when everyone does what everyone else is doing, "like that scene in "The Life of Brian –" where the crowd gathers outside Brian's window and enthusiastically chants in unison: 'Yes, we're all individuals!... Yes, we are all different! However, this has been disproved by more nuanced and detailed analyses of the genre.

Gender roles, sexuality, and privacy.

Selfies are popular among both genders; however, sociologist Ben Agger describes the trend of selfies as "the male gaze gone viral", and sociologist and women's studies professor Gail Dines links it to the rise of "porn culture" and the idea that sexual attractiveness is the only way in which a woman can make herself visible. Feminist writer Megan Murphy has pointed out that posting images publicly or sharing them with others who do so may have a dramatic effect in the case of revenge porn, where ex-lovers post sexually explicit photographs or nude selfies to exact revenge or humiliate their former lovers. Nonetheless, some feminists view selfies as a subversive form of self-expression that narrates one's own view of desirability. In this sense, selfies can be positive and offer a way of actively asserting agency.  In 2013 in the blog "Jezebel", author Erin Gloria Ryan criticized selfies, believing that the images they often portray, as well as the fact that they are usually posted to social media with the intent of getting positive comments and "likes", reinforce the "notion that the most valuable thing [a young woman] has to offer the world is her looks." The "Jezebel" post provoked commentary on Twitter from users arguing that selfies could be positive for women by promoting different standards of beauty. Media critic Jennifer Pozner saw selfies as particularly powerful for women and girls who did not see themselves portrayed in mainstream media.  Research shows that there is a particular difference between perspectives of youngsters and adults. "While not all representative of all young people's experiences of digital picture-sharing cultures, these discussions point to a significant gap between young people's own interpretations of their ordinary or everyday digital practices and adults’ interpretations of these practices."

Celebrity selfies.

Many celebrities – especially sex symbols – post selfies for their followers on social media, and provocative or otherwise interesting celebrity selfies are the subject of regular press coverage. Some commentators, such as Emma Barnett of "The Telegraph", have argued that sexy celebrity selfies (and sexy non-celebrity selfies) can be empowering to the selfie-takers but harmful to women in general as they promote viewing women as sex objects. Actor and avid selfie poster James Franco wrote an op-ed for "The New York Times" defending this frequent use of selfies on his Instagram page. Franco defends the self-portrait stating they should not be seen as an egocentric act, but instead a journalistic moment as the selfie "quickly and easily shows, not tells, how you're feeling, where you are, what you're doing" in a way that a text communication might fail to convey.  A selfie orchestrated during the 86th Academy Awards by host Ellen DeGeneres was, at one point, the most retweeted tweet ever. DeGeneres said she wanted to pay homage to Meryl Streep's record 18 Oscar nominations by setting a new record with her, and invited twelve other Oscar celebrities to join them, which included Meryl Streep, Julia Roberts, Channing Tatum, Bradley Cooper, Kevin Spacey, Angelina Jolie, Brad Pitt, Lupita Nyong'o, Jared Leto, and Jennifer Lawrence. The resulting photo of the celebrities broke the previous retweet record within forty minutes, and was retweeted over 1.8 million times in the first hour. By the end of the ceremony it had been retweeted over 2 million times, less than 24 hours later, it had been retweeted over 2.8 million times. It beat the previous record, 778,801, which was held by Barack Obama, following his victory in the 2012 presidential election.

Politician selfies.

U.S. President Barack Obama made news headlines during Nelson Mandela's memorial celebration at Johannesburg's FNB Stadium with various world leaders, as he was snapped taking a selfie and sharing smiles with Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, and later with British Prime Minister David Cameron, as they gathered to pay tribute to Mandela. The decision to take the selfies was considered to be in poor taste, as British political columnist Iain Martin critiqued the behaviour as "clowning around like muppets". The photos also depict the First Lady Michelle Obama sitting next to them looking "furious and mortified". Despite the criticism, Roberto Schmidt, the photographer who captured the photos taken at the celebration, reported to the "Today" show it was taken at "a jovial, celebratory portion of the service".  In India, BJP Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi posted a selfie on Twitter after voting in Gandhinagar, India. The post became a major trending item on the micro-blogging platform. In July 2014, the Swiss government became the first to take and post a picture of an entire national government (the picture was taken by one of the seven members of the government, Alain Berset). The Portuguese President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa is known to pose for several selfies in public appearances, once even claiming to have posed for "over 1500 selfies" in three days, during which he estimated to have greeted about four thousand people – the social media phenomenon has coined the term "Marcelfie" to refer to these. Most notably, the President posed for a selfie with Prime Minister António Costa in the Paris City Hall, during the Portugal Day ceremonies there on 10 June 2016.

Group selfies.

