Biography.

Henry Thomas Colebrooke was born on 15 June 1765. His parents were Sir George Colebrooke, 2nd Baronet, MP for Arundel and Chairman of the East India Company from 1769, and Mary Gaynor, daughter and heir of Patrick Gaynor of Antigua. He was educated at home.  In 1782 Colebrooke was appointed through his father's influence to a writership with the East India Company in Calcutta. In 1786 and three years later he was appointed assistant collector in the revenue department at Tirhut. He wrote "Remarks on the Husbandry and Commerce of Bengal", which was privately published in 1795, by which time he had transferred to Purnia. This opposed the East India Company's monopoly on Indian trade, advocating instead for free trade between Britain and India, which caused offence to the East India Company's governors.  He was appointed to the magistracy of Mirzapur in 1795 and was sent to Nagpur in 1799 to negotiate an allowance with the Raja of Berar. He was unsuccessful in this, due to events elsewhere, and returned in 1801. On his return was made a judge of the new court of appeal in Calcutta, of which he became president of the bench in 1805. Also in 1805, Lord Wellesley appointed him honorary professor of Hindu law and Sanskrit at the college of Fort William. In 1807 he became a member of council, serving for five years, and was elected President of the Asiatic Society of Calcutta. He returned to England in 1815.  In 1816 he was elected to the fellowship of both the Royal Society and the Royal Society of Edinburgh In 1820 he was a founder of the Royal Astronomical Society. He often chaired the society's meetings in the absence of the first president, William Herschel, and was elected as its second president on Herschel's death, serving 1823–1825. In 1823 he was also a founder of the Royal Asiatic Society, chairing its first meeting although he declined to become its president.

Works.

After eleven years' residence in India, Colebrooke began the study of the Sanskrit language; and to him was entrusted the translation of the major "Digest of Hindu Laws", a monumental study of Hindu law which had been left unfinished by Sir William Jones. He translated the two treatises, the "Mitacshara" of Vijnaneshwara and the "Dayabhaga" of Jimutavahana, under the title "Law of Inheritance". During his residence at Calcutta he wrote his "Sanskrit Grammar" (1805), some papers on the religious ceremonies of the Hindus, and his "Essay on the Vedas" (1805), for a long time the standard work in English on the subject.  A posthumous essay on his father's life was published by Sir T. E. Colebrooke in 1873 as part of a reprinting of "Miscellaneous Essays".

Family.

Colebrooke married Elizabeth Wilkinson in 1810. The marriage was short-lived and she died in 1814. Colebrooke had several illegitimate children from Indian women.

Henry Thomas Colebrooke FRS FRSE (15 June 1765 – 10 March 1837) was an English orientalist and mathematician. He has been described as "the first great Sanskrit scholar in Europe".

Henry Thomas Colebrooke [kohlbruck] (* 15. Juni 1765 in London; † 10. März 1837 ebenda) war der erste Sanskritist seiner Zeit, Hauptbegründer des Studiums der indischen Literatur in Europa und Präsident der Royal Asiatic Society. Außerdem war er tätig als Jurist und Botaniker. Sein offizielles botanisches Autorenkürzel lautet „Colebr.“.


Early life.

Carr was born and raised in Marrero, Louisiana, the son of Elaine Grace (Coulon), who was of Cajun (French) descent, and New Yorker Edward Sidney Carr, who worked in publishing. As a teenager, he had an interest in both music and acting. Following some acting locally, he moved to New York and studied acting at the American Theatre Wing.

Career.

After a short stint in the United States Marine Corps during his late teens, Carr launched his acting career with a role in a New Orleans production of Herman Melville's "Billy Budd". By the middle 1950s, he was working on live television in New York City, including appearances on the popular "Studio One" and "Kraft Television Theater", while continuing theatrical work in stock companies in Ohio and Michigan, including roles such as Peter Quilpe in "The Cocktail Party", Haemon in "Antigone", Jack in Tennessee Williams' "The Rose Tattoo", and Hal Carter in William Inge's "Picnic". He toured in summer stock with Chico Marx in "Fifth Season".  Carr made his film debut in 1955 with a small uncredited role in Alfred Hitchcock's thriller "The Wrong Man". That same year, he portrayed a prisoner of war in the New York Theatre Guild production of "Time Limit" on Broadway. His film career continued with a much larger role in Alfred Werker's "The Young Don't Cry" in 1957 starring James Whitmore and Sal Mineo; and that same year he appeared in the Warner Bros. rock and roll jukebox movie "Jamboree" as Pete Porter.  He worked steadily on television in the late 1950s and early 1960s with guest spots and supporting roles in many western series such as three appearances on "Laramie", "Trackdown", four appearances on "Rawhide", "The Rifleman", "The Tall Man", "The Travels of Jaimie McPheeters", and "The Virginian". He also appeared in many dramas. One such appearance was in 1964 when he played folk singer and defendant Con Bolton in the "Perry Mason" episode "The Case of the Tandem Target". He also appeared on "77 Sunset Strip", "Straightaway", "The Everglades", "Dr. Kildare", "Going My Way", "Hawaii Five-O", "The Fugitive", "Twelve O'Clock High", and "The Silent Force", interspersed with occasional film work, including "Captain Newman, M.D.". Other television appearances were on "Burke's Law", "Combat!", "Gunsmoke", "The Time Tunnel", "Land of the Giants", "Star Trek", and "The Invaders".  In 1965, Carr acted in the role of Bill Horton, the physician son of protagonist Dr. Tom Horton on "Days of Our Lives" in its first season. He was later a regular on "General Hospital" and "The Doctors". Carr went on to work in many of other television shows in the intervening years, including "Get Smart", "Mannix", "The Rockford Files", and "Murphy Brown". He may be remembered best, however, for his various appearances on science fiction shows over the years. In 1964/1965, he had the recurring role of uptight crewman Casey Clark on "Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea".  In 1965, Carr played Lt. Lee Kelso, the USS "Enterprise" helmsman in the second "" pilot episode, "Where No Man Has Gone Before". The episode finally aired, out of sequence in terms of new episodes produced, early in the first season of "Star Trek" in the autumn of 1966. Carr would later use the name Lee Kelso as a pseudonym for his voice performances in the English-language versions of the anime shows "Cowboy Bebop" and "Trigun".  In 1981, he joined the cast of "Buck Rogers in the 25th Century" as 'Lt. Devlin', one of the officers on the Earth Starship "Searcher".  Throughout his career, Carr's first love was the stage. He appeared in nearly 100 stage productions on Broadway, off-Broadway and off-off-Broadway, as well as touring companies, stock, and in regional theaters around the United States. He received the LA Weekly Theater Award for Best Actor in the Theatre East production of "Manhattan Express" in 1987 and garnered a 1995 Dramalogue Award for his role in the Los Angeles Repertory production of Assassins. Carr was also a writer and director, and headed the Play Committee of the L.A. Repertory Company.

Death.

Carr died of lung cancer in Los Angeles, California on February 17, 2006. He was 72 years old.

Paul Wallace Carr (January 31, 1934 – February 17, 2006) was an American actor, director, writer, and producer who performed on stage, film, and television for half a century.

Paul Carr (* 1. Februar 1934 in New Orleans; † 17. Februar 2006 in Los Angeles) war ein US-amerikanischer Schauspieler.


History.

