# data[].attributes.body
曼奇克特戰役中，賽爾駐土耳其蘇丹，其人死法莫名其妙

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
阿爾普·阿爾斯蘭 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
阿爾普·阿爾斯蘭（现代土耳其语：Alp Arslan；波斯語：آلپ ارسلان；1029年1月20日—1072年12月15日），本名穆罕默德·本·達伍德·恰格勒或穆罕默德·本·贾格里，塞爾柱帝國第二任蘇丹，首任蘇丹圖赫里勒·貝格之侄，一族英雄塞爾柱·貝格的曾孫
[1]。阿爾斯蘭任內屢次與埃及的法蒂瑪王朝、東羅馬帝國交戰取勝，使帝國得以擴張版圖，代表性戰役為1071年在曼齊刻爾特（今土耳其境內）以少勝多擊敗東羅馬帝國遠征軍，此役奠定大塞爾柱王朝在安納托利亞的統治。土耳其後人敬佩他的軍事才能和非凡武藝，尊稱他為“阿爾普·阿爾斯蘭”，意為“英勇之獅”[2]。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Battle of Manzikert 1071 - Byzantine - Seljuq Wars Documentary

# data[].attributes.body
基督教堂與城市發展

城市新興階級帶來的衝擊

城市布爾喬亞與君主合作，打擊封建貴族

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
环境恶劣蛮族砸门？文艺复兴的滥觞？中世纪欧洲的城市究竟是怎样的？【中世纪城市】

# data[].attributes.body
羅馬三段落姓名的出現

西賽羅源自於鷹嘴豆，因為其祖先身上有一個長得像鷹嘴豆的疣

凱薩的意思是頭髮茂密的

布魯圖斯是不理智的

基督教化後對於歐洲姓名的影響，聖人名字

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
简单又粗暴？你以为的贵族是假的？不为人知的欧洲姓名史

# data[].attributes.body
戈培爾-德國的光輝

戈培爾並且經由兼任新設立的全國文化院院長、在宣傳中不斷攻擊「頹廢藝術」、杯葛猶太藝術家，有系統剷除猶太人對德國文化生活的影響力，並且買下最大的電影公司UFA，終於將所有媒體和藝術表現編入國家控制之下。

迪士尼-元首的尊榮

# data[].attributes.body
阮文紹在越戰末期流亡台灣，後定居美國

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
民國62年4月13日，越南共和國總統阮文紹（Nguyễn Văn Thiệu）和夫人阮氏梅英（Nguyễn Thị Mai Anh）搭乘專機飛抵松山機場，副總統嚴家淦伉儷、行政院院長蔣經國及外交部部長沈昌煥等政府首長到場迎接，彼此握手相迎。隨後阮總統及嚴副總統登上授禮台，接受21響禮炮的最高敬意，並搭乘敞篷禮車檢閱三軍儀隊，阮總統伉儷也和我國政府官員及越南僑民一一握手致意。隨後，阮總統一行人驅車途經台北市區，下榻圓山行館（今台北圓山大飯店）。 14日上午，阮總統在圓山行館接見嚴副總統及蔣院長，就亞洲情勢及中越兩國共同利益交換意見。當日中午，嚴副總統以午宴款待阮總統伉儷。晚間，越南駐華大使館代辦阮文矯（Nguyễn Văn Kiểu）舉行酒會，並由阮總統代表越南政府贈勳給我國軍政首長。阮總統還曾前往故宮博物院參觀，阮總統夫人則在嚴副總統夫人劉期純的陪同下，前往振興復健醫學中心（今振興醫療財團法人振興醫院）探視治療中的身障兒童。 15日，阮總統接受新聞界的訪問。下午，阮總統伉儷在嚴副總統、蔣院長等我方代表及僑民的歡送下，於松山機場搭乘專機返回越南。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
澎湖越南難民營 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
澎湖越南難民營，俗稱澎湖難民營。1977年後越南戰爭結束，越南出現華裔跟京族難民逃難各處現象。周遭國家及地區如中國大陸、香港、印尼與臺灣等基於人道主義等因素接濟難民。臺灣安置難民地點其中一個位址在澎湖縣，分別是西嶼鄉竹篙灣（今竹灣村）自1977年至1979年間曾有收容難民的紀錄、白沙鄉講美村的難民營則從1978年12月1日開辦，至1988年11月15日關閉營區，將近11年之久。[1]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
一場夢挖出澎湖將消失的難民營！51艘難民船，承載看不見的歷史與台越情誼｜劉吉雄口述、廖雲章訪問、劉苑杉整理／獨評真人圖書館｜獨立評論

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
《獨立評論@闖天下》第34集Podcast，專訪《彼岸他方》總策劃劉吉雄。他說：「我在澎湖當兵時，夢到的一位柬埔寨女孩。她在夢中問我，用『澎湖有個難民營，你有沒有去過？』當時我才24歲，什麼難民營啦！跟我有什麼關係？我甚至不知道，她指的是越南還是中南半島的難民營。」

# data[].attributes.headline
在這場戰事的高峰階段，越南境內的美軍有超過5

# data[].attributes.body
在這場戰事的高峰階段，越南境內的美軍有超過50萬之眾。

其成本也令人咋舌——2008年，美國國會一份報告估算，越戰總共的花費為6860億美元（換算成今天的錢則超過9500億美元）。

...

英國聖安德魯斯大學（University of St Andrews）的美國外交及國防政策專家盧克·米杜普博士（Dr Luke Middup）說，當時在戰爭初期是有一種普遍樂觀情緒的。「這在整場越南戰爭當中是其中一件非常奇特的事，」他向BBC表示，「美國完全意識到很多問題的存在——對於美軍能否在這個環境當中作戰，有很多的懷疑，但是美國政府直到1968年還是很有信心自己能贏。」

不過，這份信念後來卻萎縮了——特別是1968年由共產主義一方發動的新春攻勢（Tet offensive）大大打擊了這份信心——而最後，是國會不再支持為這場戰爭撥款，迫使美國於1973年撤軍。

美國國家檔案局（US National Archives）估算，至1966年，93%的美國家庭都擁有電視機，而當時他們能看到的內容審查更少，也比過去的戰爭更加實時。

...

從1968年開始，媒體報道已經很大程度上不利於這場戰爭——無辜平民被殺、重傷或者虐待的影像呈現在電視和報紙上，很多美國人被嚇怕了，轉而反對這場戰爭。

...

凝固汽油彈（一種燃燒溫度達2700攝氏度的石化燃燒彈，所觸及的地方都會附著在上）和橙劑（另一種用來阻止敵人以森林作掩護的化學品，但同時也毀滅莊稼導致饑荒）的使用，在鄉村民眾當中尤其能造成對美軍的負面印象。

「搜索並殲滅」的戰略任務殺害了無數無辜平民 ，比如1968年的美萊村屠殺，美軍在越戰期間這一場臭名昭著的事件中就殺害了數以百計的越南平民。

...

「美國國防部和蘭德公司（Rand corporation，為美國軍方服務的一個智庫）做了一些作戰動機和士氣方面的研究，了解北越和越共分別為什麼而參戰，結論是他們參戰的動機都是因為他們認定自己所做的是愛國的行為，也就是將國家統一在一個政府之下。」

...

這場戰爭期間有約110萬北越和越共戰士死亡，但是共產黨的軍隊似乎一直到戰爭末尾都能夠及時補員。

...

他認為，南方當時漸漸被一個宗教少數派——天主教徒——所佔據。

雖然這個群體在當時只佔人口的10-15%（越南大部分人為佛教徒），但是當時很多北方的人都因為害怕被迫害而逃到南方，形成米杜普博士所說的對南方政治「持批評態度的大多數」。而這些南方的政客，像南越第一任總統吳廷琰，都在美國有一些有權有勢的天主教徒朋友——比如像美國總統約翰·F·肯尼迪（John F. Kennedy，甘迺迪）。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
越南戰爭50週年：再看美國失敗的七大原因 - BBC News 中文

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
美國從越南戰爭中撤軍已過去50年，我們請兩位專家回顧，半個世紀前美軍戰敗的原因在哪裏。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
【吸特樂回來了！】Look Who's Back 精采預告 ~ 2016/4/8 他是誰？

# data[].attributes.body
法王非力四世因與英國間的領土戰爭，以及向外擴張的屢次征戰下，必須朝取足夠的金錢來源，因而產生與教會的徵稅衝突，並導致亞維儂之囚的發生。

法王菲力四世，晚年因內勒塔事件中三個兒媳婦被指控通姦，也間接造成卡佩王朝絕嗣，成為引發英法百年戰爭的原因

# data[].attributes.body
1. 與法王非力四世因徵稅權發生衝突，並對其施予決罰，但被法王出兵俘虜軟禁，並在被釋放後一個月身亡

2. 與但丁不睦，但丁並說很快在第八層地獄會看見他，那一層專門收納買賣聖職的人

# data[].attributes.headline
法國的民族問題阿雷烏派問題

# data[].attributes.body
法國的民族問題

阿雷烏派問題

蘇瓦松花瓶事件:被視為克洛維皈依基督教的事件

克洛薇迎娶勃艮地公主(克洛蒂爾德)進行與勃艮地的聯姻，且公主本信仰基督教

聖雷米吉烏斯(蘭斯主教)克洛維與羅馬教會關係的連結，由其為他受洗

基督教與羅馬v.s蠻族與異教派的文化對立形成

第一個皈依羅馬教會的蠻族與蠻族國家國王

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
法国的诞生，是罗马的延续还是蛮族的崛起？【你不知道的法兰西中世纪法国史 I】

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
随意废立皇帝？一人制霸整个欧洲？史上最强大的教皇能有多强？【教宗与教权VII】

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
貝希斯敦銘文 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
貝希斯敦銘文（波斯語：بیستون‎；古波斯語：Bagastana）是一個位於伊朗克爾曼沙汗省貝希斯敦山上的多語言銘文，該處近伊朗西部克爾曼沙赫。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
梵谷、達文西、畢卡索…大師都是抄出來的？那些名畫是在致敬前人?  【名畫背後的秘密】

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
最後的晚餐，通常指 耶穌在 客西馬尼園被當地政府（ 猶太公會及 羅馬帝國駐 猶太省政府）逮捕前與 十二使徒和 門徒共進的 晚餐，一般認為在 馬可福音作者 約翰·馬可家中的樓房（ 馬可樓）舉行。許多文藝作品以此為題材，其中最為著名的是 李奧納多·達文西的 同名畫作 。

《最後的晚餐》是李奧納多·達文西於1495-1498年作於義大利米蘭恩寵聖母多明我會院食堂

根據 使徒保羅在《 哥林多前書》第11章第23至26節（《 哥林多前書》第11章第23節至第26節參）所作的描述，在最後的晚餐的過程中，提到吃麵包和喝葡萄汁是紀念耶穌，形容這是「體制的聖體」（參見 濯足節 ）。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
最後的晚餐 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
最後的晚餐，通常指 耶穌在 客西馬尼園被當地政府（ 猶太公會及 羅馬帝國駐 猶太省政府）逮捕前與 十二使徒和 門徒共進的 晚餐，一般認為在 馬可福音作者 約翰·馬可家中的樓房（ 馬可樓）舉行。許多文藝作品以此為題材，其中最為著名的是 李奧納多·達文西的 同名畫作 。 根據 使徒保羅在《 哥林多前書》第11章第23至26節（《 哥林多前書》第11章第23節至第26節參 ）所作的描述，在最後的晚餐的過程中，提到吃麵包和喝葡萄汁是紀念耶穌，形容這是「體制的聖體」（參見 濯足節 ）。

# data[].attributes.headline
1497達文西版本的最後的晚餐

# data[].attributes.subject
1497達文西版本的最後的晚餐

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
拉斐爾《雅典學院》（上）：文藝復興經典壁畫，凝結哲人們的奧秘 | 轉角國際 udn Global

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
25歲的拉斐爾從佛羅倫斯轉移陣地來到羅馬，並迅速嶄露頭角。他一直待在這個社交圈裡度過人生最後的 12 年，直到 1520 年死亡。這個階段他完成了許多藝術品，位於梵蒂岡宗座宮殿的壁畫《雅典學院》絕對是其中一件最重要的傑作，與他經典的聖母子像齊名。

# data[].attributes.headline
Die Expansion des Frankenreichs von 481 bis 814

# data[].attributes.subject
Die Expansion des Frankenreichs von 481 bis 814

# data[].attributes.headline
Francia and neighbouring Slavic peoples c. 650

# data[].attributes.subject
Francia and neighbouring Slavic peoples c. 650

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
1939, September 3 – FDR – Fireside chat #14 – On the European War – open captioned

# data[].attributes.headline
邱吉爾在二戰時上任首相後的演說：血、辛勞、淚水和汗水

# data[].attributes.subject
邱吉爾在二戰時上任首相後的演說：血、辛勞、淚水和汗水

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blood, toil, tears and sweat - Wikipedia

# data[].attributes.headline
哥樂美岩洞-四世紀開始營造-西方的敦煌石窟

# data[].attributes.subject
哥樂美岩洞-四世紀開始營造-西方的敦煌石窟

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
土耳其《卡帕多奇亞》-【紅線攻略】土耳其的敦煌石窟【世界文化遺産】 歌樂美露天博物館Goreme Open Air Museum

土耳其在1985年第一批《聯合國教科文組織》的《世界文化遺産》UNESCO登錄裡，《卡帕多奇亞》Cappadocia這一帶就以《歌樂美國家公園和卡帕多奇亞的岩石景觀》Goreme National Park and the Rock Sites of Cappadocia名義成為土耳其最早被登錄的《世界文化遺産》之一。長年的旅遊業盛行也讓這裡發展出一套相當獨特的旅遊業運作模式。在這裡的旅遊業者將出名的景點以路線畫分，全數都以《紅線》red tour，《綠線》green tour，和《藍線》blue tour三條線運作。不管你是參加團體旅遊或是請私人的司機和導覽，基本上都是依照這三條線來跑。這三條線的設計都是一天內跑得完的路線，所以也很方便地幫你事先規劃好一日遊的行程。不少自駕旅遊的人也會依照這些路線來跑以便掌握時間。

每家旅行社這三條線的範圍可能會差一兩個景點，但是實際上大同小異，通常以《內夫謝希爾》Nevsehir為中心。《紅線》的路線包括了《內夫謝希爾》東北方的景點，《綠線》包括了《內夫謝希爾》西南方的景點，《藍線》則包括了《內夫謝希爾》東南方的景點。一般觀光客住的《歌樂美》Goreme和《烏奇薩爾》Uchisar在《內夫謝希爾》的東北方，所以《紅線》也是最受歡迎的一條路線，《綠線》次之，《藍線》又更其次。這次來請了私人的司機和導覽走了《紅線》和《綠線》兩條線。接下來幾篇來看看在這兩條線上出名的景點，首站來看這裡最重要的古蹟《歌樂美露天博物館》Goreme Open Air Museum。

《歌樂美露天博物館》不但是《卡帕多奇亞》最重要的歷史遺跡，也是《卡帕多奇亞》最高人氣的必訪景點。它包含了一整個羣組的洞穴教堂和修道院。《卡帕多奇亞》這一帶的人很早就發現這個區域質地較軟的岩石相當容易開鑿，所以也發展出洞穴屋和洞穴教堂的特殊生活方式。《歌樂美露天博物館》裡的洞穴修道院和教堂一般相信遠溯及第4世紀時主教Kayseri Bishop of St. Basil前來《卡帕多奇亞》傳教和廣設修道院時開始建立。這裡的洞穴教堂裡以《拜占庭帝國》Byzantine Empire （《東羅馬帝國》Eastern Roman Empire）時期的拜占庭風格宗教彩繪而聞名，仿佛是土耳其版的龍門石窟。其中壁畫保存得最好的《黑暗教堂》Dark Church要額外收費，但是不容錯過。在園區大門外的《鈕扣教堂》Buckle Church是《歌樂美》一帶最早也是最大的洞穴教堂之一，它也包含在《歌樂美露天博物館》的門票之中。不過這些教堂的內部均不准照相。

附贈一張《卡帕多奇亞》Cappadocia旅遊地圖。中間紅色斜線的那一個區塊是《內夫謝希爾》Nevsehir。通常它的東北方是紅線，西南方是綠線。藍線在這張地圖上没畫出來，不過基本上就是《內夫謝希爾》東南方的那個區塊。

《歌樂美露天博物館》Goreme Open Air Museum的園區。

這裡之所以稱為「露天博物館」主要是因為它是，呃，露天的（廢話一句）。

它裡面有一條步道，你進來之後沿著步道參觀沿途的洞穴修道院和教堂。

這裡並不是所有的洞穴教堂都有對觀光客開放。不開放的理由很多，有的是為了安全問題，有的是為了壁畫的保存。像山上的那座洞穴教堂目前就没有開放。

這個區域蠻漂亮的。

有很多奇石的景觀。

你即使是對古蹟没有興趣的人也值得來。

和《歌樂美露天博物館》隔著一座山谷的對岸還有更多的洞穴屋。

這一帶的人類居住史真的是說出來你會怕。

《歌樂美露天博物館》的洞穴修道院和教堂。

很多教堂是要爬上去看的。

這裡的修道院和教堂很多的門都特意鑿成了這種鑰匙洞的樣式，這和當時的基督教信仰有關。

我比較納悶的是這裡的階梯很多都是當代才打造的，那以前的人都是怎麼上去的啊？

教堂裡面都不准照相，所以只有這張從教堂外照的相片。

這是你在這些教堂裡會看到的壁畫主題（有些壁畫會在不同的教堂裡重覆），全都是《拜占庭帝國》Byzantine Empire （《東羅馬帝國》Eastern Roman Empire）時期的拜占庭風格宗教彩繪，美吧！

