Career.

Formation and record deal.

Both Baiyewu and Tucker were working in bars when they first met; together, they recorded demos of a number of songs Tucker had written during the late 1980s. Among these, a demo of "Ocean Drive" attracted the attention of Polydor Records A&R director Colin Barlow, who, in 1993, signed the band to a six-month development deal.  In the wake of an economic recession in the UK, British record labels were, at the time, primarily signing artists with the goal of short-term profit. In contrast, Barlow, in "The Times", expected that the band could last for "ten years or more". At the time of the launch of the first album, Polydor's investments in the band totaled £250,000. Producer Mike Peden's hiring was described as a "big spend", and music videos were filmed overseas in Los Angeles and Las Vegas.

Commercial success.

The lead single, "Lifted", received airplay on BBC Radio One as well as a number of BBC Local Radio stations, and "The Chart Show" aired its music video. Still, this did not translate to considerable single or album sales within 1995; it was not until "Lifted" was re-released in 1996 that it reached the top five on the UK Singles Chart, and "Ocean Drive", which had been deleted, rebounded and was certified six-times platinum by the end of 1997, spending 154 weeks on the UK Albums Chart in the process. Its follow-up "Postcards from Heaven" achieved similar sales status in 1997.  Lighthouse Family scaled down their appearances in early 2003 because of what they called a "heavy promotional schedule" following the release of "Whatever Gets You Through the Day" in 2001. This led to both men pursuing individual projects. Baiyewu became a solo artist, while Tucker joined a rock band, The Orange Lights.

Comeback.

In November 2010, the duo announced they were reforming Lighthouse Family and did a full UK and Ireland tour, in February and March 2011. It was the first performance of Lighthouse Family in eight years. During an interview on breakfast TV show "BBC Breakfast" on 17 January 2011, Lighthouse Family revealed they had still been talking to each other during their time away, and that there was no current defined timescale for the release of a new album. However, Tucker mentioned during the interview that the duo had "pockets... full of songs". The duo had planned to release a new album called "Blue Sky in Your Head" on 3 May 2019, introduced by the single, "My Salvation", on 21 March; however, the album release was delayed until 5 July 2019. "Blue Sky in Your Head" is their first album in 18 years. Lighthouse Family have announced a multi-date UK tour commencing in November 2019.

Lighthouse Family are a British musical duo that rose to prominence in the mid-1990s and initially remained active until the early 2000s. Vocalist Tunde Baiyewu and keyboardist Paul Tucker formed the act in 1993 in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK after meeting while studying at university and both working at the same bar. Their 1995 debut album "Ocean Drive" sold more than 1.8 million copies in the UK alone and established them as a popular easy listening duo throughout Europe.

Lighthouse Family je britské hudební duo. V polovině 90. let 20. století zaznamenalo mnoho úspěchů. Zpěvák Tunde Baiyewu a klávesista Paul Tucker vytvořili skupinu v roce 1993 v Newcastle Upon Tyne ve Velké Británii poté, co se setkali během studia na univerzitě a oba pracovali ve stejném baru. Jejich debutové album "Ocean Drive" z roku 1995 se prodalo ve Velké Británii více než 1,8 milionu kopií a vytvořilo je populární po celé Evropě. Jsou dobře známí pro své písně, jako jsou „Lifted“, „Lost In Space“, „Ocean Drive“, „Raincloud“ a „High“, který také dosáhl číslo jedna na australském žebříčku. První studiové album dua za 18 let, "Blue Sky in Your Head", bylo vydáno 5. července 2019, poté, co bylo dvakrát zpožděno z původních dat 3. května a 10. května 2019.


History.

First mentions of Loimaa come from the year 1439 but a parish was founded in the area already a decade earlier. The town was founded in its current form in 1876 as the railway between Turku and Toijala was completed.  A legend of Prättäkitti is heavily associated with Loimaa.  The town of Loimaa merged with Loimaan kunta (literally "Municipality of Loimaa") on January 1, 2005 and with the municipalities of Alastaro and Mellilä on January 1, 2009.  The name "Loimaa" comes from the river Loimijoki which flows through the town.

Culture.

A local speciality is piapo, a version of kama.  "Rompepäivät" (lit. "junk days") is an annual event that takes place in August. It brings together trunk show enthusiasts selling both old and new merchandise as well as food and entertainment. The trunk show is located at the historic market square of Loimaa, now known as Peltoinen, and draws in 8,000–10,000 visitors.  The local newspaper is called Loimaan Lehti. It first started publishing in 1915 and today comes out three times a week: Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays.

Subdivisions and villages.

Alastaron-Mäenpää, Eura, Haara, Haaroinen, Haitula, Hartoinen, Hattula, Hirvikoski, Hurskala, Ilmarinen, Inkilä, Joenperä, Juva, Karhula, Karsattila, Kauhanoja, Kemppilä, Kesärlä, Klockarla, Koenperä, Kojonkulma, Krekilä, Kuninkainen, Kurittula, Kuttila, Köyliö, Lappijoki, Levälä, Lähde, Metsämaa, Mäenpää, Niemi, Niinijoki, Onkijoki, Pahikainen, Pappinen, Peltoinen, Piltola, Puujalkala, Raikkola, Seppälä, Sieppala, Torkkala, Vesikoski, and Vilvainen.

Sports.

The city is home to the Bisons Loimaa basketball club, 2012 and 2013 Champion of the Korisliiga. The club regularly qualifies for international competitions. It plays its home games at the "Loimaa Sports Center" and on some occasions moves to the Energia Areena. The city is also home to the Hurrikaani Loimaa volleyball club, regularly qualifies for international competitions such as CLvolleyM and SM-league.

International relations.

Twin towns — sister cities.

Loimaa is twinned with the following towns.  Loimaa, Skien, Uddevalla, Thisted and Mostfellsbær form the oldest Nordic network of twin towns, which is still active.

Loimaa (; Swedish (historically):"Loimijoki") is a town and municipality of Finland. It is located in the province of Western Finland and is part of the Southwest Finland region. The municipality has a population of () and covers an area of of which is water. The population density is.

Loimaa je město ve Finsku, kde žije okolo 16 000 obyvatel. Leží v provincii Vlastní Finsko 65 km severovýchodně od Turku a protéká jím řeka Loimijoki. Městem prochází Evropská silnice E63. Významnou památkou je kostel z roku 1837.


Life.

Born in 1840, the duke was very soon orphaned – his father died in a carriage accident in 1842. Thus, during their childhood and adolescence, he and his elder brother, Prince Philippe, Count of Paris, were mainly looked after by their grandparents, King Louis-Philippe and Queen Marie-Amélie.  During the French Revolution of 1848, Louis-Philippe refused to fire upon the revolutionaries, instead abdicating his throne in favour of his grandson Philippe on February 24. Subsequently, the boys' mother presented herself before the chamber of deputies to proclaim her elder son king of the French and to have herself named regent, accompanied by her brother-in-law, the Duke of Nemours, and his children. However, the assembly, led by Ledru-Rollin, Crémieux and Lamartine, frustrated her plans and proclaimed the Second French Republic.  Helene and her children then left France for Germany, whilst Louis-Philippe and the rest of the royal family moved to the United Kingdom. There they set up home in Claremont, which was lent to them by the owner, King Leopold I of Belgium, Louis-Philippe's son-in-law. Whilst in England in 1858, Helene died of influenza.  Sent to Turin for military training shortly after his mother's death, the Duke of Chartres became an officer in the Piedmontese dragoons and fought in the Wars of Italian Unification on the side of France and the House of Savoy from 1859 onwards. He notably fought at the Battle of Palestro, for which he was decorated by King Victor Emmanuel II.  With the outbreak of the American Civil War in April 1861, Chartres and his brother, Prince Philippe, Count of Paris, travelled to the United States to support the Union cause. On September 24, 1861, Chartres was commissioned a captain in the United States Army. He served as an assistant adjutant general on the staff of the commander of the Army of the Potomac, Major General George B. McClellan. He served in the Battle of Gaines's Mill on June 27, 1862 and resigned from the Union Army on July 15, 1862.  During their stay in the United States, the princes were accompanied by their uncle, the Prince of Joinville, who painted many watercolours of their stay. Although eligible for membership, Chartres did not join (as his brother had) the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States – an organization of Union officers who had served during the American Civil War.  Returning to Europe, the Duke of Chartres decided to marry but, as an exiled member of a royal house considered illegitimate by most of the reigning dynasties of the continent, found he would be unable to marry a foreign princess. He thus asked for the hand of his first cousin Françoise d'Orléans-Joinville, whom he married on June 11, 1863, at St Raphael's Church in Kingston upon Thames, England. They bought and lived in a house in Ham (now the site of the Cassel Hospital).  Finding himself in Brussels, with his uncles Prince François and Prince Henri, Duke of Aumale, in 1870 on the declaration of the Franco-Prussian War, the Duke of Chartres immediately requested Napoleon III's government for authorisation to fight in the conflict. However, the minister of war opposed Robert's participation in the war and he was thus unable to enroll in the French army until after the fall of the Empire. He then fought in the war under the pseudonym Robert Le Fort and was made head of a squadron in the Armée de la Loire, fighting with such distinction he was made a Chevalier (knight) of the Légion d'honneur once the war was over. The provisional government kept him at that rank and in 1871 sent him to Algeria to put down a native revolt.  In 1881 the Republican regime – more and more hostile to members of the Orléans and Bonaparte former French royal families – removed him from his post as colonel of the 19th Mounted Chasseur Regiment. Then, in 1886, the law of exile allowed the Republican government to remove the prince from the Army list of officers and he was exiled from France.  Chartres was eventually allowed to return to France and he died in Saint-Firmin in 1910.

Issue.