In January 2014, "Business Insider" published a story referring to selfies of groups as "usies". A photograph of Pope Francis with visitors to the Vatican was called an "usie" by The Daily Dot, and TMZ has used the term to describe a selfie taken of celebrity couple Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez.  The term "groufie" has been trademarked by Chinese phone manufacturer Huawei Technologies in China, France, Germany, Russia, and the U.S. The word was introduced during the launch of its Ascend P7 smartphone in 2014. Huawei defines the groufie as a panoramic selfie involving multiple subjects, as well as background scenery, captured using the front facing, 8-megapixel camera and panorama capabilities of its phones.  Another term for a group selfie is "wefie", originally trademarked by Samsung in the U.S. to promote the wide-angle lens of its NX series of cameras.

Accessories.

Devices for holding smartphones or compact cameras called selfie sticks are often used when taking group selfies, as they allow a wider, more panoramic image capture.  Another option for taking selfies from a distance beyond one's arm is a drone. Selfies made with a drone are also called dronies. The concept of taking a dronie first entered the mainstream in 2014 and coincided with a relatively sudden increase in the availability of relatively cheap, camera bearing multicopter drones. In 2014, the Nixie drone was designed to serve as a "personal photographer".

Psychology and neuroscience.

First, Farace, van Laer, de Ruyter, and Wetzels describe three photography techniques with which people are more likely to engage: first-person perspective, action, and person rather than 'just' selfies and adaptation into artfulness.  According to a study performed by Nicola Bruno and Marco Bertamini at the University of Parma, selfies by non-professional photographers show a slight bias for showing the left cheek of the selfie-taker. This is similar to observations of portraits by professional painters from many historical periods and styles, indicating that the left cheek bias may be rooted in asymmetries of brain lateralization that are well documented within cognitive neuroscience. In a second study, the same group tested if selfie takers without training in photography spontaneously adhere to widely prescribed rules of photographic composition, such as the rule of thirds. It seems that they do not, suggesting that these rules may be conventional rather than hardwired in the brain's perceptual preferences.  A 2016 study examining the relationship between personality and selfie-posting behaviors suggests that extroversion and social exhibitionism positively predict frequency of selfie posting, whereas self-esteem is generally unrelated to selfie-posting behaviors.  Selfitis is a condition described as the obsessive taking of selfies, although it is currently not listed as a mental disorder in the DSM-5.  Obsessive taking of selfies and posting to social media has been found to be linked to many symptoms common to mental disorders. These include narcissism, low self-esteem, loneliness, self-centeredness, and attention-seeking behaviors.

Injuries while taking photos.

The first known selfie-related death occurred 15 March 2014, when a man electrocuted himself on top of a train.  2014, 'The Year of the Selfie', was also the year Makati and Pasig, 'Selfie Capital of the World', saw their first selfie-related death when a 14-year-old girl fell from the 3rd floor staircase landing to the 2nd.  In 2015 it was reported that more people had been killed taking selfies that year than by shark attacks. Other publications have debated that analysis. Takers of selfie photographs have fallen to their deaths while losing their balance in a precarious position, and others have been wounded or killed while posing with handguns which have accidentally fired.  Concerned about the increasing number of incidents in Russia where attempts to set up a unique selfie had led to injuries and deaths, the Russian Ministry of the Interior released a "Selfie Safety Guide" in 2015 that warned selfie enthusiasts about some common dangerous behaviors. Moscow, Russia's most active selfie-taking city, is estimated to have 8 selfie-takers per 100,000 people, and ranks 301st among cities worldwide.  A 2015 study showed that 20% of young Britons had taken selfies while driving a car. Manchester has the highest amount of selfie-takers per capita in Great Britain with 114 per 100,000 people, and ranks 7th internationally. The Italian chief of state police expressed concern over the same phenomenon in Italy on the occasion of the launch of a short film with the title "Selfie". Milan is the 8th most active selfie-taking city in the world with 108 selfie-takers per 100,000 people.  According to Professor Amanda du Preez, there are least three types of selfie pictures documenting death, selfies unknowingly taken before death, where the taker's death is almost witnessed, or where the taker stands by while someone else dies.  In 2019 a teen left an imprint on the ground where he landed after falling more than four stories while attempting to take a selfie with his friends on a bridge in Dallas, TX. He had multiple serious injuries, but he survived.

Facial distortion effect.

Because they are typically taken much closer to the subject's face than a conventional photograph, phone selfies tend to distort the subject's face. When conventional photographers take head shots, they typically use a narrower lens (or zoom in) and stand at a normal distance, instead of getting physically closer to the subject's face. Front-facing cell phone cameras, on the other hand, feature wide-angle lenses and are held closer to the face, since the human arm is only so long. This results in extension distortion, where objects closer to the camera appear much larger than they actually are. Though this distortion has a slimming effect, it also exaggerates the auto-photographer's nose and chin, since those parts are closer to the camera than the rest of the face.  A study published by the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery has found that selfies have altered people's perception of their faces to the point where they increased the demand for rhinoplasties (nose jobs). Forty-two percent of surgeons surveyed have noticed that patients are seeking surgeries to improve their appearance in photographs, especially selfies taken at close distance. Another study found that selfies taken at a distance of 12 inches (30 cm) can exaggerate nasal size by as much as 30%, and recommends that people take pictures from a standard distance of 5 feet (1.5 meters) to minimize perspective distortion.