從教堂上看這一帶的風景。

超美的。

從一座高處的教堂看其它的修道院和教堂。

這座《黑暗教堂》Dark Church是壁畫保存得最好的一座教堂，它要額外收費，但是不容錯過。

《黑暗教堂》外岩壁已經崩塌而成了露天的部份。

從這裡你可以一窺往昔教堂內部的結構。

石壁上的彩繪。

超像中國的敦煌石窟！

石門上的十字架仍然清晰可見。《黑暗教堂》內部的壁畫保存得非常良好的原因是因為它没有窗戶（所以才叫作《黑暗教堂》），所以也没有光線來破壞它內部的壁畫。它裡面的壁畫保存程度就相當接近之前那個告示牌上列出來的壁畫了（驚）。

這裡除了教堂之外也有往昔教士們（男女都有，但是男女的修道院是分開的）在這裡居住的生活空間。

教士們生活的空間這部份是可以照相的。

這條石槽是他們吃飯的地方，中間是石桌，人就坐在周圍。在石桌前還有一幅「最後的晚餐」壁畫（在「最後的晚餐」前吃晚餐～感覺人生都勵志起來了呢）。

修道院的石壁上仍然是那個不斷出現的基督教鑰匙洞主題。

從鑰匙洞裡看修道院外的繁華人世（誤）。

再看一眼土耳其的敦煌石窟。

在園區大門外的《鈕扣教堂》Buckle Church是《歌樂美》Goreme一帶最早也是最大的洞穴教堂之一，它也包含在《歌樂美露天博物館》的門票之中。

《鈕扣教堂》的內部一樣不准照相，不過從這張相片你就可以看出來這座洞穴教堂的規模之大以及它內部的壁畫有多華麗。

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】土耳其的敦煌石窟【世界文化遺産】 歌樂美露天博物館Goreme Open Air Museum

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】烏奇薩爾的天然岩堡地標【世界文化遺産】 烏奇薩爾城堡Uchisar Castle

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】初試美味的「土耳其比薩」Dürümcü Ustanın Yeri

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】盡情發揮你的想像力【世界文化遺産】 想像谷Imagination Valley (Devrent Valley)

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】滿山滿谷可愛的蘑菇岩【世界文化遺産】 蘑菇谷Mushroom Valley (Pasabag Valley)

延伸閱讀： 【紅線攻略】長得像(咳咳)的岩石【世界文化遺産】 愛情谷Love Valley

延伸閱讀： 【綠線攻略】居民曾經高達2萬人的地下城市【世界文化遺産】 代林庫尤地下城Derinkuyu Underground City

延伸閱讀： 【綠線攻略】傳說中的星際大戰拍攝場景(並没有)【世界文化遺産】 塞利姆修道院Selime Monastery

延伸閱讀： 【綠線攻略】體驗梅倫迪茲河水中餐廳Star Restaurant

延伸閱讀： 【綠線攻略】卡帕多奇亞的迷你版大峽谷【世界文化遺産】 亞厄赫拉熱峽谷Ihlara Valley

延伸閱讀： 【綠線攻略】卡帕多奇亞的粉鳥林,滿山滿谷的鴿子【世界文化遺産】 鴿子谷Pigeon Valley

延伸閱讀： 一輩子至少要作一次的旅行,坐著熱氣球看夢幻日出【世界文化遺産】Royal Balloon Cappadocia

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 西歐

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 中歐

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 南歐

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 北美

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 中美

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 南美

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 東北亞

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 東南亞

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 中東

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 非洲

延伸閱讀： 跟著大頭熊玩世界文化遺產 大洋洲
想追蹤文章按這裡就對了! @AndyTsaiGB 更有男人騷味的大頭熊在GQ 來和大頭熊臉書換帖當個酒肉朋友啦！

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
土耳其《卡帕多奇亞》-【紅線攻略】土耳其的敦煌石窟【世界文化遺産】 歌樂美露天博物館Goreme Open Air Museum - 言不及義的流浪癖 - udn部落格

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
土耳其在1985年第一批《聯合國教科文組織》的《世界文化遺産》UNESCO登錄裡，《卡帕多奇亞》Cappadocia這一帶就以《歌樂美國家公園和卡帕多奇亞的岩石景觀》Goreme National P...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The American Revolution  - OverSimplified (Part 1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
《歷史課本不能說的祕密》：華盛頓一口爛牙，冥冥中助了美國獨立一臂之力 - TNL The News Lens 關鍵評論網

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
24歲時，華盛頓在日記中記載被拔除第一顆牙齒，代價是5先令。此後，他牙齒的頹勢一直沒有被挽回，口腔情況每況愈下。1789年，57歲的華盛頓宣誓就任第一任美國總統時，嘴巴裡只有1顆屬於他的牙齒。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What caused the French Revolution? - Tom Mullaney

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The French Revolution - OverSimplified (Part 1)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
八月十日事件 - 维基百科，自由的百科全书

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
1792年8月10日暴動是法國大革命的里程碑事件之一。8月10日，經由暴動的巴黎公社及來自馬賽和布列塔尼革命的國民警衛聯盟組成的國民自衛軍，攻入杜樂麗宮後，導致了法國君主制的崩解。國王路易十六和王室受到國民立法議會的庇護，立法的功能暫停。六週後，新國民公會組成，正式的結束了君主制度的運作。這暴動及其導致的成果革命歷史學家最常用的簡稱為“8月10日事件”；或者稱為二次革命。

# data[].attributes.body
THE GREAT NUTCRACKER OF JULY 25th.

在這幅漫畫中，查理十世試圖用牙齒咬碎一顆標有「憲章」字樣的撞球，但發現這顆球太硬了，打不碎。

# data[].attributes.headline
Kant: What is Enlightenment? 康德：何謂啟蒙？(1784) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Kant: What is Enlightenment? 康德：何謂啟蒙？(1784) 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
​

​​What is Enlightenment? (1784)
何謂啟蒙？
Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from another. This immaturity is self-imposed when its cause lies not in lack of understanding, but in lack of resolve and courage to use it without guidance from another. Sapere Aude! [dare to know] "Have courage to use your own understanding!"--that is the motto of enlightenment.

啟蒙就是人類從自我造成的不成熟狀態中解脫出來。不成熟是指缺少他人的教導就沒有能力運用自己的理智。這種不成熟狀態之所以是自我造成的，其原因不在於缺少理智，而在於沒有他人的教導就缺乏運用自己理智的決心和勇氣。Sapere Aude! [要勇於認知] "要有勇氣運用你自己的理智！" -- 這就是啟蒙運動的格言。

Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a proportion of men, long after nature has released them from alien guidance (natura-liter maiorennes), nonetheless gladly remain in lifelong immaturity, and why it is so easy for others to establish themselves as their guardians. It is so easy to be immature. If I have a book to serve as my understanding, a pastor to serve as my conscience, a physician to determine my diet for me, and so on, I need not exert myself at all. I need not think, if only I can pay: others will readily undertake the irksome work for me. The guardians who have so benevolently taken over the supervision of men have carefully seen to it that the far greatest part of them (including the entire fair sex) regard taking the step to maturity as very dangerous, not to mention difficult. Having first made their domestic livestock dumb, and having carefully made sure that these docile creatures will not take a single step without the go-cart to which they are harnessed, these guardians then show them the danger that threatens them, should they attempt to walk alone. Now this danger is not actually so great, for after falling a few times they would in the end certainly learn to walk; but an example of this kind makes men timid and usually frightens them out of all further attempts.

人類中之所以還有如此眾多的人，即使自然早已將他們從疏離的外在教導中解脫出來（因自然方式而成熟），卻依然心甘情願地終身安處於不成熟狀態之中，其原因就在於懶惰和怯懦，這也是為什麼另一些人能夠輕而易舉地把自己標舉為他們的監護者。處於不成熟狀態可真是輕鬆安逸啊。如果我有一本書來充作我自己的見解、有一位牧師來充作我自己的良心、有一名醫生來替我自己決定合理的食飲，等等等等諸如此類的，那我又何必要自己勞心費神，那完全沒有必要了。我無需思考，只需要有能力支付：其他人就會欣然應命幫我把那些傷腦筋的討厭活兒全都包辦了。仁慈慷慨地擔負起治理民眾之任的監護者們小心翼翼地看護著，以確保民眾中的絕大部分人（其中包括全部的女性）視通往成熟之路為畏途，充滿了風險，更別說困難重重了。在首先使他們馴養的牲口緘默無聲之後，在確信這些溫順的生靈們即使被撤去拴縛在身上的絡轡也不會再挪移一步之時，一旦它們試圖想要獨自邁步，這些監護者們就會向它們指出種種的威脅。這危險現在看來實際上並沒有那麼嚴重，因為在跌倒幾次之後，人們最終一定能夠學會自己走路的；但諸如此類的示例卻讓人們心生膽怯，通常就會把他們進一步嘗試的所有企圖全都嚇退了。

Thus, it is difficult for any individual man to work himself out of the immaturity that has all but become his nature. He has even become fond of this state and for the time being is actually incapable of using his own understanding, for no one has ever allowed him to attempt it. Rules and formulas, those mechanical aids to the rational use, or rather misuse, of his natural gifts, are the shackles of a permanent immaturity. Whoever threw them off would still make only an uncertain leap over the smallest ditch, since he is unaccustomed to this kind of free movement. Consequently, only a few have succeeded, by cultivating their own minds, in freeing themselves from immaturity and pursuing a secure course.

因此，對於任何一個個體而言，要把自身從那種幾乎已經變成他自己天性的不成熟狀態中解脫出來是困難的。他甚至已經開始喜歡上這種狀態了，並且在這個時候，的的確確無力運用他自己的理智，因為從未有人允許他去作過這樣的嘗試。條例和規程，這些基於他的自然稟賦的理性運用或更像是誤用的機械刻板的工具，把他禁錮在永久的不成熟狀態中。即使有誰拋開這些禁錮，那也不過是作了一次遊移不定而又微乎其微的跳躍，因為他並不習慣于這樣的自由行動。其結果就是，僅有少數一些人取得了成功，通過陶冶他們自己的心智，把他們自己從不成熟狀態中解救出來，從而踏上一條切實堅信的道路。

But that the public should enlighten itself is more likely; indeed, if it is only allowed freedom, enlightenment is almost inevitable. For even among the entrenched guardians of the great masses a few will always think for themselves, a few who, after having themselves thrown off the yoke of immaturity, will spread the spirit of a rational appreciation for both their own worth and for each person's calling to think for himself. But it should be particularly noted that if a public that was first placed in this yoke by the guardians is suitably aroused by some of those who are altogether incapable of enlightenment, it may force the guardians themselves to remain under the yoke--so pernicious is it to instill prejudices, for they finally take revenge upon their originators, or on their descendants. Thus a public can only attain enlightenment slowly. Perhaps a revolution can overthrow autocratic despotism and profiteering or power-grabbing oppression, but it can never truly reform a manner of thinking; instead, new prejudices, just like the old ones they replace, will serve as a leash for the great unthinking mass.

然而，如果公眾要啟蒙自己，那卻更有可能；事實上，公眾即使僅被賦予了自由，啟蒙就幾乎是無可避免的了。因為即使在那些根深節錯的群氓監護者們中間，一些人也總是會自己獨立進行思考的，一些人在他們自己擺脫了不成熟狀態的羈絆後，將會傳揚理性評估他們自身價值、並且理性評估每一個人受其天性召喚進行獨立思考的那種精神。但需要特別指出的是，如果原本被監護者束縛羈絆的公眾是被一群未能經受啟蒙思想洗禮的人煽動起來的，他們就可能會使用暴力強制把監護者們自己禁錮在羈絆中 -- 種下偏見可真是太有害了，因為它們最終會將復仇引向其始作俑者，亦或他們的後代。因此，公眾只能通過緩慢漸進的方式經受啟蒙洗禮。也許一場革命能夠推翻個人專制、貪欲或權勢欲的壓迫，但革命永遠無法帶來思想方式的真正變革；相反，新的偏見，一如它們所取代的舊偏見，又將成為套在不進行獨立思考的群氓身上的一條皮項圈。

Nothing is required for this enlightenment, however, except freedom; and the freedom in question is the least harmful of all, namely, the freedom to use reason publicly in all matters. But on all sides I hear: "Do not argue!" The officer says, "Do not argue, drill!" The tax man says, "Do not argue, pay!" The pastor says, "Do not argue, believe!" (Only one ruler in the World says, "Argue as much as you want and about what you want, but obey!") In this we have examples of pervasive restrictions on freedom.

啟蒙所需要的，不是別的，僅僅是自由；並且我們這裡所討論的自由也是所有形式中最不具有危害性的，亦即能夠在一切事務上公開地運用理性的自由。但是，環顧周遭我聽見的卻是 "不許爭辯！" 軍官說："不許爭辯，只管操練！" 稅務官說："不許爭辯，只管納稅！" 牧師說："不許爭辯，只管相信！" （世上只有一位君主［注：腓德烈大王］說過："隨你所願儘管去爭辯吧，爭什麼都可以，但是必須服從！" 在這種種事例中，我們看見對自由的限制無所不在。

But which restriction hinders enlightenment and which does not, but instead actually advances it? I reply: The public use of one's reason must always be free, and it alone can bring about enlightenment among mankind; the private use of reason may, however, often be very narrowly restricted, without otherwise hindering the progress of enlightenment. By the public use of one's own reason I understand the use that anyone as a scholar makes of reason before the entire literate world. I call the private use of reason that which a person may make in a civic post or office that has been entrusted to him. Now in many affairs conducted in the interests of a community, a certain mechanism is required by means of which some of its members must conduct themselves in an entirely passive manner so that through an artificial unanimity the government may guide them toward public ends, or at least prevent them from destroying such ends. Here one certainly must not argue, instead one must obey. However, insofar as this part of the machine also regards himself as a member of the community as a whole, or even of the world community, and as a consequence addresses the public in the role of a scholar, in the proper sense of that term, he can most certainly argue, without thereby harming the affairs for which as a passive member he is partly responsible. Thus it would be disastrous if an officer on duty who was given a command by his superior were to question the appropriateness or utility of the order. He must obey. But as a scholar he cannot be justly constrained from making comments about errors in military service, or from placing them before the public for its judgment. The citizen cannot refuse to pay the taxes imposed on him; indeed, impertinent criticism of such levies, when they should be paid by him, can be punished as a scandal (since it can lead to widespread insubordination). But the same person does not act contrary to civic duty when, as a scholar, he publicly expresses his thoughts regarding the impropriety or even injustice of such taxes. Likewise a pastor is bound to instruct his catecumens and congregation in accordance with the symbol of the church he serves, for he was appointed on that condition. But as a scholar he has complete freedom, indeed even the calling, to impart to the public all of his carefully considered and well-intentioned thoughts concerning mistaken aspects of that symbol, as well as his suggestions for the better arrangement of religious and church matters. Nothing in this can weigh on his conscience. What he teaches in consequence of his office as a servant of the church he sets out as something with regard to which he has no discretion to teach in accord with his own lights; rather, he offers it under the direction and in the name of another. He will say, "Our church teaches this or that and these are the demonstrations it uses." He thereby extracts for his congregation all practical uses from precepts to which he would not himself subscribe with complete conviction, but whose presentation he can nonetheless undertake, since it is not entirely impossible that truth lies hidden in them, and, in any case, nothing contrary to the very nature of religion is to be found in them. If he believed he could find anything of the latter sort in them, he could not in good conscience serve in his position; he would have to resign. Thus an appointed teacher's use of his reason for the sake of his congregation is merely private, because, however large the congregation is, this use is always only domestic; in this regard, as a priest, he is not free and cannot be such because he is acting under instructions from someone else. By contrast, the cleric--as a scholar who speaks through his writings to the public as such, i.e., the world--enjoys in this public use of reason an unrestricted freedom to use his own rational capacities and to speak his own mind. For that the (spiritual) guardians of a people should themselves be immature is an absurdity that would insure the perpetuation of absurdities.

然而，哪些限制阻礙了啟蒙，哪些限制非但沒有阻礙、實際上還推動了啟蒙呢？我的回答是：公開地運用自己的理性必須享有永久的自由，僅此一點就能夠在人類中間帶來啟蒙；而私下運用理性通常可能要被限制在一個狹小的範圍內，以使其不致於妨礙啟蒙運動的進步為界限。就公開運用自己的理性而言，我的理解是，任何一個人就像一個學者在全部知識介面前那樣運用自己的理性。我所說的私下運用理性，是指一個人在其社會身份或公職上受託時所運用的理性。在為了共同體利益的諸多事務中，有必要形成一套特定的社會機制，以此為依據，共同體中的部分成員必須以一種完全被動的姿態行事，通過這種人為促成的一致性，政府就可以引導他們朝向公共的目標，或者至少防止他們損害這些公共目標的實現。在這時他自然就不應去爭辯，相反他必須要服從。然而，只要社會機制的這一部分同時也把他視為全體公民社會中的一員，甚或是世界公民社會中的一員，從而能夠以一個有智識教養的學者（在其本然的正確含義上而言）的身份面對公眾時，他當然毫無疑義地能夠去爭辯，而不至於損害到他作為一員在其中被動行事並對此負有部分責任的社會機制的事務。如果一個正在服役的軍官在接到長官指令時懷疑其正當性和有效性，其結果將是災難性的。他必須服從。但是作為一個有智識教養的學者，他對軍隊事務上的錯誤進行評論或把它們提交給公眾來作判斷時，對其加以任何限制就不公正了。公民不能拒絕繳納向他徵收的稅負；事實上，對於所加稅負不恰當的指責甚至可以當作不實之毀（因為這可能會導致普遍的不服從）而加以懲處。但是，同樣的這個人，在作為一個有智識教養的學者公開表達他對於這種賦稅的不適宜性甚或不正當性的想法時，他的行動並沒有違背公民的義務。同理，一個牧師有義務依從他所服務的那個教廷的教義，向他的學生和教眾們宣教，因為他是根據這一條件才被選任的。但是作為一個有智識教養的學者他卻有充分的自由，甚或說是天職，把他經過深思熟慮並滿懷善意的對教義上的錯解的思考，還有他對於如何更好地安排宗教和教會事務的建議，傳達給公眾。在這麼做時，他不應有任何良心的重負。作為教會的一個僕人，對於因職務身份所應講授的內容，他並沒有按自己內心所見隨意處置的權利，相反，這是以他人名義、在他人指示下講授的內容。他會說，"我們的教會教導這些或那些，這些就是它所引用的證據。" 他因此能夠從那些他自己也並未完全信服、卻還是能擔負起宣講職責的戒律中，為其教眾抽取出具有實際意義的內容來，因為真理就隱藏在其中並非完全不可能，而且在任何一種情況下，其中都不存在與宗教內在本質相矛盾的地方。假如他相信能在這些戒律中發現矛盾，他就不能保持良心的安寧繼續待在這個職位上；他將不得不辭職。因此一個受委任的宣教士在其教眾面前運用理性就純屬於私下運用理性，因為無論教眾有多少人，理性的運用都只限於家庭式的聚會。就這個意義而言，作為牧師，他是不自由的而且當他在他人的指示下行事時是不可能自由的。與此相對的，一個牧師--當其作為一個有智識教養的學者以他的著述面向公眾、面向世界宣講之時--享受著無限的自由公開地去運用他的理性並以他自己的心智去表白。如果一個民族（精神事務）的監護者們自身尚處於不成熟狀態，那就成荒謬了，是那種由荒謬導向荒謬的無休止的迴圈。

But would a society of pastors, perhaps a church assembly or venerable presbytery (as those among the Dutch call themselves), not be justified in binding itself by oath to a certain unalterable symbol in order to secure a constant guardianship over each of its members and through them over the people, and this for all time: I say that this is wholly impossible. Such a contract, whose intention is to preclude forever all further enlightenment of the human race, is absolutely null and void, even if it should be ratified by the supreme power, by parliaments, and by the most solemn peace treaties. One age cannot bind itself, and thus conspire, to place a succeeding one in a condition whereby it would be impossible for the later age to expand its knowledge (particularly where it is so very important), to rid itself of errors,and generally to increase its enlightenment. That would be a crime against human nature, whose essential destiny lies precisely in such progress; subsequent generations are thus completely justified in dismissing such agreements as unauthorized and criminal.