Robert and Françoise had 5 children:

Prince Robert Philippe Louis Eugène Ferdinand of Orléans, Duke of Chartres (November 9, 1840 – December 5, 1910) was the son of Prince Ferdinand Philippe, Duke of Orléans, and thus grandson of King Louis-Philippe of France. He fought for the Union in the American Civil War, and then for France in the 1870 Franco-Prussian War. In 1863 he married his cousin Princess Françoise of Orléans, the daughter of François, Prince of Joinville. In 1886, he was exiled from France.

Robert Bourbonsko-Orleánský, plným jménem Robert Philippe Louis Eugène Ferdinand d'Orleans de Chartres (9. listopadu 1840 Paříž – 5. prosince 1910 Chateau de Saint Firmin, Provence-Alpes-Côte) by francouzský důstojník a člen bourbonského rodu. Bojoval v americké občanské válce na straně Unie a v prusko-francouzské válce na straně Francie. Roku 1886 byl vypovězen z Francie.


Proof.

Proof using induction.

Boole's inequality may be proved for finite collections of events using the method of induction.  For the formula_2 case, it follows that  For the case formula_4, we have  Since formula_6 and because the union operation is associative, we have  Since  by the first axiom of probability, we have  and therefore

Proof without using induction.

For any events in formula_11in our probability space we have  One of the axioms of a probability space is that if formula_13 are "disjoint" subsets of the probability space then  this is called "countable additivity."  If formula_15 then formula_16  Indeed, from the axioms of a probability distribution,  Note that both terms on the right are nonnegative.  Now we have to modify the sets formula_18, so they become disjoint.  So if formula_20, then we know  Therefore, we can deduce the following equation

Bonferroni inequalities.

Boole's inequality may be generalized to find upper and lower bounds on the probability of finite unions of events. These bounds are known as Bonferroni inequalities, after Carlo Emilio Bonferroni; see.  Define  and  as well as  for all integers "k" in {3,..., "n"}.  Then, for odd "k" in {1,..., "n"},  and for even "k" in {2,..., "n"},  Boole's inequality is the initial case, "k" = 1. When "k" = "n", then equality holds and the resulting identity is the inclusion–exclusion principle.

In probability theory, Boole's inequality, also known as the union bound, says that for any finite or countable set of events, the probability that at least one of the events happens is no greater than the sum of the probabilities of the individual events. Boole's inequality is named after George Boole.

Booleova nerovnost je ozačení pro tvrzení z oboru teorie pravděpodobnosti pojmenované po Georgeovi Booleovi, které říká, že pro každou spočetnou množinu náhodných jevů je pravděpodobnost, že alespoň jeden z nich nastane, nejvýše rovna součtu pravděpodobností jednotlivých jevů.


Background.

In 1921 Oklahoma had a racially, socially and politically tense atmosphere. The First World War had ended in 1918 with the return of many ex-servicemen. The American Civil War was still in living memory, even though it had ended in 1865. Civil rights for disenfranchised peoples were lacking and the Ku Klux Klan was resurgent (primarily through the wildly popular movie Birth of a Nation released 1916). Tulsa, as a booming oil city, supported a large number of affluent, educated and professional African Americans. This combination of factors played a part in the rising tensions which were to culminate in the coming events.  The territory of Northern Oklahoma had been established for resettlement of Native Americans from the Southeast, some of whom had owned slaves. Other areas had received many settlers from the South whose families had been slaveholders before the Civil War. Oklahoma was admitted as a state on November 16, 1907. The newly created state legislature passed racial segregation laws, commonly known as Jim Crow laws, as its first order of business. The 1907 Oklahoma Constitution did not call for strict segregation; delegates feared that, should they include such restrictions, U.S. President Theodore Roosevelt would veto the document. Still, the very first law passed by the new legislature segregated all rail travel, and voter registration rules effectively disenfranchised most blacks. That meant they were also barred from serving on juries or in local office. These laws were enforced until after passage of the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965. Major cities passed additional restrictions.  In the early 20th century, lynchings were common in Oklahoma as part of a continuing effort to assert and maintain white supremacy. Between the declaration of

Monday, May 30, 1921 – Memorial Day.

Encounter in the elevator.

It is alleged that at some time about or after 4 p.m., 19-year-old Dick Rowland, a black shoeshiner employed at a Main Street shine parlor, entered the only elevator of the nearby Drexel Building at 319 South Main Street to use the top-floor restroom, which was restricted to black people. He encountered Sarah Page, the 17-year-old white elevator operator on duty. The two likely knew each other at least by sight, as this building was the only one nearby with a restroom which Rowland had express permission to use, and the elevator operated by Page was the only one in

Brief investigation.

Although the police likely questioned Page, no written account of her statement has been found. It is generally accepted that the police determined that what happened between the two teenagers was something less than an assault. The authorities conducted a low-key investigation rather than launching a man-hunt for her alleged assailant. Afterward, Page told the police that she would not press charges.  Regardless of whether assault had occurred, Rowland had reason to be fearful. At the time, such an accusation alone put him at risk for attack by angry mobs of white people. Realizing the gravity of the situation, Rowland fled to his mother's house in the Greenwood neighborhood.

Identity of the black rioters.

On June 3 the "Morning Tulsa Daily World" reported major points of their interview with Deputy Sheriff Barney Cleaver concerning the events leading up to the Tulsa riot. Cleaver was deputy sheriff for Okmulgee County and not under the supervision of the city police department; his duties mainly involved enforcing law among the "colored people" of Greenwood but he also operated a business as a private investigator. He had previously been dismissed as a city police investigator for assisting county officers with a drug raid at Gurley's Hotel but not reporting his involvement to his superiors. He had considerable land holdings and suffered tremendous financial damages as a result of the riot. Among his holdings were several residential properties and Cleaver Hall, a large community gathering place and function hall.

Tuesday, May 31, 1921.

Suspect arrested.

On the morning after the incident, Henry Carmichael, a white detective, and Henry C. Pack, a black patrolman, located Rowland on Greenwood Avenue and detained him. Pack was one of two black officers on the city's police force, which then included about 45 officers. Rowland was initially taken to the Tulsa city jail at First and Main. Late that day, Police Commissioner

Newspaper coverage.

The "Tulsa Tribune", one of two white-owned papers published in Tulsa, broke the story in that afternoon's edition with the headline: "Nab Negro for Attacking Girl In an Elevator", describing the alleged incident. According to some witnesses, the same edition of the "Tribune" included an editorial warning of a potential lynching of Rowland, titled "To Lynch Negro Tonight". The paper was known at

Stand-off at the courthouse.

The afternoon edition of the "Tribune" hit the streets shortly after 3 p.m., and soon news spread of a potential lynching. By 4 p.m., local authorities were on alert. White residents began congregating at and near the Tulsa County Courthouse. By sunset at 7:34 p.m., the several hundred white residents assembled outside the courthouse appeared to have the makings of a lynch mob. Willard M. McCullough, the newly elected sheriff of Tulsa County, was determined to avoid events such as the 1920 lynching of white murder suspect Roy Belton in Tulsa, which had occurred during the term of his predecessor. The sheriff took steps to ensure the safety of Rowland. McCullough organized his deputies into a defensive formation around Rowland, who was terrified. One of Scott Ellsworth's references in the 2001 commission report: The "Guthrie Daily Leader" reported that Rowland had been taken to the county jail before crowds started to gather. The sheriff positioned six of his men, armed with rifles and shotguns, on the roof of the courthouse. He disabled the building's elevator, and had his

Taking up arms.

Having seen the armed blacks, some of the more than 1,000 whites who had been at the courthouse went home for their own guns. Others headed for the National Guard armory at Sixth Street and Norfolk Avenue, where they planned to arm themselves. The armory contained a supply of small arms and ammunition. Major James Bell of the 180th Infantry Regiment had already learned of the mounting situation downtown and the possibility of a break-in which he consequently took measures to prevent. He called the commanders of the three National Guard units in Tulsa, who ordered all the Guard members to put on their uniforms and report quickly to the armory. When a group of whites arrived

Second offer.

In Greenwood, rumors began to fly—in particular, a report that whites were storming the courthouse. Shortly after 10 pm, a second, larger group of approximately 75 armed black men decided to go to the courthouse. They offered their

Riot.

The gunshots triggered an almost immediate response by whites in the crowd, many of whom fired on the blacks, who then fired back at the whites. The first "battle" was said to last a few seconds or so, but took a toll, as ten whites and two blacks lay dead or dying in the street. The black contingent retreated toward Greenwood. A rolling gunfight ensued. The armed white mob pursued the armed black mob toward Greenwood, with many stopping to loot local stores for additional weapons and ammunition. Along the way, bystanders, many of whom were leaving a movie theater after a show, were caught off guard

Wednesday, June 1, 1921.

Throughout the early morning hours, groups of armed whites and blacks squared off in gunfights. At this point the fighting was concentrated along sections of the Frisco tracks, a dividing line between the black and white commercial districts. A rumor circulated that more blacks were coming by train from Muskogee to help with an invasion of Tulsa. At one point, passengers on an incoming train were forced to take cover on the floor of the train cars, as they had arrived in the midst of crossfire, with the train taking hits on both sides.  Small groups of whites made brief forays by car into Greenwood, indiscriminately firing into businesses and residences. They often received return fire. Meanwhile, white rioters threw lighted oil rags into several buildings along Archer Street, igniting them.

Fires begin.

At around 1 a.m., the white mob began setting fires, mainly in businesses on commercial Archer Street at the southern edge of the Greenwood district. As crews from the Tulsa Fire Department arrived to put out fires, they were turned away at gunpoint. Scott Elsworth makes the same claim, but his reference makes no mention of firefighters. Parrish gave only praise for the national guard. Another reference Elsworth gives to support the claim of holding firefighters at gunpoint is only a summary of events in which they suppressed the firing

Daybreak.