In the first ten years after graduating from the Saint Petersburg Conservatory in 1865 Tchaikovsky completed three symphonies. After that he started five more symphony projects, four of which led to a completed symphony premiered during the composer's lifetime.  During his second and final trip to Russia in the winter of 1867–68, the French composer Hector Berlioz conducted his program symphony "Harold en Italie". The work caused considerable stir. Its subject was very much to the tastes of its audiences, whose enthusiasm for the works of Lord Byron had not exhausted itself as it had begun to do in Europe. Berlioz's use of a four-movement structure for writing program music intrigued many Russian musicians. One immediate consequence was Nikolai Rimsky-Korsakov's four movement suite "Antar", written in 1868. Around the same time as Rimsky-Korsakov composed "Antar", critic Vladimir Stasov wrote a scenario for a sequel to "Harold", this time based on Byron's poem "Manfred" and sent it to the nationalist composer Mily Balakirev. Balakirev did not feel attracted to the idea, so he forwarded the program to Berlioz, only hinting it was not entirely his own. Berlioz declined, claiming old age and ill health. He returned the program to Balakirev, who kept it. A little over a year later, Berlioz had died, and by 1872 Balakirev was embroiled in a personal crisis that silenced him creatively.  Tchaikovsky's entrance into this story was strictly by circumstance. He finished his final revision of his fantasy-overture "Romeo and Juliet" in 1880, a work on which he and Balakirev had worked tirelessly together a decade earlier, and which was dedicated to Balakirev. Since Balakirev had dropped away from the music scene in the intervening time, Tchaikovsky asked the publisher Bessel to send a copy of the printed score to Balakirev, thinking he would have a current address. Whether the publisher delayed in fulfilling this request or Balakirev did not reply, no news was forthcoming as to whether Balakirev had received the score, so Tchaikovsky wrote to Balakirev in September 1881. Balakirev wrote back, thanking Tchaikovsky profusely for the score. In the same letter, Balakirev suggested another project—"the programme for another symphony... which you could handle superbly." He presented Stasov's detailed plan, explaining it was not in his character to engage in such composition. As he explained in a letter to Tchaikovsky in October 1882, "this magnificent subject is unsuitable, it doesn't harmonise with my inner frame of mind". When Tchaikovsky showed polite interest, Balakirev sent a copy of Stasov's program, which he had amended with suggested key signatures for each movement and representative works which Tchaikovsky had already written to give some idea of what Balakirev had in mind. Balakirev also gave warning to avoid "vulgarities in the manner of German fanfares and "Jägermusik"," plus instructions about the layout of the flute and percussion parts.  Tchaikovsky declined the project at first. He claimed the subject left him cold and seemed too close to Berlioz's work for him to manage anything but a piece that would lack inspiration and originality. Balakirev persisted. "You must, of course, "make an effort"," he exhorted, "take a more self-critical approach, don't hurry things." His importunity finally changed Tchaikovsky's mind—after two years of effort. So did Tchaikovsky's rereading "Manfred" for himself while tending to his friend Iosif Kotek in Davos, Switzerland, nestled in the same Alps in which the poem was set. Once he returned home, Tchaikovsky revised the draft Balakirev had made from Stasov's programme and began sketching the first movement.  Tchaikovsky may have found a subject in "Manfred" for which he could comfortably compose. However, there was a difference between placing a personal program into a symphony and writing such a work to a literary program. He wrote to his friend and former student Sergei Taneyev, "Composing a program symphony, I have the sensation of being a charlatan and cheating the public; I am paying them not hard cash but rubbishy bits of paper money." However, he later wrote to Emilia Pavlovskaya, "The symphony has turned out to be huge, serious, difficult, absorbing all my time, sometimes to utter exhaustion; but an inner voice tells me that my labor is not in vain and that this work will perhaps be the best of my symphonic works."  Instead of following Balakirev's instructions slavishly, Tchaikovsky wrote it in his own style. Initially, he considered it to be one of his best compositions, but wanted a few years later to destroy the score, though that intention was never carried out.  The "Manfred" Symphony was first performed in Moscow on 23 March 1886, with Max Erdmannsdörfer as conductor. It is dedicated to Balakirev.

Key signatures.

Below are the key signatures Balakirev initially envisioned for "Manfred", what he later suggested, and what Tchaikovsky eventually used in the symphony:

Form.

I. Lento lugubre (B minor).

Manfred wanders in the Alps. Weary of the fatal question of existence, tormented by hopeless longings and the memory of past crimes, he suffers cruel spiritual pangs. He has plunged into occult sciences and commands the mighty powers of darkness, but neither they nor anything in "this" world can give him the "forgetfulness" to which alone he vainly aspires. The memory of the lost Astarte, once passionately loved, gnaws his heart and there is neither limit nor end to Manfred's despair.  The musical embodiment of this program note is presented in five extensive musical slabs spaced out by four silences. A brooding first theme, briefly unharmonized, builds to music both spacious and monolithic. A second theme leads to a second musical slab, this time pushing forward with the loudest climax Tchaikovsky ever wrote. The music in the third slab seems calmer, while the fourth slab marks the appearance of Astarte. The fifth slab culminates in a frantic climax and a series of abrupt, final chords.

II. Vivace con spirito (B minor).

The Alpine fairy appears before Manfred in the rainbow from the spray of a waterfall.  Tchaikovsky's efforts in exploring fresh possibilities in scoring allowed him to present his music with new colors and more refined contrasts. In this scherzo, it seems as though the orchestration creates the music, as though Tchaikovsky has thought directly in colors and textures, making these the primary focus. Put simply, there is no tune and little definition of any harmonic base, creating a world alluring, fragile and magical. The point becomes clear when an actual and lyrical tune enters the central section of the movement.

III. Andante con moto (G major).

A picture of the bare, simple, free life of the mountain folk.  This "pastorale" opens with a siciliana, then the three-note call of a hunter. The opening theme returns. We hear a brief and lively peasant dance, then an agitated outburst, before the opening theme returns. The opening pastoral theme eventually returns more spaciously and in a fuller, more decorative scoring. The hunter sounds his horn; the music fades.

IV. Allegro con fuoco (B minor → D major → B major)..

The subterranean palace of Arimanes. Infernal orgy. Appearance of Manfred in the middle of the bacchanal. Evocation and appearance of the shade of Astarte. He is pardoned. Death of Manfred.  Many critics consider the finale to be fatally flawed, but the problem lies less with music than with the program. Up to this point Tchaikovsky has done well at reconciling the extramusical requirements for each movement with the music itself. Now, however, the program takes over, beginning with a fugue, which is by its nature academic and undramatic, to depict the horde's discovery of Manfred within their midst. The result, though in many ways becoming a condensed recapitulation of the latter half of the first movement, becomes a fragmented movement with musical disruption and non-sequiturs, ending with the Germanic chorale depicting Manfred's death scene.

Instrumentation.

Woodwinds  Brass  Percussion  Keyboard  Strings

Analysis.