但是，一個牧師團體，或是一個宗教會議或是令人敬畏的長老會（如同荷蘭人在其中間自稱的那樣），通過宣誓形成對一種特定的不可更改的信條的義務、以期對它的每一個成員、並通過這些成員進而對其全體人民享有千秋萬代綿延不斷的永續監護權，這樣做是否有其正當性呢？我說，這是完全不可能的。這樣的一份旨在把人類所有進一步的啟蒙都預先封死的契約，即使它受到了最高權利的認可，受到國會的認可，受到了最莊嚴神聖的和平條約的認可，依然是絕對空洞和無效的。一個時代決不能使自己背負這樣的義務，因而也是一種陰謀，竟使得後來的時代無法擴展自己時代的知識（尤其在其十分迫切需要的地方）、無法清除自身的錯誤，從而在廣義上增進啟蒙。那將是有違人性的犯罪，因為人性的最根本的目標恰恰就在於這種進步；後世的人們因而有完全的正當性拋開那些毫無權利依據並且是犯罪行為的協議條規。

The criterion of everything that can be agreed upon as a law by a people lies in this question: Can a people impose such a law on itself? Now it might be possible, in anticipation of a better state of affairs, to introduce a provisional order for a specific, short time, all the while giving all citizens, especially clergy, in their role as scholars, the freedom to comment publicly, i.e., in writing, on the present institution's shortcomings. The provisional order might last until insight into the nature of these matters had become so widespread and obvious that the combined (if not unanimous) voices of the populace could propose to the crown that it take under its protection those congregations that, in accord with their newly gained insight, had organized themselves under altered religious institutions, but without interfering with those wishing to allow matters to remain as before. However, it is absolutely forbidden that they unite into a religious organization that nobody may for the duration of a man's lifetime publicly question, for so do-ing would deny, render fruitless, and make detrimental to succeeding generations an era in man's progress toward improvement. A man may put off enlightenment with regard to what he ought to know, though only for a short time and for his own person; but to renounce it for himself, or, even more, for subsequent generations, is to violate and trample man's divine rights underfoot.

凡是可由一個民族經共識並以法律形式予以確認的每一件事務，其檢驗標準存在於這樣的一個問題中：這個民族是否可以把這樣的一種法律施加於其自身？為期待一種更好的事態，在一個特定的、短暫的時期內現在或許可以引入一種臨時性的秩序，即對於所有的公民，尤其是牧師，在其作為一個有智識教養的學者的意義上，給予公開評論的自由，如通過寫作，來揭示現行制度的弊病。這種臨時性的秩序可能要一直持續下去，直到對於這類事情本質的洞見已被廣泛傳播並變得顯而易見，因而公眾的集體的呼聲（即使不是完全一致的話）已經可以向王位提出建議，要求把他們那些教眾置於符合他們自己對更佳構想的見解的、變革後的宗教組織的監護下，同時卻不妨礙到那些仍願意象先前一樣留存在舊制度中的教眾們。但是，當他們聯合成為一個人終其一生都無法對其公開質疑的宗教組織時，這是絕對應當加以禁止的，因為這麼做，將否認、阻礙並損害後來的時代朝向人類進步的目標邁進。一個人也許會推遲對自己本應加以認識的事物的啟蒙，當然僅限於在一個較短的時間內而且只針對於他本人；但公然放棄對他自己的啟蒙，甚或讓後一世代的人們也放棄啟蒙，那就是違反並且踐踏人類的神聖權利了。

And what a people may not decree for itself may still less be imposed on it by a monarch, for his lawgiving authority rests on his unification of the people's collective will in his own. If he only sees to it that all genuine or purported improvement is consonant with civil order, he can allow his subjects to do what they find necessary to their spiritual well-being, which is not his affair. However, he must prevent anyone from forcibly interfering with another's working as best he can to determine and promote his well-being. It detracts from his own majesty when he interferes in these matters, since the writings in which his subjects attempt to clarify their insights lend value to his conception of governance. This holds whether he acts from his own highest insight--whereby he calls upon himself the reproach, "Caesar non eat supra grammaticos."'--as well as, indeed even more, when he despoils his highest authority by supporting the spiritual despotism of some tyrants in his state over his other subjects.

一個民族對自己都不可能頒佈的法令，一個君主就更不能夠強加於她了，因為君主的立法權威是以他把全體民眾的集體意願統一到他自己的意願中作為基礎的。只要他注意確保一切真正的或宣稱的改善都與社會秩序和諧一致，他就可以放手讓他的臣民們自己去做那些讓靈魂得救所必不可少的事，這些與他無干。然而，他必須盡力阻止任何人以強力妨礙其他人盡其所能地決定和增進其自身的福祉。干預這種事務有損他的尊嚴，因為他的臣民藉以闡明他們自己觀點的那些著作有助於他評估自己的治理。當他憑藉自己的至高智識去行事，卻為自己招致 "凱撒並不高於文法學家"的責難之時；或者更有甚者，當他把自己的無上權力降低到竟至於去支持國內一些暴君對他的其他臣民實行精神專制的時候，那就更為不堪了。

If it is now asked, "Do we presently live in an enlightened age?" the answer is, "No, but we do live in an age of enlightenment." As matters now stand, a great deal is still lacking in order for men as a whole to be, or even to put themselves into a position to be able without external guidance to apply understanding confidently to religious issues. But we do have clear indications that the way is now being opened for men to proceed freely in this direction and that the obstacles to general enlightenment--to their release from their self-imposed immaturity--are gradually diminishing. In this regard, this age is the age of enlightenment, the century of Frederick.

如果現在被問及，"我們當前是否生活在一個啟蒙後的時代？" 回答是，"不是，但我們的的確確是生活在一個啟蒙的時代。" 目前的情形表明，要讓全體民眾無需外部教導就能夠在宗教事務上自信地運用自己的理智，甚或說是將他們自己擺放到這樣的一個位置中去，這一目標的實現也仍存在巨大的缺失。不過我們的確看見明白無誤的徵兆，人類朝向這一目標自由前行的道路已被開啟，通向廣泛意義上的啟蒙的那些阻礙--那些從自我造成的不成熟狀態中解脫出來的阻礙--正在逐漸減少。在這個意義上，這個時代乃是啟蒙的時代，一個腓德烈的世紀。

A prince who does not find it beneath him to say that he takes it to be his duty to prescribe nothing, but rather to allow men complete freedom in religious matters--who thereby renounces the arrogant title of tolerance--is himself enlightened and deserves to be praised by a grateful present and by posterity as the first, at least where the government is concerned, to release the human race from immaturity and to leave everyone free to use his own reason in all matters of conscience. Under his rule, venerable pastors, in their role as scholars and without prejudice to their official duties, may freely and openly set out for the world's scrutiny their judgments and views, even where these occasionally differ from the accepted symbol. Still greater freedom is afforded to those who are not restricted by an official post. This spirit of freedom is expanding even where it must struggle against the external obstacles of governments that misunderstand their own function. Such governments are illuminated by the example that the existence of freedom need not give cause for the least concern regarding public order and harmony in the commonwealth. If only they refrain from inventing artifices to keep themselves in it, men will gradually raise themselves from barbarism.

一個君主如果不認為這樣的觀點與其身份不符-- 即他認為自己的義務不是去規定任何東西，而是在宗教事務上給予人們完全的自由，並因此拒絕使用寬容這樣一個傲慢的稱謂-- 那麼這位君主本身就已經是受啟蒙洗禮了的，作為將人類從不成熟的狀態中解救出來並且讓每一個人在所有精神事務上都有運用其理性的自由的第一人，或者至少就政權方面而言的第一人，被心懷感激的現世和後世的人們所讚頌。在他的治理下，受人尊敬的牧師們，可以以一個有智識教養的學者的身份，自由地並且公開地把他們自己的各種判斷和見解提交給全體公眾來檢驗，而這麼做又無損於他們自己的職責，即使這些判斷和見解在這裡或那裡偏離了既定教義。至於那些不承擔任何公職的人，那就更為自由了。這種自由精神也在向外擴展，甚至擴展到與誤解了其自身職能的政權這一外部阻礙發生鬥爭衝突的地步。它向這種政權啟示了一種範例，即自由的存在並非完全無視公共秩序和共同體的和諧一致。只要他們不再處心積慮地讓民眾停留在野蠻狀態，民眾自己將會逐漸從野蠻狀態中走出來。

I have focused on religious matters in setting out my main point concerning enlightenment, i.e., man's emergence from self-imposed immaturity, first because our rulers have no interest in assuming the role of their subjects' guardians with respect to the arts and sciences, and secondly because that form of immaturity is both the most pernicious and disgraceful of all. But the manner of thinking of a head of state who favors religious enlightenment goes even further, for he realizes that there is no danger to his legislation in allowing his subjects to use reason publicly and to set before the world their thoughts concerning better formulations of his laws, even if this involves frank criticism of legislation currently in effect. We have before us a shining example, with respect to which no monarch surpasses the one whom we honor.

我在論述啟蒙運動的主要觀點時把焦點放在了宗教事務上，即人類從自我造成的不成熟狀態中之解脫，其原因首先就在於我們的統治者並無興趣在藝術和科學方面對他們的臣民盡到監護之責，其次則因為這一不成熟狀態既是最有害的也是最可恥的。但是，一個支持宗教啟蒙的國家元首其思想氣度要比這更進一步，因為他意識到，允許他的臣民公開地運用他們自己的理性、並向世界公開展示他們關於更好立法的思想並不會威脅到他的法統，即使這會帶來對現行法律的坦誠批評。在我們面前矗立著一個光輝的典範，我們尊敬的這位君主［注：腓德烈大王］，沒有任何一個君主可以超越他了。

But only a ruler who is himself enlightened and has no dread of shadows, yet who likewise has a well-disciplined, numerous army to guarantee public peace, can say what no republic may dare, namely: "Argue as much as you want and about what you want, but obey!" Here as elsewhere, when things are considered in broad perspective, a strange, unexpected pattern in human affairs reveals itself, one in which almost everything is paradoxical. A greater degree of civil freedom seems advantageous to a people's spiritual freedom; yet the former established impassable boundaries for the latter; conversely, a lesser degree of civil freedom provides enough room for all fully to expand their abilities. Thus, once nature has removed the hard shell from this kernel for which she has most fondly cared, namely, the inclination to and vocation for free thinking, the kernel gradually reacts on a people's mentality (whereby they become increasingly able to act freely), and it finally even influences the principles of government, which finds that it can profit by treating men, who are now more than machines, in accord with their dignity.

但是，一個君主，只有當其本人已經受啟蒙洗禮，不懼怕幽靈，同時手中又握有人數眾多、號令嚴明的軍隊來確保公眾和平，他才能夠說出沒有一個共和政權膽敢去講的話，那就是，"隨你所願儘管去爭辯吧，爭什麼都可以，但必須服從！" 在這裡，也如同在其他任何事務上一樣，當我們以一個寬廣的視野考察事務之時，一個奇怪的、未曾預想到的人類社會行為模式就開始顯現出自身來，在其中幾乎每一件事情均存在自相矛盾的兩面性。更大程度上的公民自由看上去要比一個民族的精神自由更有優勢，然而前者卻也為後者設下不可逾越的界限；相反，更少程度的公民自由卻為全體民眾充分發展他們的心智慧力提供了足夠的空間。因而，一旦當自然剝除那堅硬的外殼、打開在她悉心呵護下的果核之時，亦即開啟對自由思想的嚮往和召喚之時，這枚思想的果核也將漸漸地反作用於一個民族的心智（借此他們變得越來越有能力去自由地行動），最終它甚至會對政權的原則產生影響，使之發現，按照人的尊嚴對待那些已經不再是機器的人，也會使其自身受益。

Konigsberg in Prussia, 30 September 1784
1784年9月30日，于普魯士哥尼斯堡

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Kant: What is Enlightenment? 康德：何謂啟蒙？(1784)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
​ ​​What is Enlightenment? (1784) 何謂啟蒙？ Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one's understanding without guidance from...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
不吃不喝一整個月？關於齋戒月你不知道的事 | 南南之隅

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
齋戒月是伊斯蘭教每年非常重要的修行之一，2024年的齋戒，依照各國時區從3月11日或3月 12日開始。不少人可能會以為齋戒要整個月不吃不喝非常辛苦，但實際上，齋戒月還是能在特定的時間進食，阿拉伯還特地縮短工時，體恤齋戒的辛苦。關於齋戒月，還有哪些你不知道的事情呢？

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
2008年的朝覲，朝覲者在麥加的大清真寺(禁寺)聚集。

朝覲（阿拉伯語： حج, Hajj），指的是伊斯蘭教徒到 麥加的朝覲，這是每年全世界 穆斯林最大規模的聚會，也是 伊斯蘭教的 五功之一。依據朝覲規範，每一個身體健康經濟良好的穆斯林，一生中至少必須朝覲一次。伊斯梯塔（）指的是身體及經濟能力皆可進行朝覲的狀態，達到此狀態的穆斯林稱為穆斯塔梯（）。朝覲是穆斯林團結及順服 真主 的一種展示。朝覲字面意義是「參與一個旅程」，這意味著外在行為的旅程及內部心靈的旅程。

每年朝覲的日期是 伊斯蘭曆12月的第8日到第12日。由於伊斯蘭曆法是陰曆，每年比 公曆少11天，朝覲日期在西曆中年年都不同。朝覲期間，朝覲者的衣著要求及身心狀態稱之為「伊蘭」（）。 朝覲與先知 穆罕默德的一生息息相關，但穆斯林認為到麥加朝覲的儀式可上溯到數千年前 易卜拉欣（亞伯拉罕）的年代。朝覲那一週，上百萬朝覲者同時在麥加聚集，並進行一系列的儀式：每個人逆時針方向繞行 卡巴天房七次，這個立方形的建築也是世上所有穆斯林祈禱時的方向；在薩法（）和麥爾瓦（）兩個小丘間來回走動；飲用 滲滲泉的井水；去阿拉法特平原守夜；在投石儀式中向魔鬼擲石塊。然後朝覲者剃髮，進行動物獻祭的儀式，並慶祝全球性的 宰牲節 。

即使在穆罕默德生前的公元 7世紀時期，朝覲根據的亦是古代的朝覲之旅。依傳統，朝覲事跡可上溯到 亞伯拉罕（易卜拉欣）的年代，大約2,000年前。亞伯拉罕的妻子撒萊無法懷孕，應她的要求，亞伯拉罕娶了女僕 夏甲為妾。夏甲懷了亞伯拉罕的兒子 以實瑪利。據信亞伯拉罕奉神之命將夏甲和以實瑪利棄置於沙漠中。為了尋找遮蔽、食物和水，夏甲帶著兒子在薩法和麥爾臥兩個小山丘間來回奔走了七次。絕望之中，她將嬰兒放在地上，祈求上帝的幫助。嬰兒哭時腳跟撞到在地面（某些故事版本說天使 加百列 刮他的腳或是翼尖刮了地面），滲滲井的泉水就此湧現。

在伊斯蘭時代之前， 阿拉伯半島所有的部落每年都會聚集在麥加朝覲。至於部落各自信奉何種神明並不重要，甚至信奉基督教的阿拉伯人也如同信奉異教的阿拉伯人一般的朝覲。穆斯林歷史學家將這個年代稱之為 蒙昧時代。在那個年代，卡巴聖殿供奉了數百個阿拉伯半島各部落所信仰的 阿拉伯神話中的神明偶像，如胡巴爾，緯度， 阿勒特 和馬納特。

穆罕默德在接受啟示之前，已定期執行 副朝覲 。歷史上，穆斯林會在其他各大城市聚集，然後再集體向麥加出發，每群朝聖者可能有數萬人。其中最有名的兩個集合地點是大馬士革及開羅，那裏的蘇丹會站在著名的珠威拉門上正式向朝聖者送行。

公元630年，穆罕默德率領追隨者從 麥地那到麥加朝覲。這是第一次僅有穆斯林參加的朝覲，也是穆罕默德唯一參與的一次。他毀掉所有異教偶像以淨化卡巴天房，然後再次將此建築獻給真主。從此以後，朝覲成為伊斯蘭教的 五功 之一。