Upon sunrise, around 5 a.m., a train whistle sounded (Hirsch said it was a siren). Some rioters believed this sound to be a signal for the rioters to launch an all-out assault on Greenwood. A white man stepped out from behind the Frisco depot and was fatally shot by a sniper in Greenwood. Crowds of rioters poured from their shelter, on foot and by car, into the streets of the black neighborhood. Five white men in a car led the charge, but were killed by a

Attack by air.

Numerous eyewitnesses described airplanes carrying white assailants, who fired rifles and dropped firebombs on buildings, homes, and fleeing families. The privately owned aircraft were dispatched from the nearby Curtiss-Southwest Field outside Tulsa.  Law enforcement officials later said that the planes were to provide reconnaissance and protect against a "Negro uprising." Law enforcement personnel were thought to be aboard at least some flights. Eyewitness accounts, such as testimony from the survivors during Commission hearings and a manuscript by eyewitness and attorney Buck Colbert Franklin discovered in 2015, said that on the morning of June 1, at least "a dozen or more" planes circled the neighborhood and dropped "burning

New eyewitness account.

In 2015, a previously unknown written eyewitness account of the events of May 31, 1921 was discovered and subsequently obtained by the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture. The 10-page typewritten manuscript was authored by Buck Colbert Franklin, noted Oklahoma attorney and father of John Hope Franklin.  Notable quotes include:  Franklin stated that every time he saw a white man shot, he "felt happy" and he "swelled with pride and hope for the race."  Franklin reported seeing multiple machine guns firing at night and hearing 'thousands and thousands of guns' being fired simultaneously from all directions. He states that he was arrested by "a thousand boys, it seemed...firing their guns every step they took."

Other whites.

As unrest spread to other parts of the city, many middle class white families who employed black people in their homes as live-in cooks and servants

Arrival of National Guard troops.

Adjutant General Charles Barrett of the Oklahoma National Guard arrived with 109 troops from Oklahoma City by special train about 9:15 a.m.. Ordered in by the governor, he could not legally act until he had contacted all the appropriate local authorities, including the mayor T. D. Evans, the sheriff, and the police chief. Meanwhile, his troops paused to eat breakfast. Barrett summoned reinforcements from several other Oklahoma cities.  By this time, thousands of black residents had fled the city; another

Stockpiled ammunition.

Captain John W. McCune reported that stockpiled ammunition within

End of martial law.

Martial law was withdrawn Friday afternoon, June 4, 1921 under Field Order No. 7.

Aftermath.

Casualties.

The massacre was covered by national newspapers and the reported number of deaths varies widely. On June 1, 1921, the "Tulsa Tribune" reported that nine white people and 68 black people had died in the riot, but shortly afterwards it changed this number to a total of 176 dead. The next day, the same paper reported the count as nine white people and 21 black people. The "Los Angeles Express" headline said "175 Killed, Many Wounded". The "New York Times" said that 77 people had been killed, including 68 black people, but it later lowered the total to 33. The "Richmond Times Dispatch" of Virginia reported that 85 people (including 25 white people) were killed; it also reported that the Police Chief had reported to Governor Robertson that the total was 75; and that a Police Major put the figure at 175. The Oklahoma Department of Vital Statistics count put the number of deaths at 36 (26 black and 10 white). very few people, if any, died as a direct result of the fire. Official state records recorded only five deaths by conflagration for the entire state in the year of 1921.  Walter Francis White of the N.A.A.C.P. traveled to Tulsa from New York and reported that, although officials and undertakers said that the fatalities numbered ten white and 21 colored, he estimated the number of the dead to be 50 whites and between 150 and 200 Negroes; he also reported that ten white men were killed on Tuesday; six white men drove into the black section and never came out, and thirteen whites were killed on Wednesday; he reported that a major of the Salvation Army in Tulsa, O.T. Johnson said that 37 negroes were employed as gravediggers to bury 120 negroes in individual graves without coffins on Friday and Saturday. The Oklahoma Commission described Johnson's statement being 150 graves and over three dozen diggers. Ground penetrating radar was used to investigate the sites purported to contain these mass graves. Multiple eyewitness reports and 'oral histories' suggested the graves could have been dug at three different cemeteries across the city. The sites were examined and no evidence of ground disturbance indicative of mass graves was found. However, at one site, ground disturbance was found in a five-meter squared area, but cemetery records indicate that three graves had been dug and bodies buried within this envelope before the riot.  Oklahoma's 2001 Commission into the riot provides multiple contradicting estimates. D. Goble estimates 100–300 (also stating right after that no one was prosecuted even though nearly a hundred were indicted), and J. H. Franklin and S. Ellsworth only estimate at least 75–100 and describe some of the higher estimates as dubious as the low estimates. C. Snow was able to confirm 39 casualties all listed as male although four were unidentifiable. 26 were black and 13 were white. The thirteen white fatalities were all taken to hospitals. Eleven of them had come from outside of Oklahoma and possibly as many as half were petroleum industry workers. Only eight of the confirmed 26 black fatalities were brought to hospitals, and as hospitals were segregated, and with the black Frissell Memorial Hospital having burned down, the only place the black injured were treated was at the basement of Morningside Hospital. Several hundred were injured.

Property losses.

The commercial section of Greenwood was destroyed. Losses included 191 businesses, a junior high school, several churches, and the only hospital in the district. The Red Cross reported that 1,256 houses were burned and another 215 were looted but not burned. The Tulsa Real Estate

Public Safety Committee.

By June 6, the Associated Press reported that a citizens' Public Safety Committee had been established, made up of 250 white men

The Tulsa race massacre (also called the Tulsa race riot, the Greenwood Massacre, or the Black Wall Street Massacre) took place on May 31 and June 1, 1921, when mobs of white residents attacked black residents and businesses of the Greenwood District in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It has been called "the single worst incident of racial violence in American history." The attack, carried out on the ground and from private aircraft, destroyed more than 35 square blocks of the district—at that time the wealthiest black community in the United States, known as "Black Wall Street".

Masakr v Tulse (nazývaný také jako rasové nepokoje v Tulse, masakr v Greenwoodu nebo masakr na černošské Wall Street) se odehrál na přelomu května a června 1921 ve čtvrti Greenwood ve městě Tulse v Oklahomě. Masakr v Tulse bývá označován za nejhorší rasově motivovaný čin v dějinách USA. Během útoku bělošského obyvatelstva na černošskou čtvrť Greenwood bylo zavražděno 36 až 300 osob. Přesné počty nebyly potvrzeny, protože spolehlivé vyšetřování probíhalo až v letech 1996–2001. V roce 2019 se podle názoru archeologů podařilo najít dva z masových hrobů obětí masakru. Jelikož byl Greenwood jednou z nejbohatších dobových čtvrtí Afroameričanů, přezdívalo se mu černošská Wall Street. Během masakru ozbrojený dav bělochů celou čtvrť zapálil; v důsledku požáru shořelo 35 bloků budov se škodou kolem 32 milionů dolarů (v přepočtu k roku 2018). Útok, během kterého byla použita i soukromá letadla, ze kterých útočníci stříleli a házeli improvizované výbušniny, si vedle zabitých vyžádal 800 zraněných osob a 6 000 zadržených Afroameričanů. Požár čtvrti připravil 10 000 Afroameričanů o domov, kteří následně žili ve stanovém městě za pomoci Červeného kříže.


Historical background.

The Magyar raids into northern Italy in 898 and again in 899 resulted in the plundering and brief occupation of the important mainland cities of Cittanova, Padua, and Treviso as well as several smaller towns and settlements in and around the Venetian Lagoon. Although the Venetians ultimately defeated the Magyars on the Lido of Albiola on 29 June 900 and repelled the incursion, Venice remained vulnerable by way of the deep navigable channel that allowed access to the harbour from the sea. In particular, the young city was most threatened by the Slavic pirates who routinely menaced Venetian shipping lanes in the Adriatic.  A series of fortifications was consequently erected during the reign of Doge Pietro Tribuno (887–911) to protect Venice from invasion by sea. These fortifications, probably begun in 901, eventually included walls that started at the "rivulus de Castello" (Rio del Palazzo), just east of the Doge’s Castle, and extended along the waterfront to the area occupied by the early Church of Santa Maria Iubanico. In addition, an iron chain that could be pulled taut across the Grand Canal and impede further access was installed at the height of San Gregorio. Integral to this defensive network, a massive watch tower was built in Saint Mark’s Square. It was also intended to serve as a point of reference to guide Venetian ships safely into the harbour which at that time occupied a substantial part of the area corresponding to the present-day piazzetta.

Construction.

Tower.

The defensive system begun under Pietro Tribuno was only provisional, and construction may have been limited to the reinforcement of pre-existing structures. Mediaeval chronicles attribute the building of the tower, principally the foundation, to his immediate successors, Orso II Participazio (912–932) and Pietro II Candiano (932–939). Delays were likely due to the difficulty in locating and importing building materials from the mainland as well as developing suitable construction techniques. Fabrication of the actual tower seems to have begun during the brief reign of Pietro Participazio (939–942) but did not progress far. Political stife during the ensuing reigns of Pietro III Candiano (942–959) and, particularly, Pietro IV Candiano (959–976) precluded further work.  Under Pietro I Orseolo (976–978), construction resumed, and it advanced considerably during the reign of Tribuno Memmo (979–991). No further additions were made to the tower until the time of Domenico Selvo (1071–1084), an indication that it had reached a serviceable height and could be used to control access to the city. Selva increased the height in correspondence to the fifth of the eight windows. Doge Domenico Morosini (1147–1156) then raised the height to the actual level of the belfry and is credited with the construction of the bell tower. His portrait in the Doge's Palace shows him together with a scroll that lists the significant events of his reign, among which is the construction of the bell tower: ""Sub me admistrandi operis campanile Sancti Marci construitur..."".