Several features make "Manfred" unique among Tchaikovsky's works. It is the only programmatic work he wrote in more than one movement. The first two movements do not recapitulate their middle sections. The entire work is not only extremely long, playing up to and sometimes over an hour, but it is designed with the utmost spaciousness in mind. There is nothing else in Tchaikovsky's works that captures the long-breathed deliberation of the third movement or the practically verbatim recapitulation of the widely variegated opening section of the second movement following the equally huge middle section. At least one critic has suggested that, in its heroic but perfectly judged dimensions, "Manfred" resembles Richard Strauss's later tone poem "A Hero's Life".  Musicologist John Warrack suggests that, of all Tchaikovsky's major neglected works, "Manfred" may be the one which least deserves this fate. While Tchaikovsky had his doubts about program music, he was actually better able to handle large forms when there was the impulse of an emotional idea behind the music. He apparently felt such an impulse—if not from Byron's poem, then from the program Balakirev gave him—and that impulse brought forth a work of great originality and power. While he did not follow Berlioz in how he might have handled the program, Tchaikovsky did make use of an "idée fixe" recurring in all four movements. He also followed a Berliozian design of a lengthy, reflective, melancholy opening movement, two colorful interludes as inner movements, and a finale in which Berlioz' Brigands' Orgy becomes (without any hint from the poem) a bacchanal.  Here again is the description of the first movement from the program:  Manfred wanders in the Alpine mountains. His life is shattered, but he is obsessed with life's unanswerable questions. In life nothing remains for him except memories. Images of his ideal Astarte permeate his thoughts, and he vainly calls to her. Only the echo from the cliffs repeats her name. Memories and thoughts bum and gnaw at him. He seeks and begs for oblivion, which no-one can give him.  It is not hard to see how these carefully selected elements might appeal to Tchaikovsky. Free from having to reconcile the first movement to sonata form, Tchaikovsky constructs his own form which succeeds well as an expression of the program. A massive opening motive associated with Manfred himself expresses both the strength and gloom of his character. This motive returns at crucial parts to identify Manfred's part in the action. Beneath this theme is a musical structure that, while not conforming to the traditional recapitulation of themes in sonata form, succeeds in moving forward without losing unity or degenerating into a series of episodes. It is a musical portrait of the guilty, doomed sensibility, drawn strongly as Berlioz' Harold. This was perhaps the aspect of Byron which appealed most vividly to Russians; it also may have touched closely on Tchaikovsky's own situation.  The two inner movements work as effective structural contrasts to the opening drama. The waterfall in the second movement gives Tchaikovsky the opportunity for one of his longest and most beautifully worked out scherzos, scored with a delicacy that Berlioz might have admired; Tchaikovsky's Alpine experiences might have come in handy here. For the third movement pastorale, Balakirev had hoped for a Russian version of the corresponding movement from the "Symphonie fantastique". Tchaikovsky's version is more conventional, with two simple themes—one graceful, the other more roughly rustic. It forms in its static quality an idealized retreat before the turmoil of the finale. The finale reflects "Harold en Italie" in the exuberance of the revelling. Tchaikovsky manages to add a fugue, a return of Astarte and a death scene at the end.'  Nevertheless, musicologist David Brown considered the finale the weakest part of "Manfred", not because of the music itself but of the programme. Up to this point, Brown writes, Tchaikovsky had very successfully reconciled extramusical specifications with musical structure. Now the program takes over, resulting in a fragmented movement with musical disruption and non sequiturs. The fatal flaw is the fugue, which Tchaikovsky wrote to convey the reaction of the hordes of the evil spirit Arimanes to Manfred's appearance amongst them. A fugue, Brown argues, is by nature undramatic in both its fixation on one thematic idea and its measured progress; therefore, it cannot help but sound stodgy, resulting in a misstep from which the music never fully recovers. Musicologist Ralph Wood, in contrast, stated that while the finale may have its faults, there is still much about the music that is quite good.

Critical views.

Critics were divided on "Manfred" from the work's outset. César Cui, the member of the Russian nationalistic music group known as The Five whose reviews of Tchaikovsky's compositions were mostly negative, praised "Manfred". Cui commented especially on the "masterly description of Manfred's gloomy, noble image" in the opening movement and the "ravishing refinement" of the scherzo, concluding that "we can only thank [Tchaikovsky] for his new contribution to the treasure-store of our nation's symphonic music." The composer's friend, critic Herman Laroche, was less positive, calling "Manfred" "among the most raw and unfinished of [Tchaikovsky's] compositions." While admitting the work was "full of melodic warmth and sincerity", Laroche criticized its programmatic aspects, which left "an impression of mystery and uncertainty cribbed from Liszt, though cribbed not in a mechanical fashion but with the addition of some of the technical sequins which cost our deft and resourceful composer so little effort."  Some regard "Manfred" as one of Tchaikovsky's most brilliant and inspired works; conductor Arturo Toscanini considered it the composer's greatest composition and was one of only two Tchaikovsky symphonies (the other being the "Pathetique") that he ever programmed. (His admiration did not stop him from making changes in the score when he performed and recorded it, including a number of cuts). However, others despise it. According to music critic David Hurwitz, composer-conductor Leonard Bernstein referred to it as "trash" and never recorded it.  Some critics have commented that, for all Tchaikovsky's distrust of program music and "Manfred"s kinship to a Berlioz work he did not wish to repeat, the symphony proves its composer's capacity to infuse another composer's example with his own personality, provided the emotional nature of the work found a response in him. These critics have called "Manfred" one of the great program symphonies of the 19th century.  The "Manfred" Symphony was voted number 75 in the ABC Classic FM Top 100 Symphony Countdown in 2009.

Recordings.

The symphony has been recorded many times, with recordings made by major orchestras and conductors. Conductors who have recorded the work include Arturo Toscanini, Mstislav Rostropovich, Lorin Maazel, Eugene Goossens, André Previn, Bernard Haitink, Eugene Ormandy, Yuri Temirkanov, Constantin Silvestri, Yevgeny Svetlanov, Riccardo Muti, Sir Neville Marriner, Igor Markevitch, Yuri Ahronovitch, Andrew Litton, Mikhail Pletnev (twice), Vladimir Fedoseyev, Riccardo Chailly, Mariss Jansons, Vasily Petrenko, Zubin Mehta, Vladimir Jurowski, Vladimir Ashkenazy and others.  "Manfred" is less frequently performed in concert. This is due to its length, unfamiliarity, and its requirement for a large orchestra, including obbligato harmonium (specified by Tchaikovsky, but often played on the organ). It is also considered to be a virtuoso work and difficult to play well.

The "Manfred" Symphony in B minor, Op. 58, is a programmatic symphony composed by Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky between May and September 1885. It is based on the poem "Manfred" written by Lord Byron in 1817. It is the only one of Tchaikovsky's symphonies he completed that is not numbered (the Symphony in E flat is a conjectural work left unfinished by the composer) and was written between the Fourth and Fifth Symphonies.

Die Manfred-Sinfonie (opus 58) ist eine Programmsinfonie in vier Bildern von Pjotr Iljitsch Tschaikowski nach der dramatischen Dichtung "Manfred" von Lord Byron aus dem Jahre 1816. Die Uraufführung fand am 11. März 1886 unter Max Erdmannsdörfer in Moskau statt. Die vier Bilder sind die vier Sätze der Sinfonie.


Plot.