對早期的朝覲者，朝覲是一趟危險的旅程。伊本·久拜爾指出在路途中有渴死信徒的骸骨。17世紀時，一群埃及朝覲者喪失了超過1500多條人命和900頭駱駝。1924年，一群敘利亞朝覲者中約有五分之一死亡。兩年後，又有12,000人在旅途中死亡。

朝覲也是中世紀伊斯蘭國家國王對付政敵的手段，是僅次於死刑的懲罰。

朝覲期間，男性朝聖者只需穿上戒衣 (ihram)，一種由兩片無縫邊白布組成的服裝，上半身從上垂下包住身體，下半身由白色的腰帶綁住，再穿一雙涼鞋。女性僅須穿上一般的 希賈布 ，露出手部及臉部。

穿上戒衣，以示所有朝聖者在 真主面前一律平等，不分綾羅綢緞的 王公貴族或葛衣粗布的 販夫走卒 。戒衣也象徵聖潔的美德，且免於過去的一切罪孽。換戒衣的特定場所稱為米嘎特(Miqat)。

穿上戒衣後，朝聖者禁止： 結婚、 行房、 理髮、刮鬍子、剪指甲、抹香水、說 髒話 、爭執、喧嘩、打架、無故砍伐植物（砍柴）、無故殺害野生動物（打獵、捕魚）、穿超過腳踝的靴子、攜帶武器。男性不得蓋住頭部、女性不得蓋住臉部和手。

曾經在麥加完成朝覲的朝聖者被稱為 哈吉(Hajji)，朝覲須進行了一系列象徵 亞伯拉罕及其妻子 夏甲一生事蹟的儀式。這儀式也象徵著全世界穆斯林的團結。 大朝覲在 伊斯蘭曆 12月(Dhu al-Hijjah)的第八天正式開始。朝覲的第二天（此月的第九日），穿好戒衣的朝聖者會離開麥加，到附近的小城米納，在那裡他們度過那一天。這時，沙烏地阿拉伯政府已經在米納搭了數千個白色大帳篷，為所有朝聖者們提供住宿。

朝聖者首先需要進行第一次塔瓦夫(Tawaf)，以逆時針方向繞行天房七次。每繞行一圈，他們皆可親吻 黑石 (Al Hajar Al Aswad)。如果人群眾多以至於吻不到 黑石 ，也可在每一圈中僅用右手指向黑石。每完成一圈，朝聖者會稱頌說：「真主啊！我在這裡服務你。我在這裡服務你，你是獨一無二的。讚美祢澤被萬物，是一切的主宰，你是獨一無二的。」七周繞行完畢後便完成了塔瓦夫。繞行七周的場所稱之為穆踏福(Mutaaf)。

根據規定，朝聖者只需在前三圈稱頌真主，但是幾乎所有朝聖者皆在全部七周繞行中稱頌真主。而在進行塔瓦夫期間，朝聖者不許吃東西，但由於麥加溫度高有脫水之虞，喝水是可以的。教規鼓勵朝聖者在繞行的前三圈加快步伐，而在後四圈放慢腳步走。

傳統上，繞行天房需於地面上進行，但由於現今朝聖者太多，現時清真寺屋頂的長廊也開放作繞行天房之用。 完成塔瓦夫後，所有的朝聖者必須在靠近天房的亞伯拉罕之地(Muqaam Ibrahim)進行兩次 祈禱(Rakaat)。與塔瓦夫本身一樣，由於現今朝聖者太多，朝聖者現在已獲允許在清真寺內隨處祈禱。

朝聖者需在完成塔瓦夫的同一天進行剎伊(sa`i)，即在 薩法和瑪爾瓦 兩個小山丘間來回走七趟，旨在重現亞伯拉罕的妾夏甲，為她的兒子以實瑪利瘋狂找水的一幕。朝聖者原本需在兩座小山之間露天來回走動，但現在這段路完全在大清真寺範圍內，朝聖者可於設有空調的大走廊來回走動。朝聖者基本上只能走路，但是大清真寺內設有兩根綠色柱子，標示朝聖者可以跑步的小區域，而大走廊中間還有一條殘障人士專用的通道。

飲用 滲滲泉 的井水也是此儀式的一部分，而大清真寺內各處皆有滲滲井的冷水容器，供朝聖者飲用。

完成薩伊後，朝聖者即算完成第一天在大清真寺的朝覲，可返回各自的帳篷中休息。

第二天早上，朝聖月的第九天，朝聖者們到米納徹夜禱告。

朝聖月的第九天，他們離開米納到阿拉法特山。在那裏，一個靠近穆罕默德最後一次佈道的小山丘，他們站著冥想、祈禱，並背誦古蘭經文。這山丘被稱為阿拉法特山的寬恕丘（Jabal al Rahmah）。這個名為屋古夫(Wuquf)的儀式，是整個朝覲的精華。從午後直到日落，朝聖者們必須在阿拉法特平原的特定區域內度過。這期間並不需特別的儀式或祈禱，但是許多朝聖者會花時間禱告、思考他們的一生。一個朝聖者如果沒在阿拉法特度過這整個下午，他的朝覲會被認為是無效的。

太陽一下山，朝聖們者就離開阿拉法特到穆茲達理法，一個介於阿拉法特和米納之間的區域。朝聖者們在此於露天睡了一夜，第二天清晨，他們收集小石子，以準備回到米納後用石頭砸魔鬼的儀式。

在米納，朝聖者們擲石拒魔 (Ramy al-Jamarat，阿拉伯語: رمي الجمرات)，一種向魔鬼投擲石塊以示抗拒的儀式。這象徵 易卜拉欣 在受神之命，以自己的兒子獻犧牲時所經歷的考驗。魔鬼挑戰他三次，在加百列天使的指示下，三次都被他以石擊退了。每根柱子標記著拒絕時的位置。開始擲石拒魔儀式時，朝聖者們首先向最大的柱子(Jamrat'al'Aqabah)扔石頭。朝聖者們從坡道爬上多層的加馬拉橋(Jamaraat Bridge)，從那裏向此柱扔石頭。接著再向其他柱子擲石頭，每次擲七塊石頭。因為群眾太多，為了安全起見，2004年時建成三個多層建築物，且由26公尺長的牆壁取代柱子，牆角下有收集石子的盆子。

投擲完石頭後，接著宰殺動物來紀念亞伯拉罕和以實瑪利的故事。傳統上，朝聖者們親自宰殺動物或監看屠宰過程。現在許多朝聖者在朝覲開始前，在麥加購買犧牲證書，這證書確認在第10日時，會有牲口在他們的名下宰殺獻祭而毋需親自參與。中央屠宰場會在每位朝聖者的名下，以一頭羊當犧牲品；或以一頭駱駝充當七位朝聖者的犧牲品。宰殺後的肉會在打包後捐給慈善機構，運送給世界各地的窮人。在麥加宰殺犧牲時，全世界的穆斯林也會在為期四天的全球性宰牲節(Eid al-Adha)執行類似的犧牲獻祭。

此日或次日，朝聖者回到麥加大清真寺再次繞行天房，稱之為塔瓦夫依發達(Tawaf al-Ifadah)。此乃象徵匆忙回應神的呼喚並顯示對祂的愛，這是朝覲中不可或缺的一部分。10日的晚上在米納度過。

朝聖者必須在11日及12日的下午，再度對位於米納的三根柱子進行擲七個石子的投石儀式。

朝聖者必須在12日的日落前離開米納到麥加。如果無法在日落前離開米納，則在13日返回麥加前，他們必須再次執行投石儀式。

朝最後，在離開麥加前，朝聖者對天房執行告別的繞行(Tawaf al-Wida)，Wida意即告別。

不同於朝覲， 副朝覲 可在一年中的任何其他時間進行，也不是必要的，副朝覲的儀式較朝覲簡單。準備副朝覲時，虔敬的身心狀態「伊蘭」是必要的，也須完成如上所述的繞行天房及兩個小山丘。通常，程序最後一步是理髮，象徵朝聖者有一個新的開始。

朝聖者們通常聚成朝覲團一起旅行以示團結。且由於 布施朝聖者的交通食宿，在穆斯林中被認為是一大功德，今日有各種不同的機構和政府計劃資助朝聖者，如在 印度 所提供的「朝覲機票補助金」(Haj subsidy)，或是總部設於馬來西亞的(Tabung Haji)「朝覲投資基金」，協助朝聖者支付旅行所需的花費。

19世紀時，許多朝聖者開始乘 輪船抵達麥加，並持續了一段時間，直到 埃及於1937年提供第一家 航空公司來服務朝聖者。有不少航空公司及旅行社都提供 穆斯林赴麥加的套裝行程。 吉達的 阿布度拉國王機場、 麥地那的 穆罕默德親王機場都有特殊的設施，以容納朝聖者的到臨。其他世界各地的國際機場，如 新德里的 甘地機場， 海得拉巴的 拉吉夫·甘地國際機場、 雅加達的 蘇加諾-哈達機場 等，也有較小規模的專用登機門或臨時設施，來服務朝聖者。

在中國大陸， 國家宗教事務局制訂了《伊斯蘭教朝覲事務管理辦法》，規定 中國伊斯蘭教協會 負責組織中國公民的朝覲活動，並負責辦理朝覲人員的朝覲簽證，統籌協調朝覲飛機航班。

在2010年，大約300萬朝聖者參加這個一年一度的朝聖。因為人群大量湧入，掌控群眾的技術已是至關重要，許多儀式不得不改變形式。沒有必要再親吻黑石，僅在繞行天房時以手指向祂即可。為安全起見，2004年將向大柱擲石改為擲向牆壁(註；之前擲石者常會意外擲中柱子另一邊的人)。宰殺犧牲可親身或委由別人代勞，或者購買沙特政府出售的屠宰券...等。不過，即使有群眾控制技術，朝覲期間仍發生了許多事件，如朝聖者被擠死、踩死，或在眾人擠壓下下梯架道被壓垮等，以及多起 踩踏事故 。朝聖者也可在其他時間到麥加實行朝聖儀式。這被稱為小朝。然而進行小朝的人，在一生中如做得到的話，仍然有義務去實行朝覲。根據沙烏地阿拉伯官方資料，2012年朝聖者的總數為3,161,573人。

美國活躍的民權人士馬爾康，描述他所經歷的朝覲時的社會氣氛如下： 「來自世界各地的數萬朝聖者，從金髮碧眼的高加索人到黑皮膚的非洲人，各種膚色都有。但我們都參與同一儀式，並散發出靈性的和諧及兄弟情誼，在我的美國經驗中這事絕不可能發生。美國需要了解伊斯蘭教，因為這種宗教在社會上消彌了種族問題。你可能會感到震驚此話居然從我而出。但在此次朝聖之旅中，我所看到的、所經驗到的，讓我不得不更改先前許多的思維模式。」

由於大量聚集的三百多萬世界各地朝聖者之間缺乏溝通，大朝覲期間發生的意外事件已奪走了數百條人命。最嚴重的意外事件，通常發生在擲石拒魔的儀式。2006年1月12日的大朝覲期間，有362名朝聖者死亡。當朝聖者們試圖在 薩法和 麥爾臥兩小丘之間奔跑時，也發生過人群相互踩踏事件。總計約有600人在2006年在大朝覲期間傷亡。事件發生後，沙烏地阿拉伯政府做了不少改進，譬如，在往返 薩法和 麥爾臥 兩地之間提供單行步道。

2008年的一項相關研究，發現伊斯蘭社群在參與大朝覲後，會變得更加開放。一篇哈佛大學甘迺迪學院所做的研究論文《伊斯蘭教大朝覲的評估：伊斯蘭教全球性聚會中的信仰與寬容》，指出大朝覲的經驗可促進和平共處、平等及和諧。具體而言，報告中說明大朝覲「增進不同種族和伊斯蘭社會間平等與和諧的信念」而且「參加大朝覲者，明顯的在不同宗教信徒之間增加了和平、平等及和諧的信念」。

過去92年間，朝聖者的人數大有增加。僅僅外國朝聖者的數量就增加約28倍。1920年只有58,584人，到2012年變成1,712,962人。以下是每年到沙烏地阿拉伯參加大朝覲的人數。

由於 MERS病毒肆虐，2012年參加大朝覲的人數低於2011年。沙烏地阿拉伯政府要求"長者和長期病患的穆斯林，不要參加今年的大朝覲"，已經限制了允許大朝覲之旅的人數。沙烏地阿拉伯衛生部長 阿卜杜拉·拉比亞 說：「到目前為止，當局沒有發現有朝聖者感染MERS。」

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
朝覲 (伊斯蘭教) - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
朝覲（阿拉伯語： حج, Hajj），指的是伊斯蘭教徒到 麥加的朝覲，這是每年全世界 穆斯林最大規模的聚會，也是 伊斯蘭教的 五功之一。依據朝覲規範，每一個身體健康經濟良好的穆斯林，一生中至少必須朝覲一次。伊斯梯塔（）指的是身體及經濟能力皆可進行朝覲的狀態，達到此狀態的穆斯林稱為穆斯塔梯（）。朝覲是穆斯林團結及順服 真主 ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The early Muslim conquests or early Islamic conquests ( Arabic: الْفُتُوحَاتُ الإسْلَامِيَّة, al-Futūḥāt al-ʾIslāmiyya), also known as the Arab conquests, were initiated in the 7th century by Muhammad, the founder of Islam. He established a new unified polity in Arabia (known today as the first Islamic state) that expanded rapidly under the Rashidun Caliphate and the Umayyad Caliphate, culminating in Muslim rule being established on three continents ( Asia, Africa, and Europe) over the next century. According to Scottish historian James Buchan: "In speed and extent, the first Arab conquests were matched only by those of Alexander the Great, and they were more lasting."

At their height, the territory that was conquered by the Arab Muslims stretched from Iberia (at the Pyrenees) in the west to India (at Sind) in the east; Muslim control spanned Sicily, most of the Middle East and North Africa, and the Caucasus and Central Asia.

Among other drastic changes, the early Muslim conquests brought about the collapse of the Sasanian Empire and great territorial losses for the Byzantine Empire. Reasons that would provide an explanation for the Muslim victories have been difficult to reconstruct in hindsight, primarily because only fragmentary sources have survived from the period. American scholar Fred McGraw Donner suggests that Muhammad's establishment of an Islamic polity in Arabia coupled with ideological (i.e., religious) coherence and mobilization constituted the main factor that propelled the early Muslim armies to successfully establish, in the timespan of roughly a century, one of the largest empires in history. Estimates of the total area of the combined territory held by the early Muslim polities at the conquests' peak have been as high as 13,000,000 square kilometres (5,000,000 sq mi). Most historians also agree that, as another primary factor determining the early Muslim conquests' success, the Sasanians and the Byzantines were militarily and economically exhausted from decades of warfare against each other.

It has been suggested that Jews and some Christians in Sasanian and Byzantine territory were dissatisfied and welcomed the invading Muslim troops, largely because of religious conflict in both empires. However, confederations of Arab Christians, including the Ghassanids, initially allied themselves with the Byzantines. There were also instances of alliances between the Sasanians and the Byzantines, such as when they fought together against the Rashidun army during the Battle of Firaz. Some of the lands lost by the Byzantines to the Muslims (namely Egypt, Palestine, and Syria) had been reclaimed from the Sasanians only a few years prior to the Muslim conquests.

Arabia was a region that hosted several cultures, some urban and others nomadic Bedouin. Arabian society was divided along tribal and clan lines, with the most important divisions being between the "southern" and "northern" tribal associations. Both the Roman and Persian empires competed for influence in Arabia by sponsoring clients, and in turn Arabian tribes sought the patronage of the two rival empires to bolster their own ambitions. The Lakhmid kingdom which covered parts of what is now southern Iraq and northern Saudi Arabia was a client of Persia, and in 602 the Persians deposed the Lakhmids to take over the defense of the southern frontier. This left the Persians exposed and over-extended, helping to set the stage for the collapse of Persia later that century. Southern Arabia, especially what is now Yemen, had for thousands of years been a wealthy region that had been a center of the spice trade. Yemen had been at the center of an international trading network linking Eurasia to Africa, and Yemen had been visited by merchants from East Africa, Europe, the Middle East, India and even from as far away as China. In turn, the Yemeni were great sailors, travelling up the Red Sea to Egypt and across the Indian Ocean to India and down the east African coast. Inland, the valleys of Yemen had been cultivated by a system of irrigation that had been set back when the Marib Dam was destroyed by an earthquake in about 450 AD. Frankincense and myrrh had been greatly valued in the Mediterranean region, being used in religious ceremonies. However, the conversion of the Mediterranean world to Christianity had significantly reduced the demand for these commodities, causing a major economic slump in southern Arabia which helped to create the impression that Arabia was a backward region.

Little is known of the pre-Islamic religions of Arabia, but it is known that the Arabs worshipped gods such as al-Lat, Manat, al-Uzza and Hubal, with the most important being Allah (God). There were also Jewish and Christian communities in Arabia, and aspects of Arab religion reflected their influence. Pilgrimage was a major part of Arabian paganism, and one of the most important pilgrimage sites was Mecca, which housed the Kaaba, considered an especially holy place to visit. Muhammad, a merchant of Mecca, started to have visions in which he claimed that the archangel Gabriel had told him that he was the last of the prophets continuing the work of Jesus Christ and the prophets of Tanakh. After coming into conflict with the elite of Mecca, Muhammad fled to the city of Yathrib, which was renamed Medina. At Yathrib, Muhammad founded an Islamic state and by 630 conquered Mecca.

The prolonged and escalating Byzantine-Sasanian wars of the 6th and 7th centuries and the recurring outbreaks of bubonic plague ( Plague of Justinian) left both empires exhausted and weakened in the face of the sudden emergence and expansion of the Arabs. The last of these wars ended with victory for the Byzantines: Emperor Heraclius regained all lost territories and restored the True Cross to Jerusalem in 629. The war against Zoroastrian Persia, whose people worshiped the fire god Ahura Mazda, had been portrayed by Heraclius as a holy war in defense of the Christian faith and the Wood of the Holy Cross, as splinters of wood said to be from the True Cross were known, had been used to inspire Christian fighting zeal. The idea of a holy war against the "fire worshipers", as the Christians called the Zoroastrians, had aroused much enthusiasm, leading to an all-out effort to defeat the Persians.