Belfry and spire.

The first belfry was added under Vitale II Michiel (1156–1172). It was surmounted by a pyramidal spire in wood that was sheathed with copper plates. Around 1329, the belfry was restored and the spire reconstructed. The spire itself was particularly prone to fire due to the wooden framework. It burned when lighting struck the tower on 7 June 1388, but it was nevertheless rebuilt in wood. On this occasion, the copper plates were covered in gold leaf, rendering the tower visible to distant ships in the Adriatic. The spire was once again destroyed in 1403 when flames from a bonfire lit to illuminate the tower in celebration of the Venetian victory over the Genoese at the Battle of Modon enveloped the wooden frame. It was rebuilt between 1405 and 1406. Lightning again struck the tower during a violent storm on 11 August 1489, setting ablaze the spire which eventually crashed into the square below. The bells fell to the floor of the belfry, and the masonry of the tower itself cracked. In response to this latest calamity, the procurators of Saint Mark "de supra", the government officials responsible for the public buildings around Saint Mark’s Square, deliberated to rebuild the belfry and spire completely in masonry so as to prevent future fires. The commission was given to their "proto" (consultant architect and buildings manager),. Although the design was submitted within a few months, financial constraints in the period of recovery from the wars in Lombardy against Milan (1423–1454) delayed execution. Instead, Spavento limited repairs to the structural damage to the tower. A temporary clay-tile roof was placed over the belfry, and the bells that were still intact were rehung. The outbreak in 1494 of the Italian wars for the control of the mainland precluded any further action.  On 26 March 1511, a violent earthquake further damaged the fragile structure and opened a long fissure on the northern side of the tower, making it necessary to immediately intervene. Upon the initiative of procurator Antonio Grimani, the temporary roof and the belfry were removed and preparations were made to finally execute Spavento's design. The work was carried out under the direction of Pietro Bon who had succeeded Spavento as "proto" in 1509. To finance the construction, the procurators sold unclaimed objects in precious metals that had been deposited in the treasury of Saint Mark's in 1414. By 1512, the tower itself had been completely repaired, and work began on the new belfry in Istrian stone. The four sides of the brick attic above have high-relief sculptures in contrasting Istrian stone. The eastern and western sides have allegorical figures of Venice, presented as a personification of Justice with the sword and the scales. She sits on a throne supported by lions on either side in allusion to the throne of Solomon, the king of ancient Israel renowned for his wisdom and judgement. This theme of Venice as embodying, rather than invoking, the virtue of Justice is common in Venetian state iconography and is recurrent on the façade of the Doge’s Palace. The remaining sides of the attic have the lion of Saint Mark, the symbol of the Venetian Republic.  The completion of work was celebrated on 6 July 1513 when a wooden statue of the archangel Gabriel, plated in copper and gilded, was placed at the top of the spire. In his diary, Marin Sanudo recorded the event: "On this day, a gilded copper angel was hoisted above Saint Mark’s Square at four hours before sunset to the sound of trumpets and fifes, and wine and milk were sprayed from above as a sign of merriment" (""In questo zorno, su la piazza di San Marco fo tirato l’anzolo di rame indorado suso con trombe e pifari a hore 20; et fo butado vin e late zoso in segno di alegrezza"").  A novelty with respect to the earlier tower, the statue functioned as a weather vane, turning so that it always faced into the wind. Francesco Sansovino suggested in his guide to the city, "Venetia città nobilissima et singolare" (1581), that the idea of a weather vane atop the new tower derived from Vitruvius’ description of the Tower of the Winds in Athens which had a bronze triton mounted on a pivot. But the specific choice of the archangel Gabriel was meant to recall the legend of Venice’s foundation on the 25 March 421, the feast of the Annunciation. In Venetian historiography, the legend, traceable to the thirteenth century, conflated the beginning of the Christian era with the birth of Venice as a Christian republic and affirmed Venice's unique place and role in history as an act of divine grace. As a construct, it is expressed in the frequent representations of the Annunciation throughout Venice, most notably on the façade of Saint Mark's Basilica and in the reliefs by Agostino Rubini at the base of the Rialto Bridge, depicting the Virgin Mary opposite the archangel Gabriel.

Loggetta.

In the fifteenth century, the procurators of Saint Mark "de supra" erected a covered exterior gallery attached to the bell tower. It was a lean-to wooden structure, partially enclosed, that served as a gathering place for nobles whenever they came to the square on government business. It also provided space for the procurators who occasionally met there and for the sentries who protected the entry to the Doge's Palace whenever the Great Council was in session.  Over time, it was repeatedly damaged by falling masonry from the bell tower as a result of storm and earthquake but was repaired after each incident. However, when lightning struck the bell tower on 11 August 1537 and the loggia underneath was once again damaged, it was decided to completely rebuild the structure. The commission was given to the sculptor and architect Jacopo Sansovino, the immediate successor to Bon as "proto" of the procurators of Saint Mark "de supra". It was completed in 1546.  The remaining three sides of the bell tower were covered with wooden lean-to stalls, destined for retail activities. These were an additional source of revenue for the procurators of Saint Mark de supra and were leased in order to finance the maintenance of the buildings in the square. The lean-to stalls were removed in 1873.

Later history.

Throughout its history, the bell tower remained subject to damage from storms. Lightning struck in 1548, 1562, 1565, and 1567. On each occasion, repairs were carried out under the direction of Jacopo Sansovino, responsible as "proto" for the maintenance of the buildings administered by the procurators of Saint Mark "de supra", including the bell tower. The work, funded from the accounts of the procurators, was typically executed by carpenters provided by the Arsenal, the government shipyards. The tower was damaged twice in 1582.  In the following centuries, it was repeatedly necessary to intervene and repair the damage caused by lightning. In 1653, Baldassarre Longhena took up repairs after lightning struck, having become "proto" in 1640. The damage must have been extensive on this occasion, given the repair cost of 1230 ducats. Significant work was also necessary to repair damage done after lightning struck on 23 April 1745, causing some of the masonry to crack and killing four people in the square as a result of falling stonework. The campanile was again damaged by lightning in 1761 and 1762. Repair costs on the second occasion reached the considerable sum of 3329 ducats. Finally, on 18 March 1776, the physicist Giuseppe Toaldo, professor of astronomy at the University of Padua, installed a lightning rod, the first in Venice.  Periodic work was also needed to repair damage from wind and rain erosion. The original statue of the Archangel Gabriel was replaced in 1557 with a smaller version. After numerous restorations, this was in turn substituted in 1820 by a statue designed by.  The tower remained of strategic importance to the city. Access to visiting foreign dignitaries was allowed only by the Senate and only at high tide when it was not possibile to distinguish the navigable channels in the lagoon. On 21 August 1609, Galileo Galilei demonstrated his telescope to the procurator Antonio Priuli and other nobles from the belfry. Three days later, the telescope was presented to doge Leonardo Donato from the loggia of the Doge's Palace.

Bells.

History.

A bell was most likely first installed in the tower during the reign of Doge Vitale II Michiel. However, documents that attest to the presence of a bell are traceable only from the thirteenth century. A deliberation of the Great Council, dated 8 July 1244, established that the bell to convene the council was to be rung in the evening if the council was to meet the following morning and in the early afternoon if the meeting was scheduled for the evening of the same day. There is a similar reference to the bell in the statute of the ironmongers' guild, dating to 1271.  Over time, the number of bells varied. In 1489, there were at least six. Four were present in the sixteenth century until 1569 when a fifth was added. Beginning in 1678 the bell brought to Venice from Crete after the island was lost to the Ottoman Turks, called the "Campanon da Candia", hung in the tower. But when it fell to the floor of the belfry in 1722, it was not resuspended. After this time, five bells remained. These were named (from smallest to largest) "Maleficio" (also "Renghiera" or "Preghiera"), "Trottiera" (also "Dietro Nona"), "Meza-terza" (also "Pregadi"), "Nona", and "Marangona".  The original "Marangona" and "Renghiera", together with the "Campanon da Candia" and other bells from former churches, were recast by Domenico Canciani Dalla Venezia into two larger bronze bells between 1808 and 1809. But these were melted with the "Meza-terza", "Trottiera", and "Nona" in 1820, again by Dalla Venezia, to create a new series of five bells. Of these bells, only the "Marangona" survived the collapse of the bell tower in 1902.

Functions.

In various combinations, the bells indicated the times of the day and coordinated activities throughout the city. Four of the bells also had specific functions in relation to the activities of the Venetian government.

Times of the day.

At dawn, with the first appearance of daylight, the "Meza-terza" rang (16 series of 18 strokes). The "Marangona" followed at sunrise (16 series of 18 strokes). Then, after a half hour, the "Meza-terza" rang continuously for a half hour. An hour then ensued at the end of which the "Marangona" marked the beginning of the work day (25 series of 26 strokes). The bell, the largest, derived its name from this particular function in reference to the "marangoni" (carpenters) who worked in the Arsenal, the government shipyards.  At midday, the "Nona" sounded (16 series of 18 strokes). Its name was associated with the Ninth Hour (Nones), the moment of the liturgical mid-afternoon prayer. A half hour later, the "Trottiera" rang continuously for 30 minutes: from this particular function, the "Trottiera" was also termed "Dietro Nona" (behind, or after, "Nona"). An hour later (two hours after midday), the "Nona", followed by the "Marangona", rang to mark the vespertine Ave Maria. The "Marangona" rang (15 series of 16 strokes) at sunset which corresponded to 24 hours and the end of the day. An hour later, the "Meza-terza" rang for 15 minutes, followed 12 minutes later by the "Nona" for 15 minutes. After another 12 minutes, the "Marangona" struck for 6 minutes, ending at two hours after sunset.  Midnight was marked by the ringing of the "Marangona" (16 series of 18 strokes).