A selfie () is a self-portrait digital photograph, typically taken with a digital camera or smartphone, which may be held in the hand or supported by a selfie stick. Selfies are often shared on social media, via social networking services such as Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, and Instagram.

Selfie [selfí], či selfíčko je typ fotografického autoportrétu, obvykle pořízeného z ruky či s tyčí za pomoci digitálního fotoaparátu či chytrého telefonu ("smartphone"). Ve slovníku Oxford Dictionaries Online je popsán jako „fotografie sebe sama, běžně pořízená chytrým telefonem nebo webkamerou a nahrána na sociální síť“. Selfies jsou často určena pro publikování na sociálních sítích a sítích pro sdílení fotografií online, jako jsou Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest, Whatsapp a Snapchat. V Koreji se často používá termínu "selca" (zkratka pro „self camera“). Selfies jsou většinou neformální snímky pořízené „z ruky“ či před zrcadlem. Na snímcích je zobrazen buď fotograf sám, nebo fotograf a tolik lidí, kolik se jich vejde do záběru. Skupinové selfies jsou označovány jako „group selfies“. V dubnu 2013 zahájil deník "The Guardian" natáčení série zvané "Thinkfluencer", která dokumentuje fenomén selfie ve Velké Británii.


Background.

In February 1980 Melbourne-based new wave group, The Boys Next Door, changed their name to The Birthday Party. They consisted of Phill Calvert on drums, Nick Cave on vocals, Mick Harvey on guitar, Rowland S. Howard on guitar and Tracy Pew on bass guitar. They relocated to London and soon signed with the 4AD label which issued the extended play, "The Friend Catcher" in the United Kingdom. In July, their Australian label, Missing Link Records, released "Mr Clarinet" from the EP as a single. In November Missing Link followed with a compilation album, "The Birthday Party" under the band names The Boys Next Door and The Birthday Party, which combined previously issued EP and singles tracks with some previously unreleased material.  Also in November 1980, The Birthday Party returned to Australia and toured. According to Australian music historian, Ian McFarlane, "It was during this time that the band cemented its reputation as a peerless live act, with its omnipresent influence settling over the Melbourne scene". On 6 April 1981 they issued the album and followed in June with its lead single, "Nick the Stripper". The group returned to London. The track "Ho-Ho" is featured in the 2004 German film, "Head-On".  Members of Melbourne jazz rock band Equal Local contributed the brass section to "Nick the Stripper" – tenor saxophonist Mick Hauser was mis-credited as Mick Hunter. Equal Local had formed in 1980 by Dean Richards on guitar, Philip Jackson on synthesisers, trumpet and rhythm generator, Melissa Webb on synthesiser and piano, Bryce Perrin on acoustic bass, and Hauser. Richards and Jackson were bandmates from post punk rockers, Whirlywirld and contemporaries of The Boys Next Door. Equal Local disbanded in early 1982.

Composition and recording.

Eight of the eleven tracks on "Prayers on Fire" were written or co-written by Cave, "[it] was a kind of reaction to the major disappointments we felt when we went to England... [we] began to see a vision and I don't think we were positively influenced... we didn't want to be like the English New Wave pop groups of the time". Pew observed "[it] stinks, quite honestly... The engineer slept through the entire session for a start". In Melbourne, in December 1980 and January 1981, they joined engineer and producer, Tony Cohen, in Armstrong's Audio Visual Studios (A.A.V. Studio 2) and Richmond Recorders, to record their tracks. Music journalist, Toby Creswell, noted that the band "struggled with creating their own identity some of them also began indulging an appetite for alcohol and heroin". Cave was embarrassed by "Zoo Music Girl" but noted "we were digging for something and we kind of just found it with some songs" and cited "King Ink" as an example of "a certain kind of sound that we wanted to work with on records after that".

Reception.

About.com's Carew felt "Prayers on Fire" was able to "capture the qualities of their infamous live-shows on record... the evocatively-produced set dared dress key cuts in blaring brass; giving a sense of perverted-cabaret to their mordant racket, turning Cave from nihilist, self-destructive savant to theatrical, flamboyant showman". Allmusic's Greg Maurer's found "a fascination with the dark, (self-)destructive side of religion is more than evident in his later work... While there might not be any of the explicit Biblical imagery on [the album] that Cave would later ejaculate, the title... is apt". McFarlane stated it showed the band was "irrevocably and unashamedly changing for the better, being more aggressive than anything they had ever recorded". Sound Stage Direct described it as "a creepy carnival of tribal rhythms, wonky discordance and garbled surrealism". Music critic, Ed St John summarised, "this is an expression which ebbs out beyond the confines of proficiently played music... [it] is akin to watching a film of Jackson Pollock painting or listening to Dylan Thomas in full alcoholic flight".