Nevertheless, neither empire was given any chance to recover, as within a few years they were overrun by the advances of the Arabs (newly united by Islam), which, according to James Howard-Johnston, "can only be likened to a human tsunami". According to George Liska, the "unnecessarily prolonged Byzantine-Persian conflict opened the way for Islam".

In late 620s Muhammad had already managed to conquer and unify much of Arabia under Muslim rule, and it was under his leadership that the first Muslim-Byzantine skirmishes took place in response to Byzantine incursions. Just a few months after Heraclius and the Persian general Shahrbaraz agreed on terms for the withdrawal of Persian troops from occupied Byzantine eastern provinces in 629, Arab and Byzantine troops confronted each other at the Battle of Mu'tah as a result of Byzantine vassals murdering a Muslim emissary. Muhammad died in 632 and was succeeded by Abu Bakr, the first caliph with undisputed control of the entire Arab peninsula after the successful Ridda Wars, which resulted in the consolidation of a powerful Muslim state throughout the peninsula.

Byzantine sources, such as Short History written by Nikephoros, claim that the Arab invasion came about as a result of restrictions imposed on Arab traders curtailing their ability to trade within Byzantine territory, and to send the profits of their trade out of Byzantine territory. As a result, the Arabs murdered a Byzantine official named Sergius whom they held responsible for convincing the Emperor Heraclius to impose the trade restrictions. Nikephoros relates that:

The Saracens, having flayed a camel, enclosed him in the hide and sewed it up. As the skin hardened, the man who was left inside also withered and so perished in a painful manner. The charge against him was that he had persuaded Heraclius not to allow the Saracens to trade from the Roman country and send out of the Roman state the thirty pounds of gold which they normally received by way of commercial gain; and for this reason they began to lay waste the Roman land.

Some scholars assert that this is the same Sergius, called "the Candidatus", who was "killed by the Saracens" as related in the 7th century Doctrina Jacobi document.

In Arabia, swords from India were greatly esteemed as being made of the finest steel and were the favorite weapons of the Mujahideen. The Arab sword known as the closely resembled the Roman . Swords and spears were the major weapons of the Muslims, and armour was either mail or leather.

In northern Arabia, Roman influence predominated; in eastern Arabia, Persian influence predominated; and in Yemen, Indian influence was felt. As the caliphate spread, the Muslims were influenced by the peoples they conquered-the Turkic peoples in Central Asia, the Persians, and the Romans in Syria. The Bedouin tribes of Arabia favored archery, though contrary to popular belief Bedouin archers usually fought on foot instead of horseback. The Arabs usually fought defensive battles with their archers placed on both flanks.

By the Umayyad period, the caliphate had a standing army, including the elite Ahl al-Sham ("people of Syria"), raised from the Arabs who settled in Syria. The caliphate was divided into jund, or regional armies, stationed in the provinces being made of mostly Arab tribes who were paid monthly by the Diwan al-Jaysh (War Ministry).

The infantry of the Byzantine army continued to be recruited from within the Byzantine Empire, but much of the cavalry were either recruited from "martial" peoples in the Balkans or in Asia Minor or alternatively were Germanic mercenaries. Most of the Roman troops in Syria were indigenae (local), and it seems that at the time of the Muslim conquest, the Roman forces in Syria were Arabs. In response to the loss of Syria, the Romans developed the phylarch system of using Armenian and Arab Christian auxiliaries living on the frontier to provide a "shield" to counter raiding by the Muslims into the empire. Overall, the Roman army remained a small but professional force of foederati. Unlike the foederati who were sent where they were needed, the stradioti lived in the frontier provinces.

During the last decades of the Sasanian empire, the frequent use of royal titles by Persian governors in Central Asia, especially in what is now Afghanistan, indicates a weakening of the power of the Shahinshah (King of Kings), suggesting the empire was already breaking down at the time of the Muslim conquest. Persian society was rigidly divided into castes with the nobility being of supposed "Aryan" descent, and this division of Persian society along caste lines was reflected in the military. The aristocracy provided the cavalry, the paighan infantry came from the peasantry and most of the greater Persian nobility had slave soldiers, this last being based on the Persian example. Much of the Persian army consisted of tribal mercenaries recruited from the plains south of the Caspian Sea and from what is now Afghanistan. The Persian tactics were cavalry based with the Persian forces usually divided into a center, based upon a hill, and two wings of cavalry on either side.

Little is known about the military forces of the Christian state of Ethiopia other than that they were divided into professional troops and the auxiliaries. The Ethiopians made much use of camels and elephants.

The Berber peoples of North Africa had often served as a (auxiliaries) to the Roman Army. The Berber forces were based around the horse and camel but seemed to have been hampered by a lack of weapons or protection, with both Roman and Arab sources mentioning the Berbers lacked armour and helmets. The Berbers went to war with their entire communities, and the presence of women and children both slowed down the Berber armies and tied down Berber tribesmen who tried to protect their families.

The British historian David Nicolle called the Turkic peoples of Central Asia the "most formidable foes" faced by the Muslims. The Jewish Turkic Khazar khanate, based in what is now southern Russia and Ukraine, had a powerful heavy cavalry. The Turkic heartland of Central Asia was divided into five khanates whose khans variously recognized the shahs of Iran or the emperors of China as their overlords.

Turkic society was feudal with the khans only being pater primus among the aristocracy of who lived in castles in the countryside, with the rest of Turkic forces being divided into (farmers), (servants) and (clients). The heavily armored Turkic cavalry played a significant role in influencing subsequent Muslim tactics and weapons; the Turkic peoples, who were mostly Buddhists at the time of the Islamic conquest, later converted to Islam and ironically came to be regarded as the foremost Muslim warriors, to the extent of replacing the Arabs as the dominant peoples in the Dar al-Islam (House of Islam).

During the migration period, the Germanic Visigoths had traveled from their homeland north of the Danube to settle in the Roman province of Hispania, creating a kingdom upon the wreckage of the Western Roman Empire. The Visigothic state in Iberia was based around forces raised by the nobility whom the king could call out in the event of war. The king had his and loyal to himself, while the nobility had their . The Visigoths favored cavalry with their favorite tactics being to repeatedly charge a foe combined with feigned retreats.

The Muslim conquest of most of Iberia in less than a decade does suggest serious deficiencies with the Visigothic kingdom, though the limited sources make it difficult to discern the precise reasons for the collapse of the Visigoths.

Another Germanic people who founded a state upon the ruins of the Western Roman Empire were the Franks who settled in Gaul. Like the Visigoths, the Frankish cavalry played a "significant part" in their wars. The Frankish kings expected all of their male subjects to perform three months of military service every year, and all serving under the king's banner were paid a regular salary. Those called up for service had to provide their own weapons and horses, which contributed to the "militarisation of Frankish society". At least part of the reason for the victories of Charles Martel was he could call up a force of experienced warriors when faced with Muslim raids.

The province of Syria was the first to be wrested from Byzantine control. Arab-Muslim raids that followed the Ridda Wars prompted the Byzantines to send a major expedition into southern Palestine, which was defeated by the Arab forces under command of Khalid ibn al-Walid at the Battle of Ajnadayn in 634. Ibn al-Walid had converted to Islam around 627, becoming one of Muhammad's most successful generals. Ibn al-Walid had been fighting in Iraq against the Persians when he led his force on a trek across the deserts to Syria to attack the Romans from the rear. In the Battle of the Mud fought at or near Pella (Fahl) and nearby Scythopolis (Beisan) , both in the Jordan Valley, in December 634 or January 635, the Arabs scored another victory. After a siege of six months the Arabs took Damascus, but Emperor Heraclius later retook it. At the battle of Yarmuk (636), the Arabs were victorious, defeating Heraclius. Ibn al-Walid appears to have been the "real military leader" at Yarmuk "under the nominal command of others". Syria was ordered to be abandoned to the Muslims with Heraclius reportedly saying: "Peace be with you Syria; what a beautiful land you will be for your enemy". On the heels of their victory, the Arab armies took Damascus again in 636, with Baalbek, Homs, and Hama to follow soon afterwards. However, other fortified towns continued to resist despite the rout of the imperial army and had to be conquered individually. Jerusalem fell in 638, Caesarea in 640, while others held out until 641.

After a two-year siege, the garrison of Jerusalem surrendered rather than starve to death; under the terms of the surrender Caliph Umar promised to tolerate the Christians of Jerusalem and not to turn churches into mosques. True to his word, Umar allowed the Church of the Holy Sepulchre to remain, with the caliph praying on a prayer rug outside of the church. The loss to the Muslims of Jerusalem, the holiest city to Christians, proved to be the source of much resentment in Christendom. The city of Caesarea Maritima continued to withstand the Muslim siege-as it could be supplied by sea-until it was taken by assault in 640.

In the mountains of Asia Minor, the Muslims enjoyed less success, with the Romans adopting the tactic of "shadowing warfare" - refusing to give battle to the Muslims, while the people retreated into castles and fortified towns when the Muslims invaded; instead, Roman forces ambushed Muslim raiders as they returned to Syria carrying plunder and people they had enslaved. In the frontier area where Anatolia met Syria, the Roman state evacuated the entire population and laid waste to the countryside, creating a no man's land where any invading army would find no food. For decades afterwards, a guerrilla war was waged by Christians in the hilly countryside of north-western Syria supported by the Romans. At the same time, the Romans began a policy of launching raids via sea on the coast of the caliphate with the aim of forcing the Muslims to keep at least some of their forces to defend their coastlines, thus limiting the number of troops available for an invasion of Anatolia. Unlike Syria with its plains and deserts - which favored the offensive - the mountainous terrain of Anatolia favored the defensive, and for centuries afterwards the line between Christian and Muslim lands ran along the border between Anatolia and Syria.

The Byzantine Empire after the Arabs conquered the provinces of Syria and Egypt c. 650

The Byzantine province of Egypt held strategic importance for its grain production, naval yards, and as a base for further conquests in Africa. The Muslim general Amr ibn al-As began the conquest of the province on his own initiative in 639. The majority of the Roman forces in Egypt were locally raised Coptic forces, intended to serve more as a police force; since the vast majority of Egyptians lived in the Nile River valley, surrounded on both the eastern and western sides by desert, Egypt was felt to be a relatively secure province. In December 639, Amr entered the Sinai with a large force and took Pelusium, on the edge of the Nile River valley, and then defeated a Roman counter-attack at Bibays. Contrary to expectations, the Arabs did not head for Alexandria, the capital of Egypt, but instead for a major fortress known as Babylon located at what is now Cairo. Amr was planning to divide the Nile River valley in two. The Arab forces won a major victory at the Battle of Heliopolis in 640, but they found it difficult to advance further because major cities in the Nile Delta were protected by water and because Amr lacked the machinery to break down city fortifications.

The Arabs laid siege to Babylon, and its starving garrison surrendered on 9 April 641. Nevertheless, the province was scarcely urbanized and the defenders lost hope of receiving reinforcements from Constantinople when the emperor Heraclius died in 641. Afterwards, the Arabs turned north into the Nile Delta and laid siege to Alexandria. The last major center to fall into Arab hands was Alexandria, which capitulated in September 642. According to Hugh Kennedy, "Of all the early Muslim conquests, that of Egypt was the swiftest and most complete. [...] Seldom in history can so massive a political change have happened so swiftly and been so long lasting." In 644, the Arabs suffered a major defeat by the Caspian Sea when an invading Muslim army was almost wiped out by the cavalry of the Khazar Khanate, and, seeing a chance to take back Egypt, the Romans launched an amphibious attack which took back Alexandria for a short period of time. Though most of Egypt is desert, the Nile Delta has some of the most productive and fertile farmland in the entire world, which had made Egypt the "granary" of the Roman empire. Control of Egypt meant that the caliphate could weather droughts without the fear of famine, laying the basis for the future prosperity of the caliphate.

The Roman Empire had traditionally dominated the Mediterranean and the Black Sea with major naval bases at Constantinople, Acre, Alexandria and Carthage. In 652, the Arabs won their first victory at sea off Alexandria, which was followed by the temporary Muslim conquest of Cyprus. As Yemen had been a center of maritime trade, Yemeni sailors were brought to Alexandria to start building an Islamic fleet for the Mediterranean.

The Muslim fleet was based in Alexandria and used Acre, Tyre and Beirut as its forward bases. The core of the fleet's sailors were Yemeni, but the shipwrights who built the ships were Iranian and Iraqi. In the Battle of the Masts off Cape Chelidonia in Anatolia in 655, the Muslims defeated the Roman fleet in a series of boarding actions. As a result, the Romans began a major expansion of their navy, which was matched by the Arabs, leading to a naval arms race. From the early 8th century onward, the Muslim fleet would launch annual raids on the coastline on the Roman empire in Anatolia and Greece.

As part of the arms race, both sides sought new technology to improve their warships. The Muslim warships had a larger forecastle, which was used to mount a stone-throwing engine. The Romans invented Greek fire, an incendiary weapon that led the Muslims to cover their ships with water-soaked cotton. A major problem for the Muslim fleet was the shortage of timber, which led the Muslims to seek qualitative instead of quantitative superiority by building bigger warships. To save money, the Muslim shipwrights switched from the hull-first method of building ships to the frame-first method.

After an Arab incursion into Sasanian territories, the Yazdgerd III, who had just ascended the Persian throne, raised an army to resist the conquerors, although many refused to help. The Persians suffered a devastating defeat at the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah in 636. Little is known about the Battle of al-Qadisiyyah other than it lasted for several days by the banks of the river Euphrates in what is now Iraq and ended with the Persian force being annihilated. Abolishing the Lakhmid Arab buffer state had forced the Persians to take over the desert defense themselves, leaving them overextended.

As a result of al-Qadisiyyah, the Arab-Muslims gained control over the whole of Iraq, including Ctesiphon, the capital city of the Sassanids. The Persians lacked sufficient forces to make use of the Zagros Mountains to stop the Arabs, having lost the prime of their army at al-Qadisiyyah. The Persian forces withdrew over the Zagros, and the Arab army pursued them across the Iranian plateau, where the fate of the Sasanian Empire was sealed at the Battle of Nahavand in 642. The crushing Muslim victory at Nahavand is known in the Muslim world as the "Victory of Victories".

After Nahavand, the Persian state collapsed with Yezdegird III fleeing further east and various marzbans surrendering to the Arabs. As the conquerors slowly covered the vast distances of Iran punctuated by hostile towns and fortresses, Yazdgerd III retreated, finally taking refuge in Khorasan, where he was assassinated by a local satrap in 651. In the aftermath of their victory over the imperial army, the Muslims still had to contend with a collection of militarily weak but geographically inaccessible principalities of Persia. It took decades to bring them all under control of the caliphate. In what is now Afghanistan-a region where the authority of the shah was always disputed-the Muslims met fierce guerrilla resistance from the militant Buddhist tribes of the region. Ironically, despite the complete Muslim triumph over Iran as compared to the only partial defeat of the Roman Empire, the Muslims borrowed far more from the vanished Sassanian state than they ever did from the Romans. However, for the Persians the defeat remained bitter. Some 400 years later, the Persian poet Ferdowsi wrote in his popular poem ( Book of Kings):

Damn this world, damn this time, damn this fate,
That uncivilized Arabs have come to
Make me a Muslim
Where are your valiant warriors and priests
Where are your hunting parties and your feats?
Where is that warlike mien and where are those
Great armies that destroyed our county's foes?
Count Iran as a ruin, as the lair
Of lions and leopards.
Look now and despair

Right from the start of the caliphate, it was realized that there was a need to write down the sayings and story of Muhammad, which had been memorized by his followers before they all died. Most people in Arabia were illiterate, and the Arabs had a strong culture of remembering history orally. To preserve the story of Muhammad and to prevent any corruptions from entering the oral history, Abu Bakr had ordered scribes to write down the story of Muhammad as told to them by his followers, which was the origin of the Quran. Disputes had emerged over which version of the Quran was the correct one and, by 644 different versions of the Quran were accepted in Damascus, Basra, Hims, and Kufa. To settle the dispute, the Caliph Uthman had proclaimed the version of the Quran possessed by one of Muhammad's widows, Hafsa, to be the definitive and correct version, which offended some Muslims who held to the rival versions. This, together with the favoritism shown by 'Uthman to his own clan, the Banu Umayya, in government appointments, led to a mutiny in Medina in 656 and 'Uthman's murder.

Uthman's successor Ali was faced with a civil war, known to Muslims as the , when the governor of Syria Mu'awiya ibn Abi Sufyan revolted against him. During this time, the first period of Muslim conquests stopped, as the armies of Islam turned against one another. A group known as the decided to end the civil war by assassinating the leaders of both sides. However, the fitna ended in January 661 when Ali was killed by a kharaji assassin, allowing Mu'awiya to become caliph and found the Umayyad dynasty. The fitna also marked the beginning of the split between Shia Muslims who supported Ali, and Sunni Muslims who opposed him. Mu'awiya moved the capital of the caliphate from Medina to Damascus, which had a major effect on the politics and culture of the caliphate. Mu'awiya followed the conquest of Iran by invading Central Asia and trying to finish off the Roman Empire by taking Constantinople. In 670, a Muslim fleet seized Rhodes and then laid siege to Constantinople. Nicolle wrote the siege of Constantinople from 670 to 677 was "more accurately" a blockade rather than a siege proper, which ended in failure as the "mighty" walls built by the Emperor Theodosius II in the 5th century proved their worth.

The majority of the people in Syria remained Christian, and a substantial Jewish minority remained as well; both communities were to teach the Arabs much about science, trade and the arts. The Umayyad caliphs are well-remembered for sponsoring a cultural "golden age" in Islamic history-for example, by building the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem and for making Damascus into the capital of a "superpower" that stretched from Portugal to Central Asia, covering the vast territory from the Atlantic Ocean to the borders of China.