Public executions.

The smallest bell, known alternatively as the "Renghiera", "Maleficio", or "Preghiera", signalled public executions. It had previously been located in the Doge’s Palace and is mentioned in connection with the execution for treason of Doge Marin Falier in 1355. In 1569, it was moved to the tower. The earliest name "Renghiera" derived from "renga" (harangue) in reference to the court proceedings within the Palace. The alternative name of "Maleficio", from "malus" (evil, wicked), recalled the criminal act, whereas "Preghiera" (prayer) invoked supplications for the soul of the condemned. After the execution, the "Marangona" was rung for a half hour and then the "Meza-terza".

Convocation of the Great Council.

The "Marangona" announced the sessions of the Great Council. In the event that the council was to meet in the afternoon, the "Trottiera" first rang for 15 minutes, immediately after Third Hour (Terce). After midday, the "Marangona" resounded (9 series of 50 strokes followed by 5 of 25). The "Trottiera" then rang continuously for a half hour as a second call for the members of the Great Council, signalling the need to quicken the pace. The name of the bell originated when horses were used in the city. The ringing of the "Trottiera" was therefore meant to signal the need to proceed at a trot. When the bell ceased, the doors of the council hall were closed and the session began. No latecomers were admitted. Whenever the Great Council convened in the morning, the "Trottiera" rang the previous evening for 15 minutes after the "Marangona" marked the end of the day. The "Marangona" was then rung in the morning, with the prescribed series of strokes, followed by the "Trottiera".

Convocation of the Senate.

The meetings of the Venetian Senate were announced by the "Trottiera" which rang for 12 minutes. It was then joined by the "Meza-terza", and both bells rang together for 48 minutes. The "Meza-terza" was also known as the "Pregadi" in reference to the early name of the Senate when members were 'prayed' ("pregadi") to attend.

Holy days and events.

On solemnities and certain feast days, all the bells rang in "plenum". The bells also rang in unison for three days, until three hours after sunset, to mark the election of the doge and the coronation of the pope. On these occasions, they were rapidly hammered. Two hundred lanterns were also arranged in four tiers at the height of the belfry in celebration.  To announce the death of the doge and for the funeral, the bells rang in unison (nine series of 18 double strokes, each series slowly over 12 minutes). For the death of the pope, the bells rang for three days after third hour (6 double strokes, slowly over 12 minutes). The bells also marked the passing of cardinals and foreign ambassadors who had died in Venice, the wife and sons of the doge, the patriarch and the canons of Saint Mark's, the procurators of Saint Mark, and the Grand Chancellor (the highest ranking civil servant).

Collapse and rebuilding.

Collapse.

When the lean-to stalls were removed from the sides of the bell tower in 1873–1874, the base was discovered to be in poor condition. But restoration was limited to repairing surface damage. Similarly, excavations in Saint Mark's Square in 1885 raised concerns for the state of the foundation and the stability of the structure. Yet inspection reports by engineers and architects in 1892 and 1898 were reassuring that the tower was in no danger. Ensuing restoration was sporadic and primarily involved the substitution of weathered bricks.  In July 1902, work was underway to repair the roof of the loggetta. The girder supporting the roof where it rested against the tower was removed by cutting a large fissure, roughly in height and in depth, at the base of the tower. On 7 July, it was observed that the shaft of the tower trembled as workmen hammered the new girder into place. Glass tell-tales were inserted into crevices in order to monitor the shifting of the tower. Several of these were found broken the next day.  By 12 July, a large crack had formed on the northern side of the tower, running almost the entire height of the brick shaft. More accurate plaster tell-tales were inserted into the crevices. Although a technical commission was immediately formed, it determined that there was no threat to the structure. Nevertheless, wooden barricades were erected to keep onlookers at a safe distance as pieces of mortar began to break off from the widening gap and fall to the square below. Access to the tower was prohibited, and only the bell signalling the beginning and end of the work day was to be rung in order to limit vibrations. The following day, Sunday, the customary band in Saint Mark's Square was cancelled for the same reason.  The next morning, Monday 14 July, the latest tell-tales were all discovered broken; the maximum crack that had developed since the preceding day was. At 09:30 it was ordered that the square be evacuated. Stones began to fall at 9:47, and at 9:53 the entire bell tower collapsed. Because of its isolated position, the resulting damage was relatively limited. Apart from the loggetta, which was completely demolished, only a corner of the historical building of the Marciana Library was destroyed. The basilica itself was protected by the "pietra del bando", a large porphyry column from which laws used to be read. The sole fatality was the caretaker's cat. That same evening, the communal council convened in an emergency session and voted unanimously to rebuild the bell tower exactly as it was. The council also approved an initial 500,000 Lire for the reconstruction. The province of Venice followed with 200.000 Lire on 22 July. Although a few detractors of the reconstruction, including the editorialist of the "Daily Express" and Maurice Barrès, claimed that the square was more beautiful without the tower and that any replica would have no historical value, ""dov’era e com’era"" (""where it was and how it was"") was the prevailing sentiment.

Rebuilding.

In addition to the sums appropriated by the commune and the province, a personal donation arrived from King Victor Emmanuel III and the queen mother (100,000 Lire). This was followed by contributions from other Italian communes and provinces as well as private citizens. Throughout the world, fund raising began, spearheaded by international newspapers. The German scaffolding specialist Georg Leib of Munich donated the scaffolding on 22 July 1902.  In autumn 1902, work began on clearing the site. The fragments of the loggetta, including columns, reliefs, capitals, and the bronze statues, were carefully removed, inventoried, and transferred to the courtyard of the Doge's Palace. Bricks that could be utilized for other construction projects were salvaged, whereas the rubble of no use was transported on barges to the open Adriatic where it was dumped. By spring 1903, the site had been cleared of debris, and the remaining stub of the old tower was torn down and the material removed. The oak pilings of the mediaeval foundation were inspected and found to be in good condition, requiring only moderate reinforcement. The ceremony to mark the commencement of the actual reconstruction took place on 25 April 1903, Saint Mark's feast day, with the blessing by the patriarch of Venice Giuseppe Sarto, later Pope Pius X, and the laying of the cornerstone by Prince Vittorio Emanuele, the count of Turin, in representation of the king. For the first two years, work consisted in preparing the foundation which was extended outward by on all sides. This was accomplished by driving in 3076 larch piles, roughly in length and in diameter. Eight layers of Istrian stone blocks were then placed on top to create the new foundation. This was completed in October 1905. The first of the 1,203,000 bricks used for the new tower was laid in a second ceremony on 1 April 1906. To facilitate construction, a mobile scaffold was conceived. It surrounded the tower on all sides and was raised as work progressed by extending the braces.  With respect to the original tower, structural changes were made to provide for greater stability and decrease the overall weight. The two shafts, one inside the other, were previously independent of each other. The outer shell alone bore the entire weight of the belfry and spire; the inner shaft only partially supported the series of ramps and steps. With the new design, the two shafts were tied together by means of reinforced concrete beams which also support the weight of the ramps, rebuilt in concrete rather than masonry. In addition, the stone support of the spire was replaced with reinforced concrete, and the weight was distributed on both the inner and outer shafts of the tower.  The tower itself was completed on 3 October 1908. It was then in height. The following year work began on the belfry and the year after on the attic. The allegorical figures of Venice as Justice on the eastern and western sides were reassembled from the fragments that had been recuperated from the ruins and were restored. The twin effigies of the winged lion of Saint Mark located on the remaining sides of the attic had already been chiselled away and irreparably damaged after the fall of the Venetian Republic at the time of the first French occupation (May 1797 – January 1798). They were completely remade.  Work began on the spire in 1911 and lasted until 5 March 1912 when the restored statue of the archangel Gabriel was hoisted to the summit. The new campanile was inaugurated on 25 April 1912, on the occasion of Saint Mark's feast day, exactly 1000 years after the foundations of the original building had allegedly been laid.

New bells.

Of the five bells cast by Domenico Canciani Dalla Venezia in 1820, only the largest, the "Marangona", survived the collapse of the bell tower. Together with the pieces of the four shattered bells, it was transferred inside the Doge’s Palace for safekeeping during the reconstruction of the tower.  On 14 July 1908, Pope Pius X, patriarch of Venice at the time of the bell tower’s collapse in 1902, announced his intention to personally finance the recasting of the four bells as a gift to the city. The work was carried out under the supervision of the directors of the choirs of Saint Mark's and Saint Anthony's in Padua, the director of the Milan Conservatory, and the owner of the of Milan. The fragments of the four bells were first assembled, and moulds were made to ensure the same sizes and shapes, after which the original bronze was remelted to create the new "Maleficio", "Trottiera", "Meza terza", and "Nona". For the purpose, a foundry was activated near the Church of Sant'Elena, on the homonymous island, and the new bells were cast on 24 April 1909, the vigil of Saint Mark’s Feast. After two months, the bells were tuned to harmonize with the "Marangona" before being transported to Saint Mark’s Square. They were formally blessed by Cardinal Aristide Cavallari, patriarch of Venice, on 15 June 1910 in a ceremony with Prince Luigi Amedeo in attendance, prior to being raised to the new belfry on 22 June.  To ring the new bells, the earlier simple rope and lever system, used to swing the wooden headstock, was replaced with a groved wheel around which the rope is wrapped. This was done to minimize the vibrations whenever the bells are rung and hence the risk of damage to the tower.

Elevator.

In 1892, it was first proposed that an elevator be installed in the bell tower. But concerns over the stability of the structure were voiced by the Regional Office for the Preservation of Veneto Monuments ("Ufficio Regionale per la Conservazione dei Monumenti del Veneto"). Although a special commission was nominated and concluded that the concerns were unfounded, the project was abandoned.  At the time of the reconstruction, an elevator was utilized to raise the new bells to the level of the belfry, but it was only temporary. Finally, in 1962, a permanent elevator was installed. Located within the inner shaft, it employs 30 seconds to reach the belfry.