Prayers on Fire is the debut studio album by Australian rock group The Birthday Party, which was released on 6 April 1981 on the Missing Link label in Australia, later licensed to the 4AD label. This was the band's first full-length release on an international record label and the first after changing the group's name from Boys Next Door to The Birthday Party. It was recorded at Armstrong's Audio Visual Studios in Melbourne and Richmond Recorders in the nearby suburb of Richmond, between December 1980 and January 1981.

Prayers on Fire je první studiové album australské rockové skupiny The Birthday Party, vydané pod tímto názvem (dříve skupina vydala dvě alba jako The Boys Next Door). Album vyšlo v dubnu 1981 u vydavatelství Missing Link Records v Austrálii a u vydavatelství 4AD ve Spojeném království. Nahráno bylo od prosince 1980 do ledna 1981 a o produkci se spolu s členy skupiny staral Tony Cohen.


Background.

Yugoslav coup d'état.

Following Germany's 1938 "Anschluss" of Austria, Yugoslavia shared a border with the Third Reich and came under increasing pro-Axis political pressure as its neighbours fell into line with the Axis powers. In April 1939, Yugoslavia gained a second frontier with Italy when Italy invaded Albania. Between September and November 1940, Hungary joined the Tripartite Pact, Italy invaded Greece, and Romania also joined the Pact. From that time, Yugoslavia was almost surrounded by Axis powers or their client states, and its neutral stance toward the war was under tremendous pressure. On 14 February 1941, Adolf Hitler invited Prime Minister Dragiša Cvetković and Foreign Minister Aleksandar Cincar-Marković to Berchtesgaden, and requested that Yugoslavia also join the Pact. On 1 March, Bulgaria joined, and the next day, German troops entered Bulgaria from Romania, closing the ring around Yugoslavia.  Further pressure was applied by Hitler on 4 March 1941, when the Yugoslav regent, Prince Paul, visited Berchtesgaden, but the prince delayed a decision. On 6 March, the Royal Yugoslav Army Air Force (, VVKJ) was secretly mobilised. The following day, British troops began landing in Greece to bolster the country's defences against the Italians. On 12 March, the VVKJ began dispersing to auxiliary airfields. By 20 March, the VVKJ's dispersal had been completed. Hitler, wishing to secure his southern flank in anticipation of Germany's impending invasion of the Soviet Union, demanded that Yugoslavia sign the Pact. On 25 March, the Yugoslav government complied. Two days later, a group of VVKJ and Yugoslav Royal Guard officers, led by Brigadier General Borivoje Mirković, deposed Prince Paul in the Yugoslav coup d'état. He was replaced by his 17-year-old nephew Peter.

Preparations.

The day of the coup, Hitler issued Directive 25, which stated that the coup had changed the political situation in the Balkans. He ordered that "even if Yugoslavia at first should give declarations of loyalty, she must be considered as a foe and therefore must be destroyed as quickly as possible". German reconnaissance aircraft frequently violated Yugoslav airspace in the aftermath of the coup. VVKJ fighters were placed on constant alert. The German incursions demonstrated that the Yugoslav ground observation post network and supporting radio communications were inadequate. Hitler decided that Belgrade would be bombed as punishment for the coup, under the codename Operation Retribution ("Unternehmen Strafgericht"). On 27 and 28 March 1941, "Reichsmarschall" Hermann Göring transferred about 500 fighter and bomber aircraft from France and northern Germany to airfields near the Yugoslav border. The commander of "Luftflotte" IV, "Generaloberst" (General) Alexander Löhr, allocated these aircraft to attack the Yugoslav capital in waves by day and night. Löhr issued his orders for the bombing on 31 March, but the decision to bomb Belgrade would not be confirmed by Hitler until 5 April. Hitler ordered the general destruction of Belgrade, but at the last minute Löhr replaced these general directions with specific military objectives within the city.  On 3 April, Major Vladimir Kren flew a Potez 25 aircraft to Graz and defected to the Germans. He disclosed the locations of many of Yugoslavia's dispersal airfields, as well as codes used by the VVKJ, which had to be quickly changed. Also disclosed were the location of Yugoslavia's troop mobilisation centres and air-raid shelters in Belgrade. On the afternoon of 5 April, a British colonel visited Mirković at the VVKJ base in Zemun and informed him that the attack on Belgrade would commence at 06:30 the next day. The previous day, the Yugoslav government had declared Belgrade an open city in the event of hostilities. The German embassy had informed its government that Belgrade did not contain any anti-aircraft defences, but in an effort to justify the attack to the public, German propaganda branded the city "Fortress Belgrade" after the first bombs were dropped.  By 6 April, the VVKJ had been almost completely mobilised, and consisted of four air brigades with more than 423 aircraft of Yugoslav, German, Italian, French, Czech and British design, including 107 modern fighters and 100 modern medium bombers. Other than a small number of locally made Rogožarski IK-3 fighters, almost all the modern aircraft available to the VVKJ were of German, Italian or British design for which limited spares and munitions were available. The available aircraft were spread all over the country, and only the 1st Fighter Brigade was near enough to Belgrade to respond to an attack on the capital. In total, the 1st Fighter Brigade fielded 56 Messerschmitt Bf 109E-3a fighters, 15 Hawker Hurricane MkIs, and six Rogožarski IK-3s.