The rapidity of the early conquests has received various explanations. Contemporary Christian writers conceived them as God's punishment visited on their fellow Christians for their sins. Early Muslim historians viewed them as a reflection of the religious zeal of the conquerors and evidence of divine favor. The theory that the conquests are explainable as an Arab migration triggered by economic pressures enjoyed popularity early in the 20th century but has largely fallen out of favor among historians, especially those who distinguish the migration from the conquests that preceded and enabled it.

There are indications that the conquests started as initially disorganized pillaging raids launched partly by non-Muslim Arab tribes in the aftermath of the Ridda Wars and were soon extended into a war of conquest by the Rashidun caliphs, although other scholars argue that the conquests were a planned military venture already underway during Muhammad's lifetime. Fred Donner writes that the advent of Islam "revolutionized both the ideological bases and the political structures of the Arabian society, giving rise for the first time to a state capable of an expansionist movement." According to Chase F. Robinson, it is likely that Muslim forces were often outnumbered, but unlike their opponents, they were fast, well coordinated and highly motivated.

Another key reason was the weakness of the Byzantine and Sasanian Empires, caused by the wars they had waged against each other in the preceding decades with alternating success. It was aggravated by a plague that had struck densely populated areas and impeded conscription of new imperial troops, while the Arab armies could draw recruits from nomadic populations. The Sasanian Empire, which had lost the latest round of hostilities with the Byzantines, was also affected by a crisis of confidence, and its elites suspected that the ruling dynasty had forfeited the favor of the gods. The Arab military advantage was increased when Christianized Arab tribes who had served imperial armies as regular or auxiliary troops switched sides and joined the West Arabian coalition. Arab commanders also made liberal use of agreements to spare lives and property of inhabitants in case of surrender and extended exemptions from paying tribute to groups who provided military services to the conquerors. Additionally, the Byzantine persecution of Christians opposed to the Chalcedonian creed in Syria and Egypt alienated elements of those communities and made them more open to accommodation with the Arabs once it became clear that the latter would let them practice their faith undisturbed as long as they paid tribute.

The conquests were further secured by the subsequent large-scale migration of Arabian peoples into the conquered lands. Robert Hoyland argues that the failure of the Sasanian empire to recover was due in large part to the geographically and politically disconnected nature of Persia, which made coordinated action difficult once the established Sasanian rule collapsed. Similarly, the difficult terrain of Anatolia made it difficult for the Byzantines to mount a large-scale attack to recover the lost lands, and their offensive action was largely limited to organizing guerrilla operations against the Arabs in the Levant.

Although there were sporadic incursions by Arab generals in the direction of India in the 660s and a small Arab garrison was established in the arid region of Makran in the 670s, the first large-scale Arab campaign in the Indus valley occurred when the general Muhammad bin Qasim invaded Sindh in 711 after a coastal march through Makran. Three years later the Arabs controlled all of the lower Indus valley. Most of the towns seem to have submitted to Arab rule under peace treaties, although there was fierce resistance in other areas, including by the forces of Raja Dahir at the capital city Debal. Arab incursions southward from Sindh were repulsed by the armies of Gurjara and Chalukya kingdoms, and further Islamic expansion was checked by the Rashtrakuta dynasty, which gained control of the region shortly after.

Arab forces began launching sporadic raiding expeditions into Cyrenaica (modern northeast Libya) and beyond soon after their conquest of Egypt. Byzantine rule in northwest Africa at the time was largely confined to the coastal plains, while autonomous Berber polities controlled the rest. In 670 Arabs founded the settlement of Qayrawan, which gave them a forward base for further expansion. Muslim historians credit the general Uqba ibn Nafi with subsequent conquest of lands extending to the Atlantic coast, although it appears to have been a temporary incursion. The Berber chief Kusayla and an enigmatic leader referred to as (prophetess or priestess) seem to have mounted effective, if short-lived resistance to Muslim rule at the end of the 7th century, but the sources do not give a clear picture of these events. Arab forces were able to capture Carthage in 698 and Tangiers by 708. After the fall of Tangiers, many Berbers joined the Muslim army. In 740 Umayyad rule in the region was shaken by a major Berber revolt, which also involved Berber Kharijite Muslims. After a series of defeats, the caliphate was finally able to crush the rebellion in 742, although local Berber dynasties continued to drift away from imperial control from that time on.

The Muslim conquest of Iberia is notable for the brevity and unreliability of the available sources. After the Visigothic king of Spain Wittiza died in 710, the kingdom experienced a period of political division. The Visigothic nobility was divided between the followers of Wittiza and his successor Roderic. Akhila, Wittiza's son, had fled to Morocco after losing the succession struggle, and Muslim tradition states that he asked the Muslims to invade Spain. Starting in the summer of 710, the Muslim forces in Morocco had launched several successful raids into Spain, which demonstrated the weakness of the Visigothic state.

Taking advantage of the situation, the Muslim Berber commander, Tariq ibn Ziyad, who was stationed in Tangiers at the time, crossed the Strait of Gibraltar with an army of Arabs and Berbers in 711. Most of the invasion force of 15,000 were Berbers, with the Arabs serving as an "elite" force. Ziyad landed on the Rock of Gibraltar on 29 April 711. After defeating Roderic at the river Guadalete on 19 July 711, Muslim forces advanced, capturing cities one after another. The capital of Toledo surrendered peacefully. Some of the cities surrendered with agreements to pay tribute and local aristocracy retained a measure of former influence. The Spanish Jewish community welcomed the Muslims as liberators from the oppression of the Catholic Visigothic kings.

In 712, another larger force of 18,000 from Morocco, led by Musa Ibn Nusayr, crossed the Strait of Gibraltar to link up with Ziyad's force at Talavera. The invasion seemed to have been on the initiative of Ziyad: the caliph, al-Walid, in Damascus reacted as if he was surprised to see him. By 713 Iberia was almost entirely under Muslim control. In 714, al-Walid summoned Ziyad to Damascus to explain his campaign in Spain, but Ziyad took his time travelling through North Africa and Palestine, and was finally imprisoned when he arrived in Damascus. The events of the subsequent ten years, the details of which are obscure, included the capture of Barcelona and Narbonne, and a raid against Toulouse, followed by an expedition into Burgundy in 725.

The last large-scale raid to the north ended with a Muslim defeat at the Battle of Tours at the hands of the Franks in 732. The victory of the Franks, led by Charles Martel, over 'Abd al-Rahman Ibn 'Abd Allah al-Ghafiqi has often been misrepresented as the decisive battle that stopped the Muslim conquest of France, but the Umayyad force had been raiding Aquitaine with a particular interest in sacking churches and monasteries, not seeking its conquest. The battle itself is a shadowy affair with the few sources describing it in poetic terms that are frustrating for the historian. The battle occurred between 18 and 25 October 732 with the climax being an attack on the Muslim camp led by Martel that ended with al-Ghafiqi being killed and the Muslims withdrawing when night fell. Martel's victory ended whatever plans there may have been to conquer France, but a series of Berber revolts in North Africa and in Spain against Arab rule may have played a greater role in ruling out conquests north of the Pyrenees.

Battle of Talas between Tang dynasty and Abbasid Caliphate c. 751

Transoxiana is the region northeast of Iran beyond the Amu Darya or Oxus River roughly corresponding with modern-day Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and parts of Kazakhstan. Initial incursions across the Oxus River were aimed at Bukhara (673) and Samarqand (675), and the results were limited to promises of tribute payments. In 674, a Muslim force led by Ubaidullah Ibn Zayyad attacked Bukhara, the capital of Sogdia, which ended with the Sogdians agreeing to recognize the Umayadd caliph Mu'awiaya as their overlord and to pay tribute.

In general, the campaigns in Central Asia were "hard fought" with the Buddhist Turkic peoples fiercely resisting efforts to incorporate them into the caliphate. China, which saw Central Asia as its own sphere of influence, particularly because of the economic importance of the Silk Road, supported the Turkic defenders. Further advances were hindered for a quarter century by political upheavals within the Umayyad caliphate. This was followed by a decade of rapid military progress under the leadership of the new governor of Khurasan, Qutayba ibn Muslim, which included the conquest of Bukhara and Samarqand in 706-712. The expansion lost its momentum when Qutayba was killed during an army mutiny and the Arabs were placed on the defensive by an alliance of Sogdian and Türgesh forces with support from Tang China. However, reinforcements from Syria helped turn the tide and most of the lost lands were reconquered by 741. Muslim rule over Transoxania was consolidated in 751 when a Chinese-led army was defeated at the Battle of Talas.

Medieveal Islamic scholars divided the area of modern-day Afghanistan into two regions: the provinces of Khorasan and Sistan. Khorasan was the eastern satrapy of the Sasanian Empire, containing Balkh and Herat. Sistan included Ghazna, Zarang, Bost, Qandahar (also called al-Rukhkhaj or Zamindawar), Kabul, Kabulistan and Zabulistan.

Before Muslim rule, the regions of Balkh ( Bactria or Tokharistan), Herat and Sistan were under Sasanian rule. Further south in the Balkh region, in Bamiyan, indication of Sasanian authority diminishes, with a local dynasty apparently ruling from late antiquity, probably Hephthalites subject to the Yabghu of the Western Turkic Khaganate. While Herat was controlled by the Sasanians, its hinterlands were controlled by northern Hepthalites who continued to rule the Ghurid mountains and river valleys well into the Islamic era. Sistan was under Sasanian administration, but Qandahar remained out of Arab hands. Kabul and Zabulistan housed Indic religions, with the Zunbils and Kabul Shahis (for the most part) offering stiff resistance to Muslim rule for two centuries until the Saffarid and Ghaznavid conquests. The Umayyad Caliphate regularly claimed nominal overlordship over the Zunbils and Kabul Shahis, and in 711 Qutayba ibn Muslim managed to force them to pay tribute.

Cyprus, Armenia, and Georgia

In 646 a Byzantine naval expedition was able to briefly recapture Alexandria. The same year Mu'awiya, the governor of Syria and future founder of the Umayyad dynasty, ordered construction of a fleet. Three years later it was put to use in a pillaging raid of Cyprus, followed by a raid in 650 that concluded with a treaty under which Cypriots surrendered many of their riches and slaves. In 688 the island was made into a joint dominion of the caliphate and the Byzantine Empire under a pact which was to last for almost 300 years.

In 639-640 Arab forces began to make advances into Armenia, which had been partitioned into a Byzantine province and a Sasanian province. There is considerable disagreement among ancient and modern historians about events of the following years, and nominal control of the region may have passed several times between Arabs and Byzantines. Although Muslim dominion was finally established by the time the Umayyads acceded to power in 661, it was not able to implant itself solidly in the country, and Armenia experienced a national and literary efflorescence over the next century. As with Armenia, Arab advances into other lands of the Caucasus region, including Georgia, had as their end assurances of tribute payment and these principalities retained a large degree of autonomy. This period also saw a series of clashes with the Khazar kingdom whose center of power was in the lower Volga steppes, and which vied with the caliphate over control of the Caucasus.

Byzantine manuscript illustration showing Greek fire in action

Other Muslim military ventures were met with outright failure. Despite a naval victory over the Byzantines in 654 at the Battle of the Masts, the subsequent attempt to besiege Constantinople was frustrated by a storm which damaged the Arab fleet. Later sieges of Constantinople in 668-669 (674-678 according to other estimates) and 717-718 were thwarted with the help of the recently invented Greek fire. In the east, although Arabs were able to establish control over most Sasanian-controlled areas of modern Afghanistan after the fall of Persia, the Kabul region resisted repeated attempts at invasion and would continue to do so until it was conquered by the Saffarids three centuries later.

By the time of the Abbasid Revolution in the middle of the 8th century, Muslim armies had come against a combination of natural barriers and powerful states that impeded any further military progress. The wars produced diminishing returns in personal gains and fighters increasingly left the army for civilian occupations. The priorities of the rulers also shifted from conquest of new lands to administration of the acquired empire. Although the Abbasid era witnessed some new territorial gains, such as the conquests of Sicily and Crete, the period of rapid centralized expansion would now give way to an era when further spread of Islam would be slow and accomplished through the efforts of local dynasties, missionaries, and traders.

Nicolle writes that the series of Islamic conquests of the 7th and 8th centuries was "one of the most significant events in world history", leading to the creation of "a new civilisation", the Islamicised and Arabised Middle East. Islam, which had previously been confined to Arabia, became a major world religion, while the synthesis of Arab, Roman, and Persian elements led to distinctive new styles of art and architecture emerging in the Middle East. English historian Edward Gibbon writes in The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire:

Under the last of the Umayyads, the Arabian empire extended two hundred days journey from east to west, from the confines of Tartary and India to the shores of the Atlantic Ocean ... We should vainly seek the indissoluble union and easy obedience that pervaded the government of Augustus and the Antonines; but the progress of Islam diffused over this ample space a general resemblance of manners and opinions. The language and laws of the Quran were studied with equal devotion at Samarcand and Seville: the Moor and the Indian embraced as countrymen and brothers in the pilgrimage of Mecca; and the Arabian language was adopted as the popular idiom in all the provinces to the westward of the Tigris.

The military victories of armies from the Arabian Peninsula heralded the expansion of Arab culture and religion. The conquests were followed by a large-scale migration of families and whole tribes from Arabia into the lands of the Middle East. The conquering Arabs had already possessed a complex and sophisticated society. Emigrants from Yemen brought with them agricultural, urban, and monarchical traditions; members of the Ghassanid and Lakhmid tribal confederations had experience collaborating with the empires. The rank and file of the armies was drawn from both nomadic and sedentary tribes, while the leadership came mainly from the merchant class of the Hejaz.

Two fundamental policies were implemented during the reign of the second caliph Umar (): the Bedouins would not be allowed to damage agricultural production of the conquered lands, and the leadership would cooperate with the local elites. To that end, the Arab-Muslim armies were settled in segregated quarters or new garrison towns such as Basra, Kufa, and Fustat. The latter two became the new administrative centers of Iraq and Egypt, respectively. Soldiers were paid a stipend and prohibited from seizing lands. Arab governors supervised collection and distribution of taxes but otherwise left the old religious and social order intact. At first, many provinces retained a large degree of autonomy under the terms of agreements made with Arab commanders.

As the time passed, the conquerors sought to increase their control over local affairs and make existing administrative machinery work for the new regime. This involved several types of reorganization. In the Mediterranean region, city-states which traditionally governed themselves and their surrounding areas were replaced by a territorial bureaucracy separating town and rural administration. In Egypt, fiscally independent estates and municipalities were abolished in favor of a simplified administrative system. In the early 8th century, Syrian Arabs began to replace Coptic functionaries and communal levies gave way to individual taxation. In Iran, the administrative reorganization and construction of protective walls prompted agglomeration of quarters and villages into large cities such as Isfahan, Qazvin, and Qum. Local notables of Iran, who at first had almost complete autonomy, were incorporated into the central bureaucracy by the Abbasid period. The similarity of Egyptian and Khurasanian official paperwork at the time of the caliph al-Mansur () suggests a highly centralized empire-wide administration.

Mosaic from Hisham's Palace, an Umayyad residence near Jericho (c. 724-743)

The society of new Arab settlements gradually became stratified into classes based on wealth and power. It was also reorganized into new communal units that preserved clan and tribal names but were in fact only loosely based around old kinship bonds. Arab settlers turned to civilian occupations and in eastern regions established themselves as a landed aristocracy. At the same time, distinctions between the conquerors and local populations began to blur. In Iran, the Arabs largely assimilated into local culture, adopting the Persian language and customs and marrying Persian women. In Iraq, non-Arab settlers flocked to garrison towns. Soldiers and administrators of the old regime came to seek their fortunes with the new masters, while slaves, laborers and peasants fled there seeking to escape the harsh conditions of life in the countryside. Non-Arab converts to Islam were absorbed into the Arab-Muslim society through an adaptation of the tribal Arabian institution of clientage, in which protection of the powerful was exchanged for loyalty of the subordinates. The clients () and their heirs were regarded as virtual members of the clan. The clans became increasingly economically and socially stratified. For example, while the noble clans of the Tamim tribe acquired Persian cavalry units as their mawali, other clans of the same tribe had slave laborers as theirs. Slaves often became mawali of their former masters when they were freed.

Contrary to the belief of earlier historians, there is no evidence of mass conversions to Islam in the immediate aftermath of the conquests. The first groups to convert were Christian Arab tribes, although some of them retained their religion into the Abbasid era even while serving as troops of the caliphate. They were followed by former elites of the Sasanian empire, whose conversion ratified their old privileges. With time, the weakening of non-Muslim elites facilitated the breakdown of old communal ties and reinforced the incentives of conversion which promised economic advantages and social mobility. By the beginning of the 8th century, conversions became a policy issue for the caliphate. They were favored by religious activists, and many Arabs accepted the equality of Arabs and non-Arabs. However, conversion was associated with economic and political advantages, and Muslim elites were reluctant to see their privileges diluted. Public policy towards converts varied depending on the region and was changed by successive Umayyad caliphs. These circumstances provoked opposition from non-Arab converts, whose ranks included many active soldiers, and helped set the stage for the civil war which ended with the fall of the Umayyad dynasty.

The Arab-Muslim conquests followed a general pattern of nomadic conquests of settled regions, whereby the conquering peoples became the new military elite and reached a compromise with the old elites by allowing them to retain local political, religious, and financial authority. Peasants, workers, and merchants paid taxes, while members of the old and new elites collected them. Payment of taxes, which for peasants often reached half of the value of their produce, was an economic burden as well as a mark of social inferiority. Scholars differ in their assessment of relative tax burdens before and after the conquests. John Esposito states that in effect this meant lower taxes. According to Bernard Lewis, available evidence suggests that the change from Byzantine to Arab rule was "welcomed by many among the subject peoples, who found the new yoke far lighter than the old, both in taxation and in other matters". In contrast, Norman Stillman writes that although the tax burden of the Jews under early Islamic rule was comparable to that under previous rulers, Christians of the Byzantine Empire (though not Christians of the Persian empire, whose status was similar to that of the Jews) and Zoroastrians of Iran shouldered a considerably heavier burden in the immediate aftermath of the conquests.