Restoration work (2007–2012).

The Campanile underwent a major set of building works beginning in 2007. Like many buildings in Venice, it is built on soft ground, supported by wooden piles. Due to years of winter flooding (Acqua Alta), the subsoil has become saturated and the campanile has begun to subside and lean. Evidence of this can be seen in the increasing number of cracks in the masonry.  In order to stop the damage, a ring of titanium was built underneath the foundations of the campanile. The titanium ring will protect the campanile from the shifting soil and ensure that the tower subsides equally and does not lean.

Influence.

The original Campanile inspired the designs of other towers worldwide, especially in the areas belonging to the former Republic of Venice. Almost identical, albeit smaller, replicas of the campanile exist in the Slovenian town of Piran and in the Croatian town of Rovinj; both were built in the early 17th century. Other, later replicas include the clock tower at King Street Station in Seattle; North Toronto Station; Brisbane City Hall, Australia; the Rathaus (Town Hall) in Kiel Germany; the Daniels & Fisher Tower in Denver; the Campanile in Port Elizabeth- South Africa; Sather Tower, nicknamed the Campanile, on the campus of the University of California, Berkeley; 14 Wall Street; and the right-hand bell-tower of St. John Gualbert in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.  The Metropolitan Life Insurance Company Tower, a landmark in the New York City borough of Manhattan, was designed by the architectural firm of Napoleon LeBrun & Sons, who based the external form and shape of the skyscraper on this Campanile.  Replicas of the current tower sit on the complex of The Venetian, the Venice-themed resort on the Las Vegas Strip, its sister resort The Venetian Macao, in the Italy Pavilion at Epcot, a theme park at Walt Disney World in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, and in the nearly empty New South China Mall in Dongguan, China.  There is a mill chimney in Darwen, Lancashire which is modelled on the Campanile in St. Mark's Square, Venice, called India Mill. Another one is in the Venice Grand Canal, Taguig in Manila, Philippines.  The Venetian Towers in Barcelona, Spain, are modelled on the Campanile. The Custom House Tower in Boston, MA is modelled on the Campanile.  The Italianate-style tower at Jones Beach State Park, Long Island, New York, is modelled on the Campanile.  The Sretenskaya church in Bogucharovo, Tula region, Russia is modelled on the Campanile.

St Mark's Campanile (; ) is the bell tower of St Mark's Basilica in Venice, Italy, located in the Piazza San Marco. It is one of the most recognizable symbols of the city.

Zvonice svatého Marka ( "Campanile di San Marco", "Canpanièl de San Marco") je zvonicí neboli kampanilou světoznámé Baziliky svatého Marka v italských Benátkách. Je to jedna z dominant náměstí Svatého Marka a jeden ze symbolů města.


Background.

James Asher developed the total physical response ( TPR ) method as a result of his observation of the language development of young children. Asher saw that most of the interactions that young children experience with parents or other adults combine both verbal and physical aspects. The child responds physically to the speech of the parent, and the parent reinforces the child's responses through further speech. This creates a positive feedback loop between the parent's speech and the child's actions. Asher also observed that young children typically spend a long time listening to language before ever attempting to speak, and that they can understand and react to utterances that are much more complex than those they can produce themselves.  From his experiences, Asher outlined three main hypotheses about learning second languages that are embodied in the total physical response method. The first is that the brain is naturally predisposed to learn language through listening. Specifically, Asher says that learners best internalize language when they respond with physical movement to language input. Asher hypothesizes that speech develops naturally and spontaneously after learners internalize the target language through input, and that it should not be forced. In Asher's own words:  A reasonable hypothesis is that the brain and the nervous system are biologically programmed to acquire language, either the first or the second in a particular sequence and in a particular mode. The sequence is listening before speaking and the mode is to synchronise language with the individual's body.  The second of Asher's hypotheses is that effective language learning must engage the right hemisphere of the brain. Physical movement is controlled primarily by the right hemisphere, and Asher sees the coupling of movement with language comprehension as the key to language acquisition. He says that left-hemisphere learning should be avoided, and that the left hemisphere needs a great deal of experience of right-hemisphere-based input before natural speech can occur.  Asher's third hypothesis is that language learning should not involve any stress, as stress and negative emotions inhibit the natural language-learning process. He regards the stressful nature of most language-teaching methods as one of their major weaknesses. Asher recommends that teachers focus on meaning and physical movement to avoid stress.  The main text on total physical response is James Asher's "Learning Another Language through Actions", first published in 1977.

Principles.

Total physical response is an example of the comprehension approach to language teaching. Methods in the comprehension approach emphasize the importance of listening to language development, and do not require spoken output in the early stages of learning. In total physical response, students are not forced to speak. Instead, teachers wait until students acquire enough language through listening that they start to speak spontaneously. At the beginning stages of instruction students can respond to the instructor in their native language.  While the majority of class time in total physical response is spent on listening comprehension, the ultimate goal of the method is to develop oral fluency. Asher sees developing listening comprehension skills as the most efficient way of developing spoken language skills.  Lessons in TPR are organized around grammar, and in particular around the verb. Instructors issue commands based on the verbs and vocabulary to be learned in that lesson. However, the primary focus in lessons is on meaning, which distinguishes TPR from other grammar-based methods such as grammar-translation.  Grammar is not explicitly taught, but is learned by induction. Students are expected to subconsciously acquire the grammatical structure of the language through exposure to spoken language input, in addition to decoding the messages in the input to find their meaning. This approach to listening is called "codebreaking".  Total physical response is both a teaching technique and a philosophy of language teaching. Teachers do not have to limit themselves to TPR techniques to teach according to the principles of the total physical response method.  Because the students are only expected to listen and not to speak, the teacher has the sole responsibility for deciding what input students hear.

Procedure.

The majority of class time in TPR lessons is spent doing drills in which the instructor gives commands using the imperative mood. Students respond to these commands with physical actions. Initially, students learn the meaning of the commands they hear by direct observation. After they learn the meaning of the words in these commands, the teacher issues commands that use novel combinations of the words the students have learned.  Instructors limit the number of new vocabulary items given to students at any one time. This is to help students differentiate the new words from those previously learned, and to facilitate integration with their existing language knowledge. Asher suggests that students can learn between 12 and 36 words for every hour of instruction, depending on their language level and class size.  While drills using the imperative are the mainstay of total physical response classes, teachers can use other activities as well. Some typical other activities are role plays and slide presentations. However, beginners are not made to learn conversational dialogs until 120 hours into their course.  There is little error correction in TPR. Asher advises teachers to treat learners' mistakes the same way a parent would treat their children's. Errors made by beginning-level students are usually overlooked, but as students become more advanced teachers may correct more of their errors. This is similar to parents raising their children; as children get older parents tend to correct their grammatical mistakes more often.  According to Asher, TPR lesson plans should contain the detailed commands that the teacher intends to use. He says, “It is wise to write out the exact utterances you will be using and especially the novel commands because the action is so fast-moving there is usually not time for you to create spontaneously.”

Teaching materials.

Total physical response lessons typically use a wide variety of realia, posters, and props. Teaching materials are not compulsory, and for the very first lessons they may not be used. As students progress in ability the teacher may begin to use objects found in the classroom such as furniture or books, and later may use word charts, pictures, and realia.  There are a number of specialized TPR teaching products available, including student kits developed by Asher and an interactive CD-ROM for students to practice with privately.

Research.

Asher conducted a large number of scientific studies to test and refine his hypotheses and the teaching practices in total physical response. When testing children and adults learning Russian, Asher and Price found that the adults outperformed the children.  Research performed in Turkey in 2018 on TPR by Adnan Oflaz showed that using the method can significantly reduce anxiety in students. Over the course of Oflaz's research of using the TPR method for two hours a week over a six week period, "those [students] whose anxiety levels were high and those who experienced anxiety very close to high level... went down to medium level." Oflaz also observed that the students were more willing to speak in German (which was the target language), that they didn't purposefully avoid situations in which they needed to speak in the target language, and that some students were even "eager to take turns to speak."

Reception.

According to the "Routledge Encyclopedia of Language Teaching and Learning", TPR is often criticized as being only suitable for beginning students. However, the encyclopedia goes on to note that there are several publications available about how to use TPR with intermediate and advanced students.  According to its proponents, total physical response has a number of advantages: Students enjoy getting out of their chairs and moving around. Simple TPR activities do not require a great deal of preparation on the part of the teacher. TPR is aptitude-free, working well with a mixed ability class, and with students having various disabilities. It is good for kinesthetic learners who need to be active in the class. Class size need not be a problem, and it works effectively for children and adults.  However, it is recognized that TPR is most useful for beginners, though it can be used at higher levels where preparation becomes an issue for the teacher. It does not give students the opportunity to express their own thoughts in a creative way. Further, it is easy to overuse TPR-- "Any novelty, if carried on too long, will trigger adaptation." It can be a challenge for shy students. Additionally, the nature of TPR places an unnaturally heavy emphasis on the use of the imperative mood, that is to say commands such as "sit down" and "stand up". These features are of limited utility to the learner, and can lead to a learner appearing rude when attempting to use their new language. As a TPR class progresses, group activities and descriptions can extend basic TPR concepts into full communication situations.  Because of its participatory approach, TPR may also be a useful alternative teaching strategy for students with dyslexia or related learning disabilities, who typically experience difficulty learning foreign languages with traditional classroom instruction.

Influence.