In the farming village Nakanogō, on the shore of Lake Biwa in Ōmi Province in the Sengoku period, Genjūrō, a potter, takes his wares to nearby Ōmizo. He is accompanied by Tōbei, who dreams of becoming a samurai. A respected sage tells Genjūrō's wife Miyagi to warn her husband about seeking profit in times of upheaval, and to prepare for a probable attack on the village. Genjūrō arrives with wide profits, but she asks him to stop. Genjūrō nevertheless works long hours to finish his pottery. That night, Shibata Katsuie's army sweeps through Nakanogō, and Genjūrō, Tōbei and their wives are uprooted. Genjūrō collects his pottery from the kiln, and decides to take the pots to a different marketplace. As the two couples travel across a lake, a boat appears from thick fog. The sole passenger tells them he was attacked by pirates, warns them back to their homes, then dies. The two men decide to return their wives to the shore. Tōbei's wife Ohama refuses to go. Miyagi begs Genjūrō not to leave her, but is left on the shore with their young son, Gen'ichi, clasped to her back. At market, Genjūrō's pottery sells well. After taking his promised share of the profits, Tōbei runs off to buy samurai armor, and sneaks into the ranks of a clan of samurai. Lost from her companions, Ohama has wandered beyond Nagahama in her desperate search for Tōbei. She is raped by a group of soldiers.  Genjūrō is visited by a noblewoman and her female servant, who order several pieces of pottery and tell him to take them to the Kutsuki mansion. Genjūrō learns that Nobunaga's soldiers have attacked the manor and killed all who lived there, except Lady Wakasa and her servant. He also learns that Lady Wakasa's father haunts the manor. Genjūrō is seduced by Lady Wakasa, and she convinces him to marry her. Meanwhile, Nakanogō is under attack. Miyagi and her son hide from soldiers and are found by an elderly woman who hurries them to safety. In the woods, several soldiers desperately search her for food. She fights with the soldiers and is stabbed. She collapses with her son still clutching her back. Tōbei steals the severed head of a general, which he presents to the commander of the victorious side. He is rewarded with armor, a mount, and a retinue. Tōbei later rides into the marketplace on his new horse, eager to return home to show his wife. However, he visits a brothel and finds her working there as a prostitute. Tōbei promises to buy back her honor. Later, the two return to Nakanogō, Tōbei throwing his armor into a river along the way.  Genjūrō meets a priest, who tells him to return to his loved ones or certain death awaits him. When Genjūrō mentions the noblewoman, the priest reveals that the noblewoman is dead and must be exorcised, and then invites Genjūrō to his home where he paints Buddhist prayers on his body. Genjūrō returns to the Kutsuki mansion. He admits that he is married, has a child and wishes to return home. Lady Wakasa will not let him go. She and her servant admit they are spirits, returned to this world so that Lady Wakasa, who was slain before she knew love, could experience its joys. They tell him to wash away the Buddhist symbols. Genjūrō reaches for a sword, throws himself out of the manor, and passes out. The next day, he is awakened by soldiers. They accuse him of stealing the sword, but he denies it, saying it is from the Kutsuki mansion. The soldiers laugh at him, saying the Kutsuki mansion was burned down over a month ago. Genjūrō arises and finds the mansion he has lived in is nothing more than a pile of burnt wood. The soldiers confiscate his money, but because Shibata's army burned down the prison, they leave Genjūrō in the rubble. He returns home by foot, searching for his wife.  Miyagi, delighted to see him, will not let him tell of his terrible mistake. Genjūrō holds his sleeping son in his arms, and eventually lies down to sleep. The next morning, Genjūrō wakes to the village chief knocking on his door. He is surprised to see Genjūrō home, and expresses concern. He explains that he has been caring for Genjūrō's son, and that the boy must have come to his old home in the middle of the night. Genjūrō calls for Miyagi. The neighbor asks if Genjūrō is dreaming, as his wife is dead. Miyagi's spirit tells Genjūrō: "I am always with you", while he continues on pottery, and their son offers food to her.

Production.

Development.

After the success of his previous film "The Life of Oharu" (1952), Mizoguchi was offered to make a film by his old friend Masaichi Nagata at Daiei Film studios. The deal promised Mizoguchi complete artistic control and a large budget. Despite this, Mizoguchi was eventually pressured to make a less pessimistic ending for the film. Mizoguchi's screenwriter and long-time collaborator Yoshikata Yoda said that originally, Mizoguchi did not envision making an anti-war film, instead wishing to capture the sensations and lucidity of Ueda's book "Ugetsu Monogatari".  Mizoguchi based his film on two stories from Ueda's book, "The House in the Thicket" (Asaji ga Yado) and "The Lust of the White Serpent" (Jasei no In). "The Lust of the White Serpent" is about a demon who appears as a princess and attempts to seduce a man. It was the basis of the plot in which Lady Wakasa seduces Genjūrō. "The House in the Thicket" gave the film its ending, in which the protagonist returns home after a long absence, only to meet the spirit of his lost wife. The film is set in the 16th century, though "The House in the Thicket" is set in the 15th century and "The Lust of the White Serpent" is set in an earlier time frame. Other inspirations for the film's script include Guy de Maupassant's "Décoré!" ("How He Got the Legion of Honour"). This story provided a basis for Tōbei's subplot. In the short story, the protagonist receives the French Legion of Honour by ignoring his wife's adultery with a member of the Legion. Similarly, Tōbei becomes a samurai while his wife becomes a prostitute.  Despite initial intentions, as the film developed, Yoda said anti-war messages, particularly about how war makes women suffer, kept surfacing and soon became the most prominent theme. While writing the script, Mizoguchi told Yoda "Whether war originates in the ruler's personal motives, or in some public concern, how violence, disguised as war, oppresses and torments the populace both physically and spiritually... I want to emphasise this as the main theme of the film". During the shooting Yoda was constantly rewriting and revising scenes due to Mizoguchi's perfectionism.

Casting.

The film was Machiko Kyō's second collaboration with Mizoguchi, as she had a small role in "The Three Danjuros" (1944). She had collaborated much more frequently with Masayuki Mori. As Lady Wakasa, Kyō's costume was modeled after fashion before the Edo period and her face was designed to appear similar to a mask common in Noh theatre. As such, her eyebrows were styled using a practice known as "hikimayu".  Kinuyo Tanaka, who played Miyagi, found the scene where she is a ghost to be the most stressful, as she had to play a ghost and appear to be an actual wife at the same time. After rehearsals and the shooting, Mizoguchi lit a cigarette for Mori, indicating his rare degree of satisfaction with the scene. Eitaro Ozawa, who played Tōbei, said the actors frequently rehearsed alone, or with the cinematographer, while Mizoguchi was willingly absent during these preparations.

Filming.

Mizoguchi told his cinematographer Kazuo Miyagawa that he wanted the film "to unroll seamlessly like a scroll-painting". The Southern School of Chinese painting was particularly an inspiration the filmmakers aspired to. The film has been praised for its cinematography, such as the opening shot and the scene where Genjūrō and Lady Wakasa have sex by a stream and the camera follows the flow of the water instead of lingering on the two lovers. Mizoguchi never personally handled the camera and did not participate in planning the lighting of his film. To achieve the appearance the filmmakers wanted, Miyagawa kept lighting low and filmed as near to sunset as circumstances would allow. Many of the shots were taken from cranes, with Miyagawa claiming in 1992 that these shots made up 70% of the film. Miyagawa also stated that this film was the only occasion in which Mizoguchi complimented him for his camera work.  The set depicting Kutsuki Manor was based on the Katsura Imperial Villa in Kyoto. These sets are decorated with props evocative of feudal-era aristocrats, such as kimono and armor, personally chosen by Mizoguchi. The scene where the protagonists travel through Lake Biwa on a boat was in fact shot on a pool in the studio, with added smoke. The assistant directors had to push the boat through the cold waters. Miyagawa identified this as one of the scenes shot from a crane.

Music.

For the film score, Mizoguchi relied on composer Fumio Hayasaka and the assistant directors, and was not involved in their creative process. Fumio Hayasaka was a strong proponent of using Japanese music in Japanese films, though he incorporated several elements of Western music as well. For "Ugetsu", he employed geza music, common in Kabuki theatre. Additional, uncredited composers were Ichirō Saitō and Tamekichi Mochizuki, whose music was blended with Hayasaka's, and could provide accurate music reflective of the period.  The score employs drums, flutes and chanting. The film's sounds also include bells heard in improbable places.

Themes.