Egyptian papyrus PERF 558 containing a bilingual Greek-Arabic tax receipt dated from 643 AD

In the wake of the early conquests taxes could be levied on individuals, on the land, or as collective tribute. During the first century of Islamic expansion, the words and were used in all three senses, with context distinguishing between individual and land taxes. Regional variations in taxation at first reflected the diversity of previous systems. The Sasanian Empire had a general tax on land and a poll tax having several rates based on wealth, with an exemption for aristocracy. This poll tax was adapted by Arab rulers, so that the aristocracy exemption was assumed by the new Arab-Muslim elite and shared by local aristocracy who converted to Islam. The nature of Byzantine taxation remains partly unclear, but it appears to have been levied as a collective tribute on population centers and this practice was generally followed under the Arab rule in former Byzantine provinces. Collection of taxes was delegated to autonomous local communities on the condition that the burden be divided among its members in the most equitable manner. In most of Iran and Central Asia local rulers paid a fixed tribute and maintained their autonomy in tax collection.

Difficulties in tax collection soon appeared. Egyptian Copts, who had been skilled in tax evasion since Roman times, were able to avoid paying the taxes by entering monasteries, which were initially exempt from taxation, or simply by leaving the district where they were registered. This prompted imposition of taxes on monks and introduction of movement controls. In Iraq, many peasants who had fallen behind with their tax payments converted to Islam and abandoned their land for Arab garrison towns in hope of escaping taxation. Faced with a decline in agriculture and a treasury shortfall, the governor of Iraq, al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, forced peasant converts to return to their lands and subjected them to the taxes again, effectively forbidding them from converting to Islam. In Khorasan, a similar phenomenon forced the native aristocracy to compensate for the shortfall in tax collection out of their own pockets, and they responded by persecuting peasant converts and imposing heavier taxes on poor Muslims.

The situation where conversion to Islam was penalized in an Islamic state could not last, and the Umayyad caliph Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz () has been credited with changing the taxation system. Modern historians doubt this account, although details of the transition to the system of taxation elaborated by Abbasid-era jurists are unclear. Umar II ordered governors to cease collection of taxes from Muslim converts, but his successors obstructed this policy and some governors sought to stem the tide of conversions by introducing additional requirements such as circumcision and the ability to recite passages from the Quran. Taxation-related grievances of non-Arab Muslims contributed to the opposition movements which resulted in the Abbasid Revolution. Under the new system that was eventually established, kharaj came to be regarded as a tax levied on the land, regardless of the taxpayer's religion. The poll-tax was no longer levied on Muslims, but the treasury did not necessarily suffer and converts did not gain as a result, since they had to pay zakat, which was probably instituted as a compulsory tax on Muslims around 730. The terminology became specialized during the Abbasid era, so that kharaj no longer meant anything more than land tax, while the term jizya was restricted to the poll-tax on dhimmis.

The influence of jizya on conversion has been a subject of scholarly debate. Julius Wellhausen holds that the poll tax amounted to so little that exemption from it did not constitute sufficient economic motive for conversion. Similarly, Thomas Arnold states that jizya was "too moderate" to constitute a burden, "seeing that it released them from the compulsory military service that was incumbent on their Muslim fellow subjects." He further adds that converts escaping taxation would have to pay the legal alms, zakat, that is annually levied on most kinds of movable and immovable property. Other early 20th century scholars suggest that non-Muslims converted to Islam en masse in order to escape the poll tax, but this theory has been challenged by more recent research. Daniel Dennett has shown that other factors, such as desire to retain social status, had greater influence on this choice in the early Islamic period.

The Arab conquerors did not repeat the mistakes which had been made by the governments of the Byzantine and Sasanian empires, which had tried and failed to impose an official religion on subject populations, which had caused resentments that made the Muslim conquests more acceptable to them. Instead, the rulers of the new empire generally respected the traditional middle-Eastern pattern of religious pluralism, which was not one of equality but rather of dominance by one group over the others. After the end of military operations, which involved sacking of some monasteries and confiscation of Zoroastrian fire temples in Syria and Iraq, the early caliphate was characterized by religious tolerance and peoples of all ethnicities and religions blended in public life. Before Muslims were ready to build mosques in Syria, they accepted Christian churches as holy places and shared them with local Christians. In Iraq and Egypt, Muslim authorities cooperated with Christian religious leaders. Numerous churches were repaired and new ones built during the Umayyad era.

The first Umayyad caliph Muawiyah made deliberate efforts to convince those whom he had conquered that he was not opposed to their religion, and tried to enlist support from Christian Arab elites. There is no evidence for public display of Islam by the state before the reign of Abd al-Malik (685-705), when Quranic verses and references to Muhammad suddenly became prominent on coins and official documents. This change was motivated by a desire to unify the Muslim community after the second civil war and rally them against their chief common enemy, the Byzantine Empire.

A further change of policy occurred during the reign of Umar II (717-720). The disastrous failure of the siege of Constantinople in 718 which was accompanied by massive Arab casualties led to a spike of popular animosity among Muslims toward Byzantium and Christians in general. At the same time, many Arab soldiers left the army for civilian occupations and they wished to emphasize their high social status among the conquered peoples. These events prompted introduction of restrictions on non-Muslims, which, according to Hoyland, were modeled both on Byzantine curbs on Jews, starting with the Theodosian Code and later codes, which contained prohibitions against building new synagogues and giving testimony against Christians, and on Sassanid regulations that prescribed distinctive attire for different social classes.

In the following decades Islamic jurists elaborated a legal framework in which other religions would have a protected but subordinate status. Islamic law followed the Byzantine precedent of classifying subjects of the state according to their religion, in contrast to the Sasanian model which put more weight on social than on religious distinctions. In theory, like the Byzantine empire, the caliphate placed severe restrictions on paganism, but in practice most non-Abrahamic communities of the former Sasanian territories were classified as possessors of a scripture ( ahl al-kitab) and granted protected () status.

In Islam, Christians and Jews are seen as "Peoples of the Book" as the Muslims accept both Jesus Christ and the Jewish prophets as their own prophets, which accorded them a respect that was not reserved to the "heathen" peoples of Iran, Central Asia and India. In places like the Levant and Egypt, both Christians and Jews were allowed to maintain their churches and synagogues and keep their own religious organizations in exchange for paying the jizya tax. At times, the caliphs engaged in triumphalist gestures, like building the famous Dome of the Rock mosque in Jerusalem from 690 to 692 on the site of the Jewish Second Temple, which had been destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD-though the use of Roman and Sassanian symbols of power in the mosque suggests its purpose was partly to celebrate the Arab victories over the two empires.

Those Christians out of favor with the prevailing orthodoxy in the Roman Empire often preferred to live under Muslim rule as it meant the end of persecution. As both the Jewish and Christian communities of the Levant and North Africa were better educated than their conquerors, they were often employed as civil servants in the early years of the caliphate. However, a reported saying of Muhammad that "Two religions may not dwell together in Arabia" led to different policies being pursued in Arabia with conversion to Islam being imposed rather than merely encouraged. With the notable exception of Yemen, where a large Jewish community existed right up until the middle of the 20th century, all of the Christian and Jewish communities in Arabia "completely disappeared". The Jewish community of Yemen seems to have survived as Yemen was not regarded as part of Arabia proper in the same way that the Hejaz and the Nejd were.

Mark R. Cohen writes that the jizya paid by Jews under Islamic rule provided a "surer guarantee of protection from non-Jewish hostility" than that possessed by Jews in the Latin West, where Jews "paid numerous and often unreasonably high and arbitrary taxes" in return for official protection, and where treatment of Jews was governed by charters which new rulers could alter at will upon accession or refuse to renew altogether. The Pact of Umar, which stipulated that Muslims must "do battle to guard" the dhimmis and "put no burden on them greater than they can bear", was not always upheld, but it remained "a steadfast cornerstone of Islamic policy" into early modern times.

1. ^ Gardner, Hall; Kobtzeff, Oleg, eds. (2012). The Ashgate Research Companion to War: Origins and Prevention. Ashgate Publishing. pp. 208-209.

2. ^ Rosenwein, Barbara H. (2004). A Short History of the Middle Ages. Ontario: Broadview Press. pp. 71-72. ISBN 978-1-55111-290-9.

3. ^ Jandora, John W. (1985). "The battle of the Yarmūk: A reconstruction". Journal of Asian History. 19 (1): 8-21. JSTOR 41930557.

4. Theophanes, ^ Chronicle, 317-327
* Greatrex-Lieu (2002), II, 217-227; Haldon (1997), 46; Baynes (1912), passim; Speck (1984), 178

5. ^ Foss, Clive (1975). "The Persians in Asia Minor and the end of antiquity". The English Historical Review. 90 (357): 721-747. doi:10.1093/ehr/XC.CCCLVII.721. JSTOR 567292.

6. ^ Howard-Johnston, James (2006). East Rome, Sasanian Persia And the End of Antiquity: Historiographical And Historical Studies. Ashgate Publishing. p. xv. ISBN 978-0-86078-992-5.

7. ^ Liska, George (1998). "Projection contra prediction: Alternative futures and options". Expanding Realism: The Historical Dimension of World Politics. Rowman & Littlefield. p. 170. ISBN 978-0-8476-8680-3.

8. Vaglieri (1977), pp. 60-61

9. ^ Robinson, Chase F. (2010). "The rise of Islam, 600 705". In Robinson, Chase F. (ed.). The New Cambridge History of Islam, Volume 1: The Formation of the Islamic World, Sixth to Eleventh Centuries. Cambridge University Press. p. 197. ISBN 9780521838238. it is probably safe to assume that Muslims were often outnumbered. Unlike their adversaries, however, Muslim armies were fast, agile, well coordinated and highly motivated.

10. G. Yver. Encyclopedia of Islam 2nd ed, Brill. "Maghreb", vol. 5, p. 1189.

11. Évariste Lévi-Provençal. Encyclopedia of Islam 2nd ed, Brill. "Al-Andalus", vol. 1, p. 492

12. ^ Lee, Jonathan L.; Sims Williams, Nicholas (2003). "Bactrian Inscription from Yakawlang sheds new light on history of Buddhism in Afghanistan". Silk Road Art and Archaeology. 9: 167.

13. ^ Cahen (1965), p. 560; Anver M. Emon, Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire of Law, p. 98, note 3. Oxford University Press, ISBN 978-0199661633. Quote: "Some studies question the nearly synonymous use of the terms kharaj and jizya in the historical sources. The general view suggests that while the terms kharaj and jizya seem to have been used interchangeably in early historical sources, what they referred to in any given case depended on the linguistic context. If one finds references to "a kharaj on their heads," the reference was to a poll tax, despite the use of the term kharaj, which later became the term of art for land tax. Likewise, if one fins the phrase "jizya on their land," this referred to a land tax, despite the use of jizya which later come to refer to the poll tax. Early history therefore shows that although each term did not have a determinate technical meaning at first, the concepts of poll tax and land tax existed early in Islamic history." Denner, Conversion and the Poll Tax, 3-10; Ajiaz Hassan Qureshi, "The Terms Kharaj and Jizya and Their Implication," Journal of the Punjab University Historical Society 12 (1961): 27-38; Hossein Modarressi Rabatab'i, Kharaj in Islamic Law (London: Anchor Press Ltd, 1983).

14. ^ Walker Arnold, Thomas (1913). Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim Faith. Constable & Robinson Ltd. pp. 59. ... but this jizyah was too moderate to constitute a burden, seeing that it released them from the compulsory military service that was incumbent on their Muslim fellow-subjects. Conversion to Islam was certainly attended by a certain pecuniary advantage, but his former religion could have had but little hold on a convert who abandoned it merely to gain exemption from the jizyah; and now, instead of jizyah, the convert had to pay the legal alms, zakāt, annually levied on most kinds of movable and immovable property. (online)

15. Lewis, Bernard (2014). The Jews of Islam. Princeton University Press. p. 19. ISBN 9781400820290.

Cahen, Claude (1965). Lewis, B.; Pellat, Ch. & Schacht, J. (eds.). The Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition. Volume II: C-G. Leiden: E. J. Brill. OCLC 495469475.

Cohen, Mark (2008). Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 978-0-691-13931-9.

Dennett, Daniel Clement (1950). Conversion and the Poll Tax in Early Islam. Harvard University Press. ISBN 9780674331594.

Donner, Fred M. (2014). The Early Islamic Conquests. Princeton University Press.

Edward Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Chapter 51

Hoyland, Robert G (1997). Seeing Islam as Others Saw It: A Survey and Evaluation of Christian, Jewish and Zoroastrian Writings on Early Islam (Studies in Late Antiquity and Early Islam). The Dawrwin Press, Inc. Princeton, NJ.

Nicolle, David (2009). The Great Islamic Conquests AD 632-750. Osprey Publishing. ISBN 978-1-84603-273-8.

Pagden, Anthony (13 March 2008). Worlds at War: The 2,500 - Year Struggle Between East and West. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-923743-2.

Stillman, Norman (1979). The Jews of Arab Lands : A History and Source Book. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America. ISBN 978-0-8276-0198-7.

Vaglieri, Laura Veccia (1977). "The Patriarchal and Umayyad caliphates". In Holt, P. M.; Lambton, Ann K. S.; Lewis, Bernard (eds.). The Cambridge History of Islam Volume 1A: The Central Islamic Lands from Pre-Islamic Times to the First World War. Cambridge University Press. pp. 57-103. doi:10.1017/CHOL9780521219464.005. ISBN 9780521219464.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The early Muslim conquests or early Islamic conquests ( Arabic: الْفُتُوحَاتُ الإسْلَامِيَّة, al-Futūḥāt al-ʾIslāmiyya), also known as the Arab conquests, were initiated in the 7th century by Muhammad, the founder of Islam.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
纪录：天主教教宗方济各的一生丨ABC中文

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
深度解读《天国王朝》当年被剪的没人看得懂！如今成神作！

# data[].attributes.headline
菲力四世的擴張與亞維儂之囚

# data[].attributes.subject
菲力四世的擴張與亞維儂之囚

# data[].attributes.body
波尼法爵八世在與非力四世因徵稅權的鬥爭中，服軟，並封其祖父路易九世為聖人，也抬高法國王室的地位

當是時很多法國貴族會接受小神品的神職，其不算是正式的神職人員，所以不需遵守清修的戒規，故可以照常娶妻生子，但又因為具有神職，故可以免稅，也因此招來世俗君主的不滿

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
欧洲史的转折？史上最大的耻辱？教皇如何体验法式「孝道」？【教宗与教权VIII】

# data[].attributes.headline
諷刺十八世紀英國的政治yaho

# data[].attributes.body
諷刺十八世紀英國的政治

yahoo由來

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
格列佛遊記 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A colonial empire is a collective of territories (often called colonies), either contiguous with the imperial center or located overseas, settled by the population of a certain state and governed by that state.

Before the expansion of early modern European powers, other empires had conquered and colonized territories, such as the Romans in Iberia, or the Chinese in what is now southern China. Modern colonial empires first emerged with a race of exploration between the then most advanced European maritime powers, Portugal and Spain, during the 15th century. The initial impulse behind these dispersed maritime empires and those that followed was trade, driven by the new ideas and the capitalism that grew out of the European Renaissance. Agreements were also made to divide the world up between them in 1479, 1493, and 1494. European imperialism was born out of competition between European Christians and Ottoman Muslims, the latter of which rose up quickly in the 14th century and forced the Spanish and Portuguese to seek new trade routes to India, and to a lesser extent, China.

Although colonies existed in classical antiquity, especially amongst the Phoenicians and the Ancient Greeks who settled many islands and coasts of the Mediterranean Sea, these colonies were politically independent from the city-states they originated from, and thus did not constitute a colonial empire.

Portugal began establishing the first global trade network and one of the first colonial empires under the leadership of Henry the Navigator. The empire spread throughout a vast number of territories distributed across the globe (especially at one time in the 16th century) that are now parts of 60 different sovereign states. Portugal would eventually control Brazil, territories such as what is now Uruguay and some fishing ports in north, in the Americas; Angola, Mozambique, Portuguese Guinea, and São Tomé and Príncipe (among other territories and bases) in the North and the Subsaharan Africa; cities, forts or territories in all the Asian Subcontinents, as Muscat, Ormus and Bahrain (amongst other bases) in the Persian Gulf; Goa, Bombay and Daman and Diu (amongst other coastal cities) in India; Portuguese Ceylon; Malacca, bases in Southeast Asia and Oceania, as Makassar, Solor, Banda, Ambon and others in the Moluccas, Portuguese Timor; and the granted entrepôt-base of Macau and the entrepôt-enclave of Dejima ( Nagasaki) in East Asia, amongst other smaller or short-lived possessions.

During its Siglo de Oro, the Spanish Empire had possession of Mexico, South America, the Philippines, all of southern Italy, a stretch of territories from the Duchy of Milan to the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Belgium, parts of Burgundy, and many colonial settlements in the Americas, Africa, and Asia. Possessions in Europe, Africa, the Atlantic Ocean, the Americas, the Pacific Ocean, and East Asia qualified the Spanish Empire as attaining a global presence. From 1580 to 1640 the Portuguese Empire and the Spanish Empire were conjoined in a personal union of its Habsburg monarchs during the period of the Iberian Union, but beneath the highest level of government, their separate administrations were maintained.

Subsequent colonial empires included the French, English, Dutch and Japanese empires. By the mid-17th century, the Tsardom of Russia, continued later as the Russian Empire and the Soviet Union, became the largest contiguous state in the world, and the modern Russian Federation continues to be so to this day. Russia today has nine time zones, stretching across about half of the world's longitude.

The British Empire, consolidated during the period of British maritime hegemony in the 19th century, became the largest empire in history by virtue of the improved transportation technologies of the time. At its height, the British Empire covered a quarter of the Earth's land area and comprised a quarter of its population. During the New Imperialism, Italy and Germany also built their colonial empires in Africa.