Teachers who use TPR typically use it together with a variety of other activities and techniques. It is most often used for introducing new vocabulary. This is in line with Asher's recommendations for using the method.  Blaine Ray, a Spanish language teacher, added stories to TPR to help students acquire non-physical language, creating the foundation of the method known as Teaching Proficiency through Reading and Storytelling (TPRS) built on Stephen Krashen's theories of language acquisition.

Total physical response (TPR) is a language teaching method developed by James Asher, a professor emeritus of psychology at San José State University. It is based on the coordination of language and physical movement. In TPR, instructors give commands to students in the target language with body movements, and students respond with whole-body actions.

Metoda celkové fyzické odpovědi je alternativní metoda výuky cizích jazyků zformulovaná profesorem Jamesem J. Asherem v 70. letech 20. století. Tato metoda se obvykle spojuje s podobnými přístupy a metodami jako přirozený přístup, lexikální přistup, či sugestopedie. Je založená na teoretickém předpokladu, že lidský mozek je rozdělen do dvou hemisfér – levé a pravé. V levé hemisféře se nachází centrum řeči a pravá ovládá pohyb. Učitel v hodinách dává příkazy žákům zaměřené na pohyb. Důrazem na používání pravé hemisféry má pak výuka redukovat stres. Tímto se napodobí postup osvojování mateřského jazyka u dětí, který má být optimální i při učení se dalšího jazyka. Metoda je užívaná především ve výuce dětí a začátečníků.


Biography.

Early life and education.

Krylenko was born in Bekhteyevo, in Sychyovsky Uyezd of Smolensk Governorate, the eldest of six children (two sons and four daughters) born to a populist revolutionary and his wife. His father, needing income to support his growing family, became a tax collector for the Tsarist government.  The young Krylenko joined the Bolshevik faction of the Russian Social Democratic Labor Party (RSDLP) in 1904 while studying history and literature at St. Petersburg University, where he was known to fellow students as Comrade Abram. He was a member of the short-lived St. Petersburg Soviet during the Russian Revolution of 1905 and a member of the Bolshevik St. Petersburg Committee. He had to flee Russia in June 1906, but returned later that year. Arrested by the Tsar's secret police in 1907, Krylenko was released for lack of evidence, but soon exiled to Lublin (present-day Poland) without trial.  Krylenko returned to St. Petersburg in 1909 and finished his degree. He left the RSDLP in 1911, but soon rejoined it. He was drafted in 1912 and was promoted to Second Lieutenant before being discharged in 1913. After working as an assistant editor of "Pravda" and a liaison to the Bolshevik faction in the Duma for a few months, Krylenko was arrested again in 1913 and exiled to Kharkiv. There he studied and earned a law degree. In early 1914, Krylenko learned that he might be re-arrested and fled to Austria.  At the outbreak of the Great War in August 1914, he moved to neutral Switzerland as a Russian national. In the summer of 1915, Vladimir Lenin sent Krylenko back to Russia to help rebuild the Bolshevik underground organization. In November 1915 Krylenko was arrested in Moscow as a draft dodger and, after a few months in prison, sent to the South West Front in April 1916.

1917 revolutions.

After the February Revolution of 1917 and the introduction of elected committees in the Russian armed forces, Krylenko was elected chairman of his regiment's and then division's committee. On April 15 he was elected chairman of the 11th Army's committee. After Lenin's return to Russia in April 1917, Krylenko adopted the new Bolshevik policy of irreconcilable opposition to the Provisional Government. He had to resign his post on May 26, 1917 for lack of support from non-Bolshevik members of the Army committee.  In June 1917 Krylenko was made a member of the Bolshevik Military Organization and was elected to the First All-Russian Congress of Soviets. At the Congress, he was elected to the permanent All-Russian Central Executive Committee from the Bolshevik faction. Krylenko left Petrograd for the High Command HQ in Mogilev on July 2, but was arrested there by the Provisional government after the Bolsheviks staged an abortive uprising on July 4. He was kept in prison in Petrograd, but was released in mid-September after the Kornilov Affair.  Krylenko took an active part in preparing the October Revolution of 1917 in Petrograd as newly elected chairman of the Congress of Northern Region Soviets and a leading member of the Military Revolutionary Committee. On October 16, ten days before the uprising, he reported to the Bolshevik Central Committee that the Petrograd military would support the Bolsheviks in case of an uprising. During the Bolshevik takeover on October 24 and 25, Krylenko was one of the uprising's leaders, along with Leon Trotsky, Adolph Joffe, and Vladimir Antonov-Ovseenko.

Head of the Red Army.

At the Second All Russian Congress of Soviets on October 25, Krylenko was made a People's Commissar (minister) and member of the triumvirate (with Pavel Dybenko and Nikolai Podvoisky) responsible for military affairs. In early November (Old Style) 1917, immediately after the Bolshevik seizure of power, Krylenko helped Leon Trotsky suppress an attempt by Provisional Government loyalists, led by Alexander Kerensky and General Peter Krasnov, to retake Petrograd.  After the Provisional Commander in Chief (and Chief of General Staff), General Nikolai Dukhonin, refused to open peace negotiations with the Germans, Krylenko (an Ensign at this point) was appointed as Commander in Chief on November 9. He started negotiations with representatives of the German army on November 12–13. Krylenko arrived at the High Command HQ in Mogilev on November 20 and arrested General Dukhonin, who was bayoneted and shot to death by Red Guards answering to Krylenko. After the formation of the Red Army on January 15, 1918 (Old Style; January 28 in New Style), Krylenko was a member of the All-Russian Collegium that oversaw its buildup. He proved to be an excellent public speaker, able to win over hostile mobs with words alone. His organizational talents, however, lagged far behind his oratorical ones.  Krylenko supported the policy of democratization of the Russian military, including abolishing subordination, providing for election of officers by enlisted men, and using propaganda to win over enemy units. Although the Red Army had some successes in early 1918 against small and poorly armed anti-Bolshevik detachments, the policy proved unsuccessful when Soviet forces were roundly defeated by the German Army in late February 1918 after the breakdown of the Brest-Litovsk negotiations. At this time, Krylenko was described by Bruce Lockhart, a British spy, as "an epileptic degenerate... and the most repulsive type I came across in all my connections with the Bolsheviks."  In the wake of the defeats, Trotsky pushed for the formation of a military council of former Russian generals that would function as a Red Army advisory body. Lenin and the Bolshevik Central Committee agreed to create a Supreme Military Council on March 4, appointing Mikhail Bonch-Bruyevich, former chief of the imperial General Staff, as its head. At that point the entire Bolshevik leadership of the Red Army, including People's Commissar (defense minister) Nikolai Podvoisky and Krylenko, protested vigorously and eventually resigned. The office of the "Commander in Chief" was formally abolished by the Soviet government on March 13, and Krylenko was reassigned to the Collegium of the Commissariat for Justice.

Legal career (1918-1934).

From May 1918 and until 1922, Krylenko was Chairman of the Revolutionary Tribunal of the All-Russian Central Executive Committee. He simultaneously served as a member of the Collegium of Prosecutors of the Revolutionary Tribunal.  In May 1918, Leon Trotsky ordered that Soviet Navy Admiral Alexei Shchastny be put on trial for having refused to scuttle the Baltic Fleet. After a trial prosecuted by Krylenko, the presiding judge, Karklin, sentenced the Admiral, "To be shot within twenty four hours." Attendees reacted with dismay as Lenin had abolished the death penalty on October 28, 1917. Krylenko said to those present, "What are you worrying about? Executions have been abolished. But Shchastny is not being executed; he is being shot." The sentence was carried out soon after.  Krylenko was an enthusiastic proponent of the Red Terror, whatever his differences with the Cheka (the Soviet secret police), exclaiming, "We must execute not only the guilty. Execution of the innocent will impress the masses even more."  In early 1919, Krylenko was involved in a dispute with the Cheka and was instrumental in taking away its right to execute people without a trial. In 1922 Krylenko became Deputy Commissar of Justice and assistant Prosecutor General of the RSFSR, in which capacity he served as the chief prosecutor at the Moscow show trials of the 1920s.

Cieplak Trial.