According to Professor Martha P. Nochimson, a common interpretation of the film is that Mizoguchi refashioned the stories of "Ugetsu Monogatari" to express regret about the pro-war extremism leading to World War II, with Mizoguchi personally having made the pro-war propaganda film "The 47 Ronin" in 1941. These reflections on militarism, greed and arrogance connected with audiences not only in Japan but around the world in the wake of the war. The subplot of Tōbei and Ohama particularly reflects the comfort women, who were made into prostitutes by the Imperial Japanese Army. Mizoguchi struggled with Daiei to give the subplot an unhappier ending than what appears in the film, in line with real comfort women's experiences after the war. Tōbei's subplot reveals the mistake of war can also be a "tragicomedy".  According to British critic Tony Rayns the film's presentation of the vanity of a man, neglecting his family, is a critique of historic men in feudal Japanese culture. In his relationship with Wakasa, Genjūrō is insignificant and is seduced by something greater, that he can never comprehend. However, by neglecting his family, Genjūrō failed to appreciate he has already been blessed with a good life, and in the process, loses it.  As a ghost story, the film delves into a relationship between a spirit and a living person, which runs contrary to nature and will lead to the death of the person. Although ghosts are not mentioned in the initial parts of the film, Japanese writer Kazushi Hosaka stated Mizoguchi foreshadowed it using the scenery, which suggests a detachment from real life. The scene where the protagonists cross Lake Biwa is an example, given the fogs that turn the film away from the "jidaigeki" genre. Professor Robin Wood argues that the film's depiction of the main ghost character evolves from the mere demon of "The Lust of the White Serpent" into the more humane and tragic Lady Wakasa, and this makes the story more complex. Wood further opines the combination of the story with "The House in the Thicket," combining the male protagonist of each tale into one character, Genjūrō, also connects the demon character and the ghost wife. Both Lady Wakasa and Miyagi are killed by a male-dominated society, and both are wronged by Genjūrō. Wood believes "Ugetsu" can be considered a feminist film for its exploration of the negative impact of a patriarchy.  Genjūrō's pottery is also a major theme in the film. Professor Wood argues his pottery evolves in three phases, reflecting Mizoguchi's changing approach to filmmaking. Genjūrō begins making the pottery for commercial reasons, shifts to pure aesthetics while isolated with Lady Wakasa, and finally moves on to a style that reflects life and strives to understand it.

Release.

"Ugetsu" was released in Japan on 26 March 1953. It was shown at the 1953 Venice Film Festival. Accompanied by Yoda and Kinuyo Tanaka, Mizoguchi made his first trip outside Japan to attend the festival. He spent most of his time in Italy inside his hotel room praying to a scroll with a portrait of Nichiren. While in Venice he met director William Wyler, whose film "Roman Holiday" was also screening in competition at the festival and was rumoured to be the winner of the Silver Lion for best director. The film opened in New York City on 7 September 1954, with the English title "Ugetsu" being a truncation of "Ugetsu Monogatari", the Japanese title, from Ueda's book. It was distributed elsewhere in the United States by Harrison Pictures under the title "Tales of Ugetsu" on 20 September 1954.  In September 2006, Film Forum screened the film in New York City over six days, opening a Mizoguchi tribute. A 4K digital restoration also screened as part of the Cannes Classics section at the 2016 Cannes Film Festival, Il Cinema Ritrovato in Bologna, and the 54th New York Film Festival. The restoration "was undertaken by The Film Foundation and Kadokawa Corporation at Cineric Laboratories in New York".

Home media.

"Ugetsu" was released on VHS by Home Vision Entertainment, with English subtitles. On 8 November 2005, the film became available for the first time on Region 1 DVD when the Criterion Collection released a two-disc edition of the film, which includes numerous special features such as a 150-minute documentary on Mizoguchi, "", directed by Kaneto Shindo. The box-set also includes a booklet with an essay by Keiko I. McDonald, the author of "Mizoguchi" and editor of "Ugetsu", and the three short stories from which the film draws inspiration. The film was released on Blu-Ray through the Criterion Collection years later, with all the features included.  In April 2008, "Ugetsu Monogatari" was released in the U.K. on Region 2 DVD by Eureka Entertainment as part of their Masters of Cinema series. The two-disc special edition containing new transfers is released in a double pack which twins it with Mizoguchi's film "Miss Oyu" (1951). This U.K. set was released on Blu-ray on 23 April 2012.

Reception.

Critical reception.

"Ugetsu" is often regarded as a masterwork of Japanese cinema and a definitive piece during Japan's Golden Age of Film. It is one of a number of films arguably more popular in western countries than in Japan. Japanese film historian Tadao Satō remarked that while this film, along with Mizoguchi's other works of the period "The Crucified Lovers" and "Sansho the Bailiff", was probably not meant specifically to be sold to westerners as an "exotic" piece, it was perceived by studio executives as the kind of film that would not necessarily make a profit in Japanese theaters but would win awards at international film festivals.  The film was immediately popular in western countries and praised by such film critics as Lindsay Anderson and Donald Richie. Richie called it "one of the most perfect movies in the history of Japanese cinema" and especially praised the beauty and morality of the film's opening and closing shots. Richie analyzed how the film starts with "a long panorama" and shots spanning from a lake to the shore and the village. He judged the ending's "upward tilting panorama" from the grave to above to reflect the beginning. Bosley Crowther, in "The New York Times", wrote that the film had "a strangely obscure, inferential, almost studiedly perplexing quality". "Variety" staff praised the film's visuals for reminiscence to Japanese prints, costumes and set design, and the performances of Masayuki Mori and Machiko Kyō.  The film appeared in "Sight & Sound" magazine's top 10 critics poll of the greatest films ever made, which is held once every decade, in 1962 and 1972. "Ugetsu" currently holds a 100% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, based on 26 reviews, with a weighted average of 9.45/10. The site's critical consensus states, "With its thought-provoking themes, rich atmosphere, and brilliant direction, Kenji Mizoguchi's is a towering classic of world cinema". Roger Ebert added "Ugetsu" to his Great Movies list in 2004, calling it "one of the greatest of all films", and said that "At the end of "Ugetsu", aware we have seen a fable, we also feel curiously as if we have witnessed true lives and fates". Director Martin Scorsese has also listed it as one of his favourite films of all time. In "5001 Nights at the Movies", film critic Pauline Kael found it to be "subtle, violent yet magical", and termed "Ugetsu" as "one of the most amazing of the Japanese movies that played American art houses". In 2000, "The Village Voice" newspaper ranked "Ugetsu" 29th on their list of the 100 best films of the 20th century.

Accolades.

"Ugetsu" won the Silver Lion Award for Best Direction at the Venice Film Festival in 1953. The night before, Mizoguchi, believing that if the film did not win an award the shame would prevent him from returning to Japan, stayed in his hotel room and prayed. In Japan it was named third in Kinema Junpo's Best Ten for Japanese films of 1953. and won two awards at the 8th Mainichi Film Awards.

Legacy.

Along with Akira Kurosawa's film "Rashomon" (1950), "Ugetsu" is credited with having popularised Japanese cinema in the West. The film, and Yasujirō Ozu's "Tokyo Story", released the same year, particularly created awareness of other Japanese filmmakers. Mizoguchi cemented his reputation among film aficionados in Europe with his film "Sansho the Bailiff" (1954). "Ugetsu" and "Sansho the Bailiff" made an impact on French New Wave directors Jean-Luc Godard and François Truffaut, and U.S. director Paul Schrader, who sought Kazuo Miyagawa for advice on the film "" (1985).

, is a 1953 Japanese romantic fantasy drama film directed by Kenji Mizoguchi and based on stories in Ueda Akinari's 1776 book of the same name. It is a ghost story and an example of the "jidaigeki" (period drama) genre, starring Masayuki Mori and Machiko Kyō.

Ugetsu – Erzählungen unter dem Regenmond (jap., "Ugetsu monogatari") ist ein japanischer Spielfilm aus dem Jahr 1953. Regie bei dem Drama führte Kenji Mizoguchi, das Drehbuch schrieben Yoshikata Yoda und Matsutarō Kawaguchi nach Vorlagen von Akinari Ueda und Guy de Maupassant. Produziert wurde der Film von Daiei.


Varieties.

Style guides vary widely in scope and size.

Sizes.

This variety in scope and length is enabled by the cascading of one style over another, in a way analogous to how styles cascade in web development and in desktop cascade over CSS styles.  A short style guide is often called a "style sheet". A comprehensive guide tends to be long and is often called a "style manual" or "manual of style" ("MOS" or "MoS"). In many cases, a project such as one book, journal, or monograph series typically has a short style sheet that cascades over the somewhat larger style guide of an organization such as a publishing company, whose content is usually called "house style". Most house styles, in turn, cascade over an "industry-wide or profession-wide style manual" that is even more comprehensive. Some examples of these industry style guides include the following:  Finally, these reference works cascade over the orthographic norms of the language in use (for example, English orthography for English-language publications). This, of course, may be subject to national variety such as the different varieties of American English and British English.