Bombing.

German ground forces crossed the Yugoslav border at 05:15 on 6 April, and the Reich Minister of Propaganda, Joseph Goebbels, announced Germany's declaration of war at 06:00. The invasion and concurrent bombing coincided with Easter Sunday as observed by the Serbian Orthodox Church, which uses the Julian calendar. Yugoslav anti-aircraft defences caused a false alarm when they reported the approach of an air raid from the direction of Romania at 03:00, but listening posts on the Romanian border had heard the aircraft engines of the Romanian-based "Fliegerführer" Arad warming up well before they took off. The VVKJ's 51st Fighter Group at Zemun had been alerted before dawn, and when reports began to be received about Luftwaffe attacks on VVKJ airfields, the first patrol was sent into the air. At first, no aircraft could be seen approaching Belgrade.  The first wave closed on Belgrade between 06:30 and 06:45, and consisted of 74 Junkers Ju 87 "Stuka" dive bombers, and 160 Heinkel He 111 medium bombers and Dornier Do 17 light bombers at. They were escorted by Messerschmitt Bf 110 heavy fighters at and 100 Messerschmitt Bf 109E fighters at. The entire Yugoslav 6th Fighter Brigade, consisting of the 51st Fighter Group at Zemun and the 32nd Fighter Group at Prnjavor, totalling 29 Messerschmitt Bf 109Es and five Rogožarski IK-3s, were scrambled to intercept the Germans. The Yugoslavs were quickly engaged by escorting Messerschmitt Bf 109Es from "Jagdgeschwader" 77 (JG 77). Just as the first wave was departing, Hawker Hurricane Mk1s of the 52nd Fighter Group of the 2nd Fighter Regiment based at Knić arrived over Belgrade and engaged some dive bombers, claiming one "Stuka" shot down. During the first attack, the Yugoslavs claimed fifteen German aircraft shot down and lost five of their own, with six more badly damaged. The pilots of JG 77 claimed ten Yugoslav machines shot down and another six destroyed on the ground. On his return to base, the commander of the 51st Fighter Group was relieved of his command for failure to take action. The first wave hit the Belgrade power station, the post office including telegraph and postal services, the headquarters of the Ministry of Army and Navy, the Yugoslav Supreme Command building, the military academy, the royal palace at Dedinje, the royal guard barracks at Topčider, the gendarmerie command headquarters, and the airport at Zemun, among other targets.  Immediately after the first wave, King Peter, the Government of Yugoslavia and the Yugoslav Supreme Command left Belgrade and retreated to Yugoslavia's mountainous interior with the intention of going into exile. The second wave of German aircraft arrived over Belgrade about 10:00, consisting of 57 Ju 87 dive bombers and 30 Bf 109E fighters. They were met by 15 of the remaining fighters from the 6th Fighter Brigade. This time the Yugoslavs claimed two dive bombers forced down, and one Bf 109E shot down. A patrol of Bf 109Es from the Yugoslav 31st Fighter Group based at Kragujevac, acting without orders from their group commander, followed the Germans as they returned to their bases and claimed two dive bombers shot down for the loss of both Yugoslav aircraft.  Belgrade was targeted on two other occasions on the first day of the invasion. The third wave struck at 14:00, consisting of 94 twin-engined bombers flying from airfields near Vienna, escorted by 60 fighters. This wave was met by eighteen fighters of the 6th Fighter Regiment, which claimed four German aircraft. The fourth attack of the day approached Belgrade at 16:00, comprising 97 dive bombers and 60 fighters.  The Germans claimed nineteen Yugoslav Bf 109E fighters and four unidentified aircraft destroyed on 6 April. Actual Yugoslav aircraft losses on the first day were ten shot down and fifteen damaged. The Yugoslavs claimed to have shot down twenty-two German aircraft and forced two others to land. The Germans lost twelve aircraft, significantly fewer than claimed by the Yugoslavs: two Do 17Z light bombers, five Bf 110 heavy fighters, four Ju 87 dive bombers, and one Bf 109E fighter. One Luftwaffe pilot who claimed his first victory over Belgrade on 6 April was "Oberleutnant" Gerhard Koall of "Jagdgeschwader" 54. He went on to be credited with 37 victories and was awarded the Knight's Cross of the Iron Cross in 1944.  German bombers and dive-bombers dropped of bombs and incendiaries on the capital. The weak VVKJ and inadequate anti-aircraft defences of Belgrade briefly attempted to meet the overwhelming Luftwaffe assault, but were eliminated as threats during the first wave of the attack. Sources vary regarding the success achieved by the defenders. A US Army study first published in 1953 states that the Luftwaffe lost two fighter aircraft, downed 20 Yugoslav aircraft and destroyed a further 44 on the ground. The military historian Daniel L. Zajac writes that the Germans lost 40 aircraft during the two-day air battle. Another source indicates the loss of 14 German aircraft on 6 April. Dive-bombers in subsequent waves were able to operate at rooftop altitude.  According to the historian Stevan K. Pavlowitch, the bombing of Belgrade lasted three days. Other sources state the air battle over Belgrade lasted only two days owing to poor flying conditions on 8 April. The most important cultural institution that was destroyed was the National Library of Serbia, which was hit by bombs and gutted by fire. Hundreds of thousands of rare books, maps, and medieval manuscripts were destroyed. Also struck was the Belgrade Zoo, sending frightened animals running through the streets.