In the spring of 1923, Krylenko acted as public prosecutor in the Moscow show trial of the Soviet Union's Roman Catholic hierarchy. The defendants included Archbishop Jan Cieplak, Monsignor Konstanty Budkiewicz, and Blessed Leonid Feodorov, the Exarch of the Russian Greek Catholic Church.  According to Father Christopher Lawrence Zugger, "The Bolsheviks had already orchestrated several'show trials.' The Cheka had staged the 'Trial of the St. Petersburg Combat Organization'; its successor, the new GPU, the 'Trial of the Socialist Revolutionaries.' In these and other such farces, defendants were inevitably sentenced to death or to long prison terms in the north. The Cieplak show trial is a prime example of Bolshevik revolutionary justice at this time. Normal judicial procedures did not restrict revolutionary tribunals at all; in fact, the prosecutor N.V. Krylenko, stated that the courts could trample upon the rights of classes other than the proletariat. Appeals from the courts went not to a higher court, but to political committees. Western observers found the setting -- the grand ballroom of a former Noblemen's Club, with painted cherubs on the ceiling -- singularly inappropriate for such a solemn event. Neither judges nor prosecutors were required to have a legal background, only a proper'revolutionary' one. That the prominent 'No Smoking' signs were ignored by the judges themselves did not bode well for legalities."  According to "New York Herald" correspondent Francis MacCullagh: Archbishop Cieplak and Monsignor Budkiewicz were both sentenced to death. The other fifteen defendants were sentenced to long terms in Solovki prison camp. The sentences touched off a massive uproar throughout the Western world.  According to Father Zugger, "The Vatican, Germany, Poland, Great Britain, and the United States undertook frantic efforts to save the Archbishop and his chancellor. In Moscow, the ministers from the Polish, British, Czechoslovak, and Italian missions appealed 'on the grounds of humanity,' and Poland offered to exchange any prisoner to save the archbishop and the monsignor. Finally, on March 29, the Archbishop's sentence was commuted to ten years in prison,... but the Monsignor was not to be spared. Again, there were appeals from foreign powers, from Western Socialists and Church leaders alike. These appeals were for naught: Pravda editorialized on March 30 that the tribunal was defending the rights of the workers, who had been oppressed by the bourgeois system for centuries with the aid of priests. Pro-Communist foreigners who intervened for the two men were also condemned as 'compromisers with the priestly servants of the bourgeoisie.'...Father Rutkowski recorded later that Budkiewicz surrendered himself over to the will of God without reservation. On Easter Sunday, the world was told that the Monsignor was still alive, and Pope Pius XI publicly prayed at St. Peter's that the Soviets would spare his life. Moscow officials told foreign ministers and reporters that the Monsignor's sentence was just, and that the Soviet Union was a sovereign nation that would accept no interference. In reply to an appeal from the rabbis of New York City to spare Budkiewicz's life, "Pravda" wrote a blistering editorial against 'Jewish bankers who rule the world' and bluntly warned that the Soviets would kill Jewish opponents of the Revolution as well. Only on April 4 did the truth finally emerge: the Monsignor had already been in the grave for three days. When the news came to Rome, Pope Pius fell to his knees and wept as he prayed for the priest's soul. To make matters worse, Cardinal Gasparri had just finished reading a note from the Soviets saying that 'everything was proceeding satisfactorily' when he was handed the telegram announcing the execution. On March 31, 1923, Holy Saturday, at 11:30 PM, after a week of fervent prayers and a firm declaration that he was ready to be sacrificed for his sins, Monsignor Constantine Budkiewicz had been taken from his cell and, sometime before the dawn of Easter Sunday, shot in the back of the head on the steps of the Lubyanka prison.

People's Commissar of Justice.

In 1931 Krylenko became Commissar of Justice and Prosecutor General of the RSFSR. Presiding over the show trials of the early 1930s, he was widely seen as the public face of the Soviet justice system. Krylenko stepped down as Prosecutor General in 1932 and was replaced by Andrei Vyshinsky. In 1933, Krylenko was awarded the Order of Lenin.  In January 1933, he waxed indignant about the leniency of some Soviet officials who objected to the infamous "five ears law": From 1927 to 1934, Krylenko was a member of the Central Control Commission of the Communist Party.

Sport positions.

In the 1930s Krylenko headed the Soviet chess, checkers and mountain climbing associations. He was one of the pioneers of the Pamirs mountain climbing, leading the Soviet half of a joint Soviet-German expedition in 1928 as well as expeditions to the Eastern Pamirs in 1931 and to the Lenin Peak in 1934. Krylenko used his positions to carry out the Stalinist line of total control and politicization of all areas of public life:  According to British Grandmaster Daniel King, Krylenko's work promoting Chess was an extension of his role in the Soviet anti-religious campaigns; "The Bolsheviks' motives for promoting Chess were both ideological and political. They hoped that this logical and rational game might wean the masses away from belief in the Russian Orthodox Church; but they also wanted to prove the intellectual superiority of the Soviet people over the capitalist nations. Put simply, it was part of world domination.  "With Chess, they hit upon a winner: equipment was cheap to produce; tournaments relatively easy to organize; and they were already building on an existing tradition. Soon there were Chess clubs in factories, on farms, in the army... This vast social experiment quickly bore fruit."  In 1935, Krylenko invited the former chess World Champion Emanuel Lasker to Soviet Union, where he settled until 1937.

Theorist of the Soviet Justice System.

According to his brother in law Max Eastman, Krylenko was "gentle-hearted and poetic in his youth" but "hardened up under Lenin's influence" to become "a ruthless Bolshevik". Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, he wrote dozens of books and articles in support of his philosophy of "socialist legality."  According to Krylenko, political considerations rather than evidence needed to play the decisive role in deciding the verdict and sentence before trial. He further argued that even a confession obtained under torture constituted proof of a defendant's guilt; material evidence, precise definitions of a crime, or judicial sentencing guidelines were not needed under socialism.  Mikhail Yakubovich, a defendant in one of the show trials, described meeting with Krylenko after weeks of torture by the OGPU to discuss his upcoming trial: Krylenko promoted his views on socialist legality during the work on two drafts of the Soviet Penal Code, one in 1930 and one in 1934. Krylenko's views were opposed by some Soviet theoreticians, including Soviet Prosecutor General Andrey Vyshinsky. According to Vyshinsky, Krylenko's imprecise definition of crimes and his refusal to define terms of punishment introduced legal instability and arbitrariness and were, therefore, against the interests of the Party. Their debates continued throughout 1935 and were inconclusive.  With the start of the Great Purge after Sergei Kirov's assassination on December 1, 1934, Krylenko's star began to fade and Stalin began to increasingly favor Vyshinsky. Notably, it was Vyshinsky and not Krylenko who prosecuted the first two high-profile Moscow show trials of Old Bolsheviks in August 1936 and January 1937. Krylenko's ally, the Marxist theoretician Eugen Pashukanis, was subjected to severe criticism in late 1936 and arrested in January 1937 and shot in September. Soon after Pashukanis's arrest, Krylenko was forced to publicly "admit his mistakes" and concede that Vyshinsky and his allies had been right all along.  In 1936 Krylenko justified the inclusion of a law against male homosexuality in the 1934 Soviet penal code as a measure directed against subversive activities:

Fall from power and execution.

Krylenko was promoted to Commissar of Justice of the USSR on July 20, 1936 and was directly involved in the first waves of Joseph Stalin's Great Purges between 1935 and 1938. However, at the first session of the newly reorganized Supreme Soviet of the Soviet Union in January 1938, he was denounced by an up-and-coming Stalinist, Mir Jafar Baghirov:  The attack had been carefully prepared in advance and Molotov endorsed it. In response, Stalin removed Krylenko from his post on January 19, 1938, turning the Commissariat over to his replacement, N. M. Rychkov. Leaving the Kremlin, Krylenko and his family traveled to his dacha outside Moscow. On the evening of January 31, 1938, Krylenko received a phone call from Joseph Stalin, who told him, saying: "Don't get upset. We trust you. Keep doing the work you were assigned to on the new legal code." This phone call calmed Krylenko, but later that evening his home was raided by an NKVD squad. Krylenko and his family were arrested.  After three days of interrogation and torture by the NKVD, Krylenko "confessed" that he had been a "wrecker" since 1930. On April 3, he made an additional statement, claiming to have been an enemy of Lenin before the October Revolution. During his last interrogation on June 28, 1938, Krylenko named thirty Commissariat of Justice officials whom he had allegedly recruited into an anti-Soviet conspiracy.  Nikolai Krylenko was tried by the Military Collegium of the Soviet Supreme Court on July 29, 1938. In accordance with Krylenko's own theories of socialist legality, the verdict and sentence had been decided in advance. The trial lasted only twenty minutes, just long enough for Krylenko to retract his false confessions. After being found guilty, he was taken away and immediately shot once in the back of the head.

Legacy.

The NKVD officer who had taken Krylenko's testimony, one Kogan, probably Captain Lazar V. Kogan, who also interrogated Nicolai Bukharin and Genrikh Yagoda, was, in turn, shot in 1939 (probably, on March 2) for "anti-Soviet activity". Krylenko's conviction was one of the first annulled by the Soviet State in 1955, during the Khrushchev thaw.  Krylenko's ex-wife and fellow Old Bolshevik Elena Rozmirovich survived the purges by keeping a low profile and working in the Party archives.  His sister Elena Krylenko worked for Maxim Litvinov in the Ministry for Foreign Affairs (although she was never a member of the Party); in 1924 she decided to leave Russia with the American writer Max Eastman (who had been in Russia for almost two years, researching and writing a life of Trotsky). To enable her to leave, Litvinov agreed to pass her off as a member of his delegation when he travelled to London for an international conference. But she could not leave the delegation and remain in a free country without a passport, which the Bolsheviks would not give her. So, in the hours before their train left, she and Max Eastman got married. They were still married and living in America when she died in 1956. Thus she escaped the purges.  Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russian Presidents Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin have refused to make changes to the legal system created by Nikolai Krylenko.  Furthermore, Krylenko's creation of what was later dubbed "The Soviet Chess Machine" led Soviet Grandmasters to dominate the World Chess Championship for most of the remainder of the 20th century, producing a string of World Chess Champions including Mikhail Botvinnik, Vasily Smyslov, Mikhail Tal, Tigran Petrosian, Boris Spassky, Anatoly Karpov, and Garry Kasparov.

Nikolai Vasilyevich Krylenko (; May 2, 1885 – July 29, 1938) was an Old Bolshevik and Soviet politician. Krylenko served in a variety of posts in the Soviet legal system, rising to become People's Commissar for Justice and Prosecutor General of the Russian Soviet Federated Socialist Republic. He was executed during the Great Purge.

Nikolaj Vasiljevič Krylenko (Никола́й Васи́льевич Крыле́нко; 14. května 1885 Bechtějevo – 29. července 1938 Moskva) byl sovětský voják, právník a politik, jeden ze starých bolševiků, kteří se podíleli na komunistickém teroru raných let sovětského režimu a které pak zlikvidovaly stalinské čistky. Krátkou dobu působil v čele vznikající Rudé armády, pro bojové neúspěchy byl však nahrazen profesionálními vojáky. Pak působil na různých postech v sovětském právním systému a stal se lidovým komisařem spravedlnosti a generálním prokurátorem Ruské sovětské federativní socialistické republiky. Byl také sportovním funkcionářem a jeho organizační dílo stojí za úspěchy sovětského šachu od dvacátých let až do konce sovětského režimu.