Topics.

Some style guides focus on specific topic areas such as graphic design, including typography. Website style guides cover a publication's visual and technical aspects along with text.  Style guides that cover usage may suggest ways of describing people that avoid racism, sexism, and homophobia. Guides in specific scientific and technical fields cover nomenclature, which specifies names or classifying labels that are preferred because they are clear, standardized, and ontologically sound (e.g., taxonomy, chemical nomenclature, and gene nomenclature).

Updating.

Most style guides are revised from time to time to accommodate changes in conventions and usage. The frequency of updating and the revision control are determined by the subject matter. For style manuals in reference work format, new editions typically appear every 1 to 20 years. For example, the AP Stylebook is revised annually, and the Chicago, APA, and ASA manuals are in their 17th, 6th, and 4th editions, respectively. Many house styles and individual project styles change more frequently, especially for new projects.

Examples.

International.

Several basic style guides for technical and scientific communication have been defined by international standards organizations. One example is ISO 215 "Documentation – Presentation of contributions to periodicals and other serials".

Europe.

The European Union publishes an "Interinstitutional style guide" – encompassing 24 languages across the European Union. This manual is "obligatory" for all those employed by the institutions of the EU who are involved in preparing EU documents and works. The Directorate-General for Translation of the European Commission publishes its own "English Style Guide", intended primarily for English-language authors and translators, but aiming to serve a wider readership as well.

United States.

In the United States, most public-facing corporate communication and journalism writing is written with styles following "The Associated Press Stylebook". Book publishers and authors of journals requiring reference sections generally choose the Chicago Manual of Style, while scholarly writing often follows the "MLA Style Manual and Guide to Scholarly Publishing". One of the most popular grammar guides used in third-person writing is "The Elements of Style". The Associated Press Stylebook is written to be used together with The Elements of Style to provide a very complete grammar and English style reference with no conflicts.

Law.

Despite the near uniform use of the Bluebook, nearly every state has appellate court rules that specify citation methods and writing styles specific to that state – and the Supreme Court of the United States has its own citation method. However, in most cases these are derived from the Bluebook.  There are also several other citation manuals available to legal writers in wide usage in the United States. Virtually all large law firms maintain their own citation manual and several major publishers of legal texts (West, Lexis-Nexis, Hein, "et al.") maintain their own systems.

Web publishing.

Guidelines for citing web content also appear in comprehensive style guides such as Oxford/Hart, Chicago and MLA.

A style guide or manual of style is a set of standards for the writing, formatting and design of documents. It is often called a style sheet, although that term also has other meanings. The standards can be applied either for general use, or be required usage for an individual publication, a particular organization, or a specific field.

Ein Styleguide (oder deutsch Gestaltungsrichtlinie) beschreibt, wie bestimmte Elemente eines Druckerzeugnisses oder einer Website zu gestalten sind. Diese Richtlinien sollen ein einheitliches Erscheinungsbild verschiedener Kommunikationsmittel einer Institution oder Firma, z. B. Werbe- und Informationsmaterial, Geschäftsbriefe oder Internetauftritte, gewährleisten und so die Bildung einer Corporate Identity ermöglichen. Daneben werden Styleguides auch für die Software-Erstellung oder Produkte allgemein eingesetzt; auch hier ist das Ziel: Produkte sollen als zusammengehörig wahrgenommen werden und ggf. auch mit der verbundenen Marke assoziiert werden.


Early life and family.

Otto was born on 23 November 912, the oldest son of the Duke of Saxony, Henry the Fowler and his second wife Matilda, the daughter of Dietrich of Ringelheim, a Saxon count in Westphalia. Henry had previously married Hatheburg of Merseburg, also a daughter of a Saxon count, in 906, but this marriage was annulled, probably in 909 after she had given birth to Henry's first son and Otto's half-brother Thankmar. Otto had four full siblings: Hedwig, Gerberga, Henry and Bruno.

Background.

On 23 December 918, Conrad I, King of East Francia and Duke of Franconia, died. According to the "Res gestae saxonicae" by the Saxon chronicler Widukind of Corvey, Conrad persuaded his younger brother Eberhard of Franconia, the presumptive heir, to offer the crown of East Francia to Otto's father Henry. Although Conrad and Henry had been at odds with one another since 912, Henry had not openly opposed the king since 915. Furthermore, Conrad's repeated battles with German dukes, most recently with Arnulf, Duke of Bavaria, and Burchard II,

Heir apparent.

Otto first gained experience as a military commander when the German kingdom fought against Wendish tribes on its eastern border. While campaigning against the Wends/West Slavs in 929, Otto's illegitimate son William, the future Archbishop of Mainz, was born to a captive Wendish noblewoman. With Henry's dominion over the entire kingdom secured by 929, the king probably began to prepare his succession over the kingdom. No written evidence for his arrangements is extant, but during this time Otto is first called king (Latin: "rex") in a document of the Abbey of

Reign as king.

Coronation.

Henry died from the effects of a cerebral stroke on 2 July 936 at his palace, the "Kaiserpfalz" in Memleben, and was buried at Quedlinburg Abbey. At the time of his death, all of the various German tribes were united in a single realm. At the age of almost 24, Otto assumed his father's position as Duke of Saxony and King of Germany. His coronation was held on 7 August 936 in Charlemagne's former capital of Aachen, where Otto was anointed and crowned by Hildebert, the Archbishop of Mainz. Though he was a Saxon by birth, Otto appeared at the coronation in Frankish dress in an attempt to demonstrate his sovereignty over the Duchy of Lotharingia and his role as true successor to Charlemagne, whose last heirs in East Francia had died out in 911.  According to Widukind of Corvey, Otto had the four other dukes of the kingdom (from the duchies of Franconia, Swabia, Bavaria and Lorraine) act as his personal attendants at the coronation banquet: Arnulf I of Bavaria as marshal (or stablemaster),

Rebellion of the dukes.

Arnulf, Duke of Bavaria, died in 937 and was succeeded by his son Eberhard. The new duke quickly came into conflict with Otto, as Eberhard opposed the king's sovereignty over Bavaria under the peace treaty between King Henry and Arnulf. Refusing to recognize Otto's supremacy, Eberhard rebelled against the king. In two campaigns in the spring and fall of 938, Otto defeated and exiled Eberhard from the kingdom and stripped him of his titles. In his place, Otto appointed Eberhard's uncle Berthold, a count in the March of Carinthia, as the new Duke of Bavaria on the condition that Berthold would recognize Otto as the sole authority to appoint bishops and to administer royal property within the duchy.  At the same time, Otto had to settle a dispute between Bruning, a Saxon noble, and Duke

War in France.

Shortly after his reconciliation, Eberhard planned a second rebellion against Otto. He promised to assist Otto's younger brother Henry in claiming the throne and recruited Gilbert, Duke of Lorraine, to join the rebellion. Gilbert was married to Otto's sister Gerberga of Saxony, but had sworn fealty to King Louis IV of West Francia. Otto exiled Henry from East Francia, and he fled to the court of King Louis. The West Frankish king, in hopes of regaining dominion over Lorraine once again, joined forces with Henry and Gilbert. In response, Otto allied with Louis's chief antagonist, Hugh the Great, Count of Paris, and husband of Otto's sister Hedwige. Henry captured Merseburg and planned to join Gilbert in Lorraine, but Otto besieged them at Chevremont near Liège. Before he could defeat them, he was forced to abandon the siege and moved against Louis, who had seized Verdun. Otto subsequently drove Louis back to his capital at Laon.  While Otto gained some initial victories against the rebels, he was unable to capture the conspirators and end

Consolidation of power.