British retaliation.

No. 37 Squadron of the Royal Air Force (RAF) conducted two bombing raids on Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria, in retaliation for the bombing of Belgrade. Operating Vickers Wellington bombers from an airfield in Greece, the squadron conducted raids on 6/7 April and 12/13 April, dropping a total of of high-explosive bombs on railway targets and nearby residential areas. These raids were carried out despite the fact that Britain was not at war with Bulgaria until 12 December 1941. The historian Herman Knell calls the retaliatory justification for these raids "strange and implausible". The aviation historians Shores, Cull and Malizia indicate that these raids were attacks on the lines of communication of German forces attacking Greece and Yugoslavia, and note that the raid on 6/7 April targeted an ammunition train and other installations in Sofia, and the raid on 12/13 April bombed the railway marshalling yards. Other similar targets in Bulgaria were attacked by the RAF during the Balkans Campaign.

Aftermath and legacy.

The bombing of Belgrade paralysed communications between the Yugoslav military and its headquarters, and contributed decisively to the rapid collapse of Yugoslav resistance. Civilian casualties were significant, but sources vary widely from 1,500 to 17,000 killed. They were worsened by the disclosure of air-raid shelter locations to the Germans in the days preceding the attack. The official casualty figure released by the occupation authorities soon after the bombing was 2,271 killed. Other sources mention 5,000 to 10,000 fatalities, and later Yugoslav estimates ranged even higher. The historian Jozo Tomasevich writes that the higher estimates were downgraded following "careful postwar investigations", and indicates that a figure between 3,000 and 4,000 is more realistic.  Belgrade was occupied on 13 April 1941, and four days later, Yugoslavia capitulated. Afterwards, Luftwaffe engineers conducted a bomb damage assessment in Belgrade. The report stated that of bombs were dropped, 10 to 14 percent being incendiaries. It listed all the targets of the bombing, mentioned that seven aerial mines were dropped, and that areas in the centre and north-west of the city had been destroyed, comprising 20 to 25 percent of its total area. Some aspects of the bombing remain unexplained, particularly the use of the aerial mines. Significant damage was done to Belgrade, particularly to the water and electrical systems. Pavlowitch states that almost 50 percent of housing in Belgrade was destroyed. After the invasion, the Germans forced between 3,500 and 4,000 Jews to collect rubble that was caused by the bombing. Unexploded German bombs continue to be unearthed in the 21st century.  Löhr was captured by the Yugoslav Partisans on 9 May 1945, escaped, and was recaptured on 13 May. He was intensively interrogated, after which he was tried before a Yugoslav military court on war crimes charges, one of which related to his command of "Luftflotte" IV during Operation Retribution. Löhr was convicted by the Yugoslav military court and sentenced to death. He was executed on 26 February 1947. Following the invasion, Kren was appointed head of the Air Force of the Independent State of Croatia (, ZNDH). He was arrested in Italy in March 1947 and extradited to Yugoslavia, where he was tried on unrelated charges of war crimes for his role in the targeting of civilians by the ZNDH. He was found guilty on all counts and executed in 1948.  The bombing of Belgrade was depicted in the 1980 Yugoslav feature film "Who's Singin' Over There?" () and the 1995 feature film "Underground" (). It is also the subject of Miodrag Pavlović's poem "Belgrade 1941" (). The Serbian American poet Charles Simic, a survivor of the bombing, wrote a poem titled "Cameo Appearance" recounting his experiences. A monument commemorating the Yugoslav pilots killed during Operation Retribution was inaugurated in New Belgrade on 6 April 1997. It was designed by the sculptor Miodrag Živković. On 6 April 2016, the 75th anniversary of the bombing, a memorial service was held for the victims, attended by the Serbian Minister for Labour, Employment, Veteran and Social Policy, Aleksandar Vulin. In June 2017, it was announced that the site containing the ruined foundations of the National Library of Serbia would be made into a memorial garden.

References.

Books Journals  News reports  Papers

Operation Retribution (), also known as Operation Punishment, was the April 1941 German bombing of Belgrade, the capital of Yugoslavia, in retaliation for the coup d'état that overthrew the government that had signed the Tripartite Pact. The bombing occurred in the first days of the German-led Axis invasion of Yugoslavia during World War II. The Royal Yugoslav Army Air Force (VVKJ) had only 77 modern fighter aircraft available to defend Belgrade against the hundreds of German fighters and bombers that struck in the first wave early on 6 April. Three days prior, VVKJ Major Vladimir Kren had defected to the Germans, disclosing the locations of multiple military assets and divulging the VVKJ's codes.

Bombardování Bělehradu (srbsky Бомбардовање Београда/Bombardovanje Beograda, německý název operace: Strafgericht) bylo počáteční akcí Dubnové války, během které si nacistické Německo podmanilo jugoslávské království.


Club career.

Early career.

Zé Roberto started in the youth ranks of Palestra de São Bernardo but it was while playing for Portuguesa, as a left-back, that he became known throughout Brazil finishing as runner-up in 1996 Campeonato Brasileiro Série A.  He then joined Real Madrid in January 1997 for a brief spell, where he helped them win the 1996–97 Spanish league championship. He was also part of the Madrid's 1997–98 UEFA Champions League winning squad, scoring his only goal for the club in the opening group match against Rosenborg BK, before moving back to Brazil to play for Flamengo midway through the season. In an interview in 2012, Zé Roberto spoke of his decision to leave Madrid because of his ambition to play for Brazil at the 1998 FIFA World Cup in France and had limited opportunities to prove his talents in Spain.  The first half of 1998 Zé played with Flamengo under manager Paulo Autuori alongside Romário, Palinha, Juan, who should later play for Leverkusen and AS Roma, and his Portuguesa team-mate of the vice-championship 1996 Rodrigo Fabri for the Rio de Janeiro State Championship, finishing disappointingly as runners-up. After this he was signed by German Bundesliga club Bayer 04 Leverkusen.

Bayer Leverkusen.

He joined Bayer Leverkusen in the summer of 1998. It was at Leverkusen that he really made a name for himself, fast becoming a popular figure at the club. During his four-year stay, Bayer enjoyed their most successful period, finishing as runners-up in the German Bundesliga on three occasions.  On 4 December 2001, he opened the scoring with a curling free kick against Deportivo de La Coruña in the 64th minute, as Bayer comprehensively beat the Spanish side 3–0 in the second group stage of the Champions League. Following Bayer's victory over Liverpool in the quarter-finals of the Champions League on 9 April 2002, Zé Roberto announced that he would be joining former teammate Michael Ballack at Bayern Munich. Despite the transfer distractions, Zé Roberto helped Bayer reach the final of the Champions League on 15 May 2002, losing 2–1 to former club Real Madrid in Glasgow. In four years at the club, Zé Roberto appeared in 113 league matches scoring 16 goals.

Bayern Munich and Santos.

In May 2002, he joined Bayern Munich for a reported fee of €12 million, signing a three-year deal, linking up with emerging German talent Sebastian Deisler and former Leverkusen teammate Michael Ballack. With Bayern he claimed the domestic league and cup double three times between 2002 and 2006. He found his starting spot threatened under new coach Felix Magath and left the club in 2006. Following the announcement that he would not return to Bayern Munich, he publicly criticized the club's style of play and predicted struggles if changes were not made.  Being a free agent Zé Roberto signed through his agent Juan Figer a three year contract with Club Nacional de Football in Montevideo, a club he would never play for. On 31 August 2006 it was announced that he would join Santos FC in Brazil for one year. and helped the team to win the 2007 Campeonato Paulista. The win was his first title in a Brazilian competition. He scored seven goals in the 2007 Copa Libertadores, where Santos reached the semi-finals. During his time with Santos he appeared in 48 official matches scoring 12 goals, playing for the first time in his career as an attacking midfielder.  On 22 June 2007 it was announced, that he will return to Bayern Munich, which paid on million euro to Nacional for a two year loan.  He stated, "It was as if I’d never been away", en route to winning a fourth domestic double with the Bavarians. During Bayern's 2007–08 season, he scored five goals and was influential in Bayern's domestic and cup double. The revitalised Zé Roberto demonstrated all his newly acquired skills by scoring five goals and forming a rock-solid partnership with Mark van Bommel in his new role in central defensive midfield.  He made a successful start to the 2008–09 season – scoring four goals in his first 11 starts. He would conclude his second spell at the Bavarian club appearing in 59 league matches scoring nine goals.  Zé Roberto left the club at the end of the 2009 season after Bayern executives refused to offer him a new two-year deal.