The decade between 941 and 951 was marked by Otto's exercise of undisputed domestic power. Through the subordination of the dukes under his authority, Otto asserted his power to make decisions without their prior agreement. He deliberately ignored the claims and ranks of the nobility, who wanted dynastic succession in the assignment of office, by freely appointing individuals of his choice to the kingdom's offices. Loyalty to Otto, not lineage, was the pathway towards advancement under his rule. His mother Matilda disapproved of this policy and was accused by Otto's royal advisers of undermining his authority. After Otto briefly exiled her to her Westphalian manors at Enger in 947, Matilda was brought back to court at the urging of his wife Eadgyth.  The nobility found

Foreign relations.

France.

The West Frankish kings had lost considerable royal power after internal struggles with their aristocracy, but still asserted their authority over the Duchy of Lorraine, a territory also claimed by East Francia. The German king was supported by Louis IV's chief domestic rival, Hugh the Great. Louis IV's second attempt to reign over Lorraine in 940 was based on his asserted claim to be the rightful Duke of Lorraine due to his marriage to Gerberga of Saxony, Otto's sister and the widow of Gilbert, Duke of Lorraine. Otto did not recognize Louis IV's claim and appointed his brother Henry as duke instead. In the following years, both sides tried to increase their influence in Lorraine, but the duchy remained a part of Otto's kingdom.  Despite their rivalry, Louis IV and Hugh were both tied to Otto's family through marriage bonds. Otto intervened for peace in 942 and announced a formal reconciliation between the

Burgundy.

Otto continued the peaceful relationship between Germany and the Kingdom of Burgundy initiated by his father. King Rudolf II of Burgundy had previously married Bertha of Swabia, the daughter of one of Henry's chief advisers, in 922. Burgundy was originally a part of Middle Francia, the central portion of Charlemagne's empire prior

Bohemia.

Boleslaus I, Duke of Bohemia, assumed the Bohemian throne in 935. The next year, following the death of Otto's father, King Henry the Fowler, Boleslaus stopped paying tribute to the German Kingdom (East Francia) in violation of the peace treaty Henry had established with Boleslaus' brother and predecessor, Wenceslaus I. Boleslaus attacked an ally of the Saxons in northwest Bohemia in 936 and defeated two of Otto's armies

Byzantine Empire.

During his early reign, Otto fostered close relations with Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus, who ruled over the Byzantine Empire from 913 until his death in 959; East Francia and Byzantium sent several ambassadors to one another. Bishop Thietmar of Merseburg, a medieval chronicler, records: "After this [Gilbert's defeat in 939], legates from the Greeks [Byzantines] twice brought gifts from their emperor to our king, both rulers being in a state of concord." It was during this time that Otto first tried to link himself to the Eastern Empire through marriage negotiations.

Slavic Wars.

As Otto was finalizing actions to suppress his brother's rebellion in 939, the Slavs on the Elbe River revolted against German rule. Having been subdued by Otto's father in 928, the Slavs saw Henry's rebellion as an opportunity to regain their independence. Otto's lieutenant in east Saxony, Count Gero of Merseburg, was charged with the subjugation of the pagan Polabian Slavs. According to Widukind, Gero invited about thirty Slavic chieftains to a banquet; after the feast his soldiers attacked and massacred the unsuspecting drunken guests. The Slavs demanded revenge and marched against Gero with an enormous army. Otto agreed to a brief truce with his rebellious brother Henry and moved to support Gero. After fierce fighting, their combined forces were

Expansion into Italy.

Disputed Italian throne.

Upon the death of Emperor Charles the Fat in 888, the empire of Charlemagne was divided into several territories: East Francia, West Francia, the kingdoms of Lower and Upper Burgundy, and the Kingdom of Italy, with each of the realms being ruled by its own king. Though the pope in Rome continued to invest the kings of Italy as "emperors" to rule Charlemagne's empire, these "Italian emperors" never exercised any authority north of the Alps. When Berengar I of Italy was assassinated in 924, the last nominal heir to Charlemagne was dead and the imperial title was left unclaimed.  King Rudolf II of Upper Burgundy and Hugh, Count of Provence, the effective ruler of Lower Burgundy, competed to gain dominion over Italy. In 926, Hugh defeated Rudolf, established "de facto" control over the Italian peninsula and was crowned as King of Italy. His son Lothair was elevated to co-ruler in 931. Hugh and Rudolf II eventually concluded a peace treaty in 933; four years later Lothair was betrothed to Rudolf's infant daughter Adelaide.  In 940,

First Italian Expedition.

In the early summer of 951, before his father marched across the Alps, Otto's son Liudolf, Duke of Swabia, invaded Lombardy in northern Italy. The exact reasons for Liudolf's action are unclear, and historians have proposed several possible motives. Liudolf may have tried to help Adelaide, a distant relative of Liudolf's wife Ida, or he intended to strengthen his position within the royal family. The young heir was also competing with his uncle, Duke Henry of Bavaria, both in German affairs and Northern Italy. While Liudolf was preparing his expedition, Henry influenced the Italian aristocrats not to join Liudolf's campaign. When Liudolf arrived in Lombardy, he found no support and was unable to sustain his troops. His army was near destruction until Otto's troops crossed the Alps. The king reluctantly received Liudolf's forces into his command, angry at his son for his independent

Aftermath.

In a weak military position with few troops, Otto's regent in Italy attempted a diplomatic solution and opened peace negotiations with Berengar II. Conrad recognized that a military confrontation would impose great costs upon Germany, both in manpower and in treasure. At a time when the kingdom was facing invasions from the north by the Danes and from the east by the Slavs and Hungarians, all available resources were required north of the Alps. Conrad believed that a client state relationship with Italy would be in Germany's best interest. He offered a peace treaty in which Berengar II would remain King of Italy on the condition that he recognized Otto as his overlord. Berengar II agreed and the pair traveled north to meet with Otto to seal the agreement.  Conrad's treaty was met with disdain by Adelaide and Henry. Though Adelaide was Burgundian by birth, she was raised as an Italian. Her father Rudolf II of Burgundy was briefly king of Italy prior to being deposed and she herself had briefly been

Relations with the Catholic Church.

Beginning in the late 940s, Otto rearranged interior policies by utilizing the offices of the Catholic Church as tools of royal administration, thereby setting the course for the Ottonian Imperial Church System. With regard to his "divine right" to rule he viewed himself as the protector of the Church. A key element of administratve reorganisation was the installment of celibate clerics in secular offices, chiefly bishops and abbots, at the expense of the hereditary secular nobility. Otto sought to establish a non-hereditary counter-balance to the fiercely independent and powerful royal princes. He granted land and bestowed the title of "Prince of the Empire" ("Reichsfürst") to appointed bishops and abbots. Hereditary claims were thus avoided as after death the offices fell back upon the crown. Historian Norman Cantor concludes: "Under these conditions clerical election became a mere formality in the Ottonian empire, and the king filled up the ranks of the episcopate with his own relatives and with his loyal chancery clerks, who were also appointed to

Liudolf's Civil War.

Rebellion against Otto.

With the humiliating failure of his Italian campaign and Otto's marriage to Adelaide, Liudolf became estranged from his father and planned a rebellion. On Christmas Day 951, he held a grand feast at Saalfeld that was attended by many important figures from across the kingdom, most notably Archbishop Frederick of Mainz, the Primate of Germany. Liudolf was able to recruit his brother-in-law Conrad, Duke of Lorraine, to his rebellion. As Otto's regent in Italy, Conrad had negotiated a peace agreement and an alliance with Berengar II and believed that Otto would confirm this treaty. Instead of an ally, Berengar II was made Otto's subject and his kingdom was subsequently reduced. Conrad felt betrayed and insulted over Otto's decision, especially with the additional empowerment

End of the rebellion.

In early 954, Margrave Hermann Billung, Otto's long-time loyal vassal in Saxony, was facing increased Slavic movements in the east. Taking advantage of the German civil war, the Slavs raided deeper and deeper into the adjacent border areas. Meanwhile, the Hungarians began extensive raids into Southern Germany. Though Liudolf and Conrad prepared defenses against the invasions in their territories, the Hungarians devastated Bavaria and Franconia. On Palm Sunday, 954, Liudolf held a great feast at Worms and invited the Hungarian chieftains to

Hungarian invasions.

The Hungarians (Magyars) invaded Otto's domain as part of the larger Hungarian invasions of Europe and ravaged much of Southern Germany during Liudolf's civil war. Though Otto had installed the Margraves Hermann Billung and Gero on his kingdom's northern and northeastern borders, the Principality of Hungary to the southeast was a permanent threat to German security. The Hungarians took advantage of the kingdom's civil war and invaded the Duchy of Bavaria in spring 954. Though Liudolf, Duke of Swabia, and Conrad, Duke of Lorraine, had successfully prevented the Hungarians from invading their own territories in the west, the invaders managed to reach the Rhine River, sacking much of Bavaria and Franconia in the process.  The Hungarians, encouraged by their successful raids, began another invasion into Germany in the spring of 955. Otto's army, now unhindered by civil war, was able to defeat the invasion, and soon the Hungarians sent an ambassador to seek peace with Otto. The ambassador proved to be a decoy: Otto's brother Henry I, Duke of Bavaria, sent word to Otto that the Hungarians had crossed into his territory from the southeast. The main Hungarian army had camped along the Lech River and besieged Augsburg. While the city was defended by Bishop Ulrich of Augsburg, Otto assembled his army and marched south to face the Hungarians.  Otto and his army fought the Hungarian force on 10 August 955 at the Battle of Lechfeld. Under Otto's command were Burchard III, Duke of Swabia and Bohemian troops of Duke Boleslaus I. Though outnumbered nearly two to one, Otto was determined to push the Hungarian forces out of his territory. According to Widukind of Corvey, Otto "pitched his camp in the territory of the city of Augsburg and joined there the forces of Henry I, Duke of Bavaria, who was himself lying mortally ill nearby, and by Duke Conrad with a large following of Franconian knights. Conrad's unexpected arrival encouraged the warriors so much that they wished to attack the enemy immediately."  The Hungarians crossed the river and immediately attacked the Bohemians, followed by the Swabians under Burchard. Confusing the defenders with a rain of arrows, they plundered the baggage train and made many captives. As Otto

Reign as emperor.

Second Italian Expedition and imperial coronation.

Liudolf's death in the fall of 957 deprived Otto of both an heir and a commander of his expedition against King Berengar II of Italy. Beginning with the unfavorable peace treaty signed in 952 in which he became Otto's vassal, Berengar II had always been a rebellious subordinate. With the death of Liudolf and Henry I, Duke of Bavaria, and with Otto campaigning in northern Germany, Berengar II attacked the March of Verona in 958, which Otto had stripped from his control under the 952 treaty, and besieged Count Adalbert Atto of Canossa there. Berengar II's forces also attacked the Papal States and the city of Rome under Pope John XII. In autumn 960, with Italy in political turmoil, the Pope sent word to Otto seeking his aid against Berengar II. Several other influential Italian leaders arrived at Otto's court with similar appeals, including the Archbishop of Milan, the bishops of Como and Novara, and Margrave Otbert of Milan.

Papal politics.

On 12 February 962, Emperor Otto I and Pope John XII called a synod in Rome to finalize their relationship. At the synod, Pope John XII approved Otto's long-desired Archdiocese of Magdeburg. The Emperor had planned the establishment of the archdiocese to commemorate his victory at the Battle of Lechfeld over the Hungarians and to further convert the local Slavs to Christianity. The Pope named the former royal monastery of St. Maurice as provisional center of the new archdiocese, and called upon the German archbishops for support.  The following day, Otto and John XII ratified the "Diploma Ottonianum", confirming John XII as the spiritual head of the Church and Otto as its secular protector. In the Diploma, Otto acknowledged the earlier Donation of Pepin of 754 between Pepin the Short, King of the Franks and Pope Stephen II. Otto recognized John XII's secular control over the Papal States, and expanded the Pope's domain by the Exarchate of Ravenna, the Duchy of Spoleto, the Duchy of Benevento and several smaller possessions. Despite this confirmed claim, Otto never ceded real control over those additional territories. The Diploma granted the

Third Italian Expedition.

Otto returned to Germany in January 965, believing his affairs in Italy had been settled. On 20 May 965, the Emperor's long-serving lieutenant on the eastern front, Margrave Gero, died and left a vast march stretching from the Billung March in the north to the Duchy of Bohemia in the south. Otto divided this territory into five separate smaller marches, each ruled by a margrave: the Northern March under Dietrich of Haldensleben, the Eastern March under Odo I, the March of Meissen under Wigbert, the March of Merseburg under Günther, and the March of Zeitz under Wigger I.  Peace in Italy, however, would not last long. Adalbert, the son of the deposed King Berengar II of Italy, rebelled against Otto's rule over the Kingdom of Italy. Otto dispatched

Reign from Rome.

Upon Otto's arrival in Italy, John XIII was restored to his papal throne in mid-November 966 without opposition by the people. Otto captured the twelve leaders of the rebel militia, which had deposed and imprisoned the Pope, and had them hanged. Taking up permanent residence at Rome, the Emperor travelled, accompanied by the Pope, to Ravenna to celebrate Easter in 967. A following synod confirmed Magdeburg's disputed status as a new archdiocese with equal rights to the established German archdioceses.  With his matters arranged in northern Italy, the Emperor continued to expand his realm to the south. Since February 967, the Prince of Benevento, Lombard Pandolf Ironhead, had accepted Otto as his overlord and received Spoleto and Camerino as fiefdom. This decision caused conflict with the Byzantine Empire, which claimed sovereignty over the principalities of southern Italy. The eastern Empire also objected to Otto's use of the title "Emperor", believing only

Final years and death.

With his son's wedding completed and peace with the Byzantine Empire concluded, Otto led the imperial family back to Germany in August 972. In the spring of 973, the Emperor visited Saxony and celebrated Palm Sunday in Magdeburg. At the same ceremony the previous year, Margrave Hermann Billung, Otto's trusted lieutenant and personal administrator over Saxony during his years in Italy, had been received like a king by Archbishop Adalbert of Magdeburg – a gesture of protest against the Emperor's prolonged absence from Germany.  Celebrating Easter with a great assembly in Quedlinburg, Emperor Otto was

Family and children.

Although never Emperor, Otto's father Henry I the Fowler is considered the founder of the Ottonian dynasty. In relation to the other members of his dynasty, Otto I was the son of

Legacy.

Ottonian Renaissance.

A limited renaissance of the arts and architecture in the second half of the 10th century depended on the court patronage of Otto and his immediate successors. The "Ottonian Renaissance" was manifest in some revived cathedral schools, such as that of Bruno I, Archbishop of Cologne, and in the production of illuminated manuscripts,

Modern world.

Otto I was selected as the main motif for a high value commemorative coin, the €100 Imperial Crown of the Holy Roman Empire commemorative coin, issued in 2008 by the Austrian Mint. The obverse

Otto I (23 November 912 – 7 May 973), traditionally known as Otto the Great (, ), was German king from 936 and Holy Roman Emperor from 962 until his death in 973. He was the oldest son of Henry I the Fowler and Matilda.

Otto I. der Große (* 23. November 912; † 7. Mai 973 in Memleben) aus dem Geschlecht der Liudolfinger war ab 936 Herzog von Sachsen und König des Ostfrankenreiches "(regnum francorum orientalium)", ab 951 König von Italien und ab 962 römisch-deutscher Kaiser.