Hamburger SV.

His contract with Bayern ran until 30 June 2009. The club offered him a contract until 2010, though Zé Roberto declined. Bundesliga side Hamburger SV officially announced signing Zé Roberto to a two-year contract on 2 July 2009. But Der Spiegel reported Hamburg actually paid €4 million sign-on fees to Zé Roberto's agent Juan Figer, which Bayern also paid €1 million in 2007. In May 2011, Zé Roberto confirmed that he would not renew his contract with the German team, because he wanted a longer contract than the new one offered by the club.

Al-Gharafa.

On 10 July 2011, Zé Roberto signed a two-year contract with the Qatari club Al-Gharafa, where he helped his team win the 2012 Emir of Qatar Cup.

Return to Brazil.

After a season with Qatari outfit Al-Gharafa, Zé Roberto returned to Brazil in May to join Grêmio, helping them finish third in the Campeonato Brasileiro Série A. On 10 December 2012, he expressed his desire to retire at Grêmio after extending his contract by a further year.  On 9 December 2014, Zé Roberto left Grêmio as the club decided not to renew his contract.

Palmeiras.

On 22 December 2014, Zé Roberto joined Palmeiras on a one-year contract, valid until 31 December 2015. He was immediately appointed team captain, helping them win the 2015 Copa do Brasil with four goals scored in the competition. In the Campeonato Brasileiro Série A, Palmeiras finished in the 9th position. He signed a one-year extension to his contract on 19 October 2015, that will keep him in the squad until 31 December 2016. On 28 November 2016, he won his first national championship in Brazil, declaring after the final match against Chapecoense that he would not retire at the end of the season. Eventually, on 9 December, he signed a new contract with Palmeiras, keeping him at the club until the end of 2017. On 24 November, he announced Palmeiras match against Botafogo two days later would be the last of his career and that he would retire.

International career.

Zé Roberto was part of the Brazil squads at the 1998 and 2006 World Cups. In 1998, he helped the Seleção to the final, making one appearance, but was an unused substitute as Brazil lost to hosts France 3–0. He was left out of the 2002 World Cup winning squad due to a calf injury. Zé Roberto scored Brazil's third and final goal in a man of the match performance in Brazil's second round match against Ghana in the 2006 World Cup finals in Germany.  Zé Roberto helped Brazil to wins at the 1997 and 1999 editions of the Copa América, scoring Brazil's third goal in their 3–1 defeat of Bolivia in the final on 26 June 1997.  He also represented Brazil at the 1997 and 2005 FIFA Confederations Cups in Saudi Arabia and Germany respectively, winning both. He played the full ninety minutes of the final in 2005, as Brazil overpowered arch rivals Argentina 4–1 on 29 June 2005.

Style of play.

Capable of playing both as a left-sided defender, and in several midfield positions, Zé Roberto was a quick, hard-working, and versatile left-footed player, who in his prime was known for his technique, vision, and efficient style of play, as well as his dribbling, passing, crossing, and tackling ability. He started his career as an attacking full-back or wing back on the left flank, occasionally functioning in a box-to-box role in midfield; he was later deployed as a left-winger, and subsequently in a more creative role, as an attacking midfielder, although he struggled to find space in the national side in this position, due to the presence of several other world-class playmakers in the squad. During his time at Bayern Munich, he excelled alongside van Bommel as a defensive midfielder, due to his ability to read the game, break down opposing plays, and subsequently start counter-attacks; his adeptness at this new holding role led him to be called up to the Brazilian national team once again, where he also formed an effective and consistent defensive midfield partnership with Emerson.

Personal life.

Zé Roberto is married to Luciana, with whom he has three children: Endrik, Miriá, and Isabelli.  Zé Roberto is a Christian. He said, "Aside from the fame, the money, from not being able to have anything and today being able to have everything, I find that the difference is to have God in my heart, by accepting Jesus. The money will finish, fame will be forgotten, but God is special. Today I have God and tomorrow I will live with God in a much better place, that is, heaven."

Career statistics.

Sources:

International.

Source:

José Roberto da Silva Júnior (born 6 July 1974), commonly known as Zé Roberto, is a Brazilian former professional footballer who played as a left wing-back or as a midfielder. Currently, he is a technical advisor to Palmeiras, acting directly with the players and the coaching staff.

José Roberto da Silva Jr. nazývaný Zé Roberto (* 6. červenec 1974, Ipiranga) je brazilský fotbalista. Hraje na pozici záložníka.