It is worth noting that, from the 16th to 19th century, there were also large non-European empires, most notably the Qing Empire of China, which conquered a huge area of East and Inner Asia, and the states of the Age of the Islamic Gunpowders, Mughal India, Ottoman Turkey, and Savafid Iran. The British replaced the Mughals in India, and after the Boxer Rebellion in 1901, Imperial China made concessions to the Eight-Nation Alliance (all the Great Powers of the time). By the end of the 20th century most of the previous colonial empires had been decolonized, though the modern nation-states of Russia and China inherited much of the territory of the Romanov and Qing empires, respectively.

The chart below shows the span of some European colonial empires.

Black lines mark the year of the empires largest territorial extent of land area.

Red represents the empire is a monarchy.

Blue represents the empire is a republic.

European :

East India Company (1757-1858) and British Raj (1858-1947)

Possessions in China

Possessions in the Middle East

Possessions in Southeast Asia

Dominions of the United Kingdom

Other countries with colonial possessions :

Wales

United States of America (1817-present)

Colonies of the Habsburg Monarchy[7] and the Austro-Hungarian Empire (1719-1750, 1778-1783, 1901-1917)

Duchy of Courland and Semigallia (a vassal of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, 1637-1690)

German colonial initiatives (1683-1721)

Italy and the colonization of the Americas

Kingdom of Scotland (1621-1707)

Norway

Colonies of the Sweden-Norway (1814-1905)

Kingdom of Morocco (1975-present)

Muscat and Oman (1652-1892)

Tsardom of Russia, Russian Empire, Soviet Union, and Russian Federation (1547-1721) (1721-1917) (1917-1991) (1991-present)

Chinese Empire (from Qin dynasty to Qing dynasty), Republic of China, and People's Republic of China
Chinese imperialism

Imperial Chinese Tributary System

Guangxi

Hainan (since the Han dynasty)

Manchuria (during the Tang, Liao, Jin, Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties)

Inner Mongolia

Outer Mongolia (during the Tang, Liao, Yuan, Northern Yuan, and Qing dynasties)

Ryukyu (from the 15th to the 19th century)

Taiwan (during the Qing dynasty)

Tibet (during the Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties)

Yunnan

Vietnam (during the Han, Xin, Eastern Wu, Jin, Liu Song, Southern Qi, Liang, Sui, Tang, Wu Zhou, Southern Han, and Ming dynasties)

Xinjiang

Central Asia (during the Tang, Western Liao, and Qing dynasties)

Indian Empires, Republic of India

Kingdom of Siam

Argentina

Empire of Brazil, Brazil

European:

Asian:

Other countries with colonial possessions:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A colonial empire is a collective of territories (often called colonies), either contiguous with the imperial center or located overseas, settled by the population of a certain state and governed by that state. Before the expansion of early modern European powers, other empires had conquered and colonized territories, such as the Romans in Iberia, or the Chinese in what is now southern China.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The 19th century marked the full flower of the British Empire. Administration and policy changed during the century from the haphazard arrangements of the 17th and 18th centuries to the sophisticated system characteristic of Joseph Chamberlain's tenure (1895-1900) in the Colonial Office. That office, which began in 1801, was first an appendage of the Home Office and the Board of Trade, but by the 1850s it had become a separate department with a growing staff and a continuing policy; it was the means by which discipline and pressure were exerted on the colonial governments when such action was considered necessary.

New Zealand became officially British in 1840, after which systematic colonization there followed rapidly. Partly owing to pressure from missionaries, British control was extended to Fiji, Tonga, Papua, and other islands in the Pacific Ocean, and in 1877 the British High Commission for the Western Pacific Islands was created. In the wake of the Indian Mutiny (1857), the British crown assumed the East India Company's governmental authority in India. Britain's acquisition of Burma (Myanmar) was completed in 1886, while its conquest of the Punjab (1849) and of Balochistān (1854-76) provided substantial new territory in the Indian subcontinent itself. The French completion of the Suez Canal (1869) provided Britain with a much shorter sea route to India. Britain responded to this opportunity by expanding its port at Aden, establishing a protectorate in Somaliland (now Somalia), and extending its influence in the sheikhdoms of southern Arabia and the Persian Gulf. Cyprus, which was, like Gibraltar and Malta, a link in the chain of communication with India through the Mediterranean, was occupied in 1878. Elsewhere, British influence in the Far East expanded with the development of the Straits Settlements and the federated Malay states, and in the 1880s protectorates were formed over Brunei and Sarawak. Hong Kong island became British in 1841, and an "informal empire" operated in China by way of British treaty ports and the great trading city of Shanghai.

The greatest 19th-century extension of British power took place in Africa, however. Britain was the acknowledged ruling force in Egypt from 1882 and in the Sudan from 1899. In the second half of the century, the Royal Niger Company began to extend British influence in Nigeria, and the Gold Coast (now Ghana) and The Gambia also became British possessions. The Imperial British East Africa Company operated in what are now Kenya and Uganda, and the British South Africa Company operated in what are now Zimbabwe (formerly Southern Rhodesia), Zambia (formerly Northern Rhodesia), and Malawi. Britain's victory in the South African War (1899-1902) enabled it to annex the Transvaal and the Orange Free State in 1902 and to create the Union of South Africa in 1910. The resulting chain of British territories stretching from South Africa northward to Egypt realized an enthusiastic British public's idea of an African empire extending "from the Cape to Cairo." By the end of the 19th century, the British Empire comprised nearly one-quarter of the world's land surface and more than one-quarter of its total population.

The idea of limited self-government for some of Britain's colonies was first recommended for Canada by Lord Durham in 1839. This report proposed "responsible self-government" for Canada, so that a cabinet of ministers chosen by the Canadians could exercise executive powers instead of officials chosen by the British government. The cabinet would depend primarily on support by the colonial legislative assembly for its tenure of ministerial office. Decisions on foreign affairs and defense, however, would still be made by a governor-general acting on orders from the British government in London. The system whereby some colonies were allowed largely to manage their own affairs under governors appointed by the mother country spread rapidly. In 1847 it was put into effect in the colonies in Canada, and it was later extended to the Australian colonies, New Zealand, and to the Cape Colony and Natal in southern Africa. These colonies obtained such complete control over their internal affairs that in 1907 they were granted the new status of dominions. In 1910 another dominion, the Union of South Africa, was formed from the Cape Colony, Natal, and the former Boer republics of the Transvaal and the Orange Free State.

This select group of nations within the empire, with substantial European populations and long experience of British forms and practices, was often referred to as the British Commonwealth. The demands and stresses of World War I and its aftermath led to a more formal recognition of the special status of the dominions. When Britain had declared war on Germany in 1914 it was on behalf of the entire empire, the dominions as well as the colonies. But after World War I ended in 1918, the dominions signed the peace treaties for themselves and joined the newly formed League of Nations as independent states equal to Britain. In 1931 the Statute of Westminster recognized them as independent countries "within the British Empire, equal in status" to the United Kingdom. The statute referred specifically to the "British Commonwealth of Nations." When World War II broke out in 1939, the dominions made their own declarations of war.

The rest of the British Empire consisted for the most part of colonies and other dependencies whose predominant indigenous populations had no such experience. For them a variety of administrative techniques was tried, ranging from the sophisticated Indian Civil Service, with its largely effective adoption of native practices in civil law and administration, to the very loose and indirect supervision exercised in a number of African territories, where settlers and commercial interests were left much to themselves while native Africans were segregated into "reserves."

Nationalist sentiment developed rapidly in many of these areas after World War I and even more so after World War II, with the result that, beginning with India in 1947, independence was granted them, along with the option of retaining an association with Great Britain and other former dependencies in the Commonwealth of Nations (the adjective "British" was not used officially after 1946). Indian and Pakistani independence was followed by that of Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Burma (Myanmar) in 1948. The Gold Coast became the first sub-Saharan African colony to reach independence (as Ghana) in 1957. The movement of Britain's remaining colonies in Africa, Asia, and the Caribbean toward self-government gained speed in the years after 1960 as international pressure mounted (especially at the United Nations), as the notion of independence spread in the colonies themselves, and as the British public, which was no longer actively imperial in its sentiments, accepted the idea of independence as a foregone conclusion.

The last significant British colony, Hong Kong, was returned to Chinese sovereignty in 1997. By then, virtually nothing remained of the empire. The Commonwealth, however, remained a remarkably flexible and durable institution. See also colonialism.
The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
British Empire - Dominance, Dominions, Expansion

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
British Empire - Dominance, Dominions, Expansion: The 19th century marked the full flower of the British Empire. Administration and policy changed during the century from the haphazard arrangements of the 17th and 18th centuries to the sophisticated system characteristic of Joseph Chamberlain's tenure (1895-1900) in the Colonial Office.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
教皇葬礼川普又整活，仪式首次现中文？六分钟看懂教皇葬礼

# data[].attributes.body
1.都是主教

2.早期主教選舉並不特別神聖，基督徒本身也是非法存在

3.教宗的選舉制度慢慢在12-13世紀間定型

4.入教會是窮人翻身的方式之一

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
在西方，上帝的代言人也得选举？天主教教宗是如何产生的？

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Leopold II ( French: Léopold Louis Philippe Marie Victor; 9 April 1835 - 17 December 1909) was the second King of the Belgians from 1865 to 1909 and, through his own efforts, the owner and absolute ruler of the Congo Free State from 1885 to 1908.

Born in Brussels as the second but eldest surviving son of Leopold I and Louise of Orléans, he succeeded his father to the Belgian throne in 1865 and reigned for exactly 44 years until his death-the longest reign of any Belgian monarch. He died without surviving legitimate sons. The current Belgian king descends from his nephew and successor, Albert I.

Leopold was the founder and sole owner of the Congo Free State, a private project undertaken on his own behalf as a personal union with Belgium. He used Henry Morton Stanley to help him lay claim to the Congo, the present-day Democratic Republic of the Congo. At the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, the colonial nations of Europe authorized his claim and committed the Congo Free State to him. Leopold ran the Congo using the mercenary Force Publique for his personal gain. He extracted a fortune from the territory, initially by the collection of ivory, and after a rise in the price of natural rubber in the 1890s, by forced labour from the native population to harvest and process rubber.

Leopold's administration of the Congo Free State was characterized by atrocities and systematic brutality, including torture, murder, and the amputation of the hands of men, women, and children when the quota of rubber was not met. In 1890, George Washington Williams used the term " crimes against humanity" to describe the practices of Leopold II of Belgium's administration of the Congo Free State. Colonial accounts typically emphasized Leopold's modernizing changes in the Congo and not the mass death he facilitated.

These and other facts were established at the time by eyewitness testimony, on-site inspection by an international commission of inquiry, and the 1904 Casement Report. Modern estimates range from 1 million to 15 million Congolese deaths, with a consensus growing around 10 million. Some historians argue against these figures, citing the lack of reliable censuses, the enormous mortality caused by smallpox and African trypanosomiasis, and the fact that there were only 175 administrative agents in charge of rubber exploitation. In 1908, the reports of deaths and abuse and pressure from the Congo Reform Association and other international groups induced the Belgian government to take over the administration of the Congo from Leopold as a new territory, Belgian Congo.

Leopold was born in Brussels on 9 April 1835, the second child of the reigning Belgian monarch, Leopold I, and of his second wife, Louise, the daughter of King Louis Philippe of France. The French Revolution of 1848 forced his maternal grandfather, Louis Philippe to flee to the United Kingdom. His sister Charlotte became Empress Carlota of Mexico in the 1860s. The British monarch, Queen Victoria, was Leopold II's first cousin, since Leopold's father and Victoria's mother were brother and sister. Louis Philippe died two years later, in 1850. Leopold's fragile mother was deeply affected by the death of her father and her health deteriorated. She died of tuberculosis that same year, when Leopold was 15 years old.

At the age of 18, Leopold married Marie Henriette of Austria, a cousin of Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria and granddaughter of the late Holy Roman Emperor Leopold II, on 22 August 1853 in Brussels. Lively and energetic, Marie Henriette endeared herself to the people by her character and benevolence. Her beauty earned her the sobriquet "The Rose of Brabant". She was also an accomplished artist and musician. She was passionate about horseback riding, to the point that she would care for her horses personally. Some joked about this "marriage of a stableman and a nun", the latter referring to the shy and withdrawn Leopold.

The marriage produced four children: three daughters and one son, Prince Leopold, Duke of Brabant. The younger Leopold died in 1869 at the age of nine from pneumonia after falling into a pond. His death was a source of great sorrow for King Leopold. The marriage became unhappy, and the couple separated after a last attempt to have another son, a union that resulted in the birth of their last daughter, Clementine. Marie Henriette retreated to Spa in 1895, and died there in 1902.

Leopold had many mistresses. In 1899, in his 65th year, Leopold took as a mistress Caroline Lacroix, a 16-year-old French prostitute, and they remained together for the next decade until his death. Leopold lavished upon her large sums of money, estates, gifts, and a noble title, Baroness de Vaughan. Owing to these gifts and the unofficial nature of their relationship, Caroline became deeply unpopular among the Belgian people and internationally. She and Leopold married secretly in a religious ceremony five days before his death. Their failure to perform a civil ceremony rendered the marriage invalid under Belgian law. After the king's death, it soon emerged that he had left Caroline a large fortune, which the Belgian government and Leopold's three estranged daughters tried to seize as rightfully theirs. Caroline bore two sons, probably fathered by Leopold.

As Leopold's older brother, the earlier crown prince Louis Philippe, had died the year before Leopold's birth, Leopold was heir to the throne from his birth. When he was 9 years old, Leopold received the title of Duke of Brabant, and was appointed a sub-lieutenant in the army. He served in the army until his accession in 1865, by which time he had reached the rank of lieutenant-general.

Leopold's public career began on his attaining the age of majority in 1855, when he became a member of the Belgian Senate. He took an active interest in the senate, especially in matters concerning the development of Belgium and its trade, and began to urge Belgium's acquisition of colonies. Leopold traveled abroad extensively from 1854 to 1865, visiting India, China, Egypt, and the countries on the Mediterranean coast of Africa. His father died on 10 December 1865, and Leopold took the oath of office on 17 December, at the age of 30.

Leopold became king in 1865. He explained his goal for his reign in an 1888 letter addressed to his brother, Prince Philippe, Count of Flanders: "the country must be strong, prosperous, therefore have colonies of her own, beautiful and calm."

Leopold's reign was marked by a number of major political developments. The Liberals governed Belgium from 1857 to 1880, and during its final year in power legislated the Frère-Orban Law of 1879. This law created free, secular, compulsory primary schools supported by the state and withdrew all state support from Roman Catholic primary schools. The Catholic Party obtained a parliamentary majority in 1880, and four years later restored state support to Catholic schools. In 1885, various socialist and social democratic groups drew together and formed the Labour Party. Increasing social unrest and the rise of the Labour Party forced the adoption of universal male suffrage in 1893.

During Leopold's reign other social changes were enacted into law. Among these were the right of workers to form labour unions and the abolition of the livret d'ouvrier, an employment record book. Laws against child labour were passed. Children younger than 12 were not allowed to work in factories, children younger than 16 were not allowed to work at night, and women younger than 21 years old were not allowed to work underground. Workers gained the right to be compensated for workplace accidents and were given Sundays off.

The first revision of the Belgian constitution came in 1893. Universal male suffrage was introduced, though the effect of this was tempered by plural voting. The eligibility requirements for the senate were reduced, and elections would be based on a system of proportional representation, which continues to this day. Leopold pushed strongly to enable a royal referendum, whereby the king would have the power to consult the electorate directly on an issue, and use his veto according to the results of the referendum. The proposal was rejected, as it would have given the king the power to override the elected government. Leopold was so disappointed that he considered abdication.

Leopold emphasized military defence as the basis of neutrality, and strove to make Belgium less vulnerable militarily. He achieved the construction of defensive fortresses at Liège, at Namur and at Antwerp. During the Franco-Prussian War, he managed to preserve Belgium's neutrality in a period of unusual difficulty and danger. Leopold pushed for a reform in military service, but he was unable to obtain one until he was on his deathbed. The Belgian army was a combination of volunteers and a lottery, and it was possible for men to pay for substitutes for service. This was replaced by a system in which one son in every family would have to serve in the military.

Leopold commissioned a great number of buildings, urban projects and public works, largely with the profits generated from exploitation of the Congo Free State. These projects earned him the epithet of "Builder King" (Dutch: Koning-Bouwheer, French: Roi-Bâtisseur). The public buildings were mainly in Brussels, Ostend and Antwerp, and include the Hippodrome Wellington racetrack, the Royal Galleries and Maria Hendrikapark in Ostend; the Royal Museum for Central Africa and its surrounding park in Tervuren; the Cinquantenaire/Jubelpark park, memorial arcade and complex, and the Duden Park in Brussels, and the 1895-1905 Antwerpen-Centraal railway station.

In addition to his public works, he acquired and built numerous private properties for himself inside and outside Belgium. He expanded the grounds of the Royal Castle of Laeken, and built the Royal Greenhouses, as well as the Japanese Tower and the Chinese Pavilion near the palace (now the Museums of the Far East). In the Ardennes, his domains consisted of 6,700 hectares (17,000 acres) of forests and agricultural lands and the châteaux of Ardenne, Ciergnon, Fenffe, Villers-sur-Lesse and Ferage. He also built important country estates on the French Riviera, including the Villa des Cèdres and its botanical garden, and the Villa Leopolda.

Thinking of the future after his death, Leopold did not want the collection of estates, lands and heritage buildings he had privately amassed to be scattered among his daughters, each of whom was married to a foreign prince. In 1900 he created the Royal Trust, by means of which he donated most of his properties to the Belgian nation in perpetuity, and arranged for the royal family to continue using them after his death.

On 15 November 1902, Italian anarchist Gennaro Rubino attempted to assassinate Leopold, who was riding in a royal cortege from a ceremony at Saint-Gudule Cathedral in memory of his recently deceased wife, Marie Henriette. After Leopold's carriage passed, Rubino fired three shots at the procession. The shots missed Leopold but almost killed the king's Grand Marshall, Count Charles John d'Oultremont. Rubino was immediately arrested and subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment. He died in prison in 1918.

The king replied after the attack to a senator: "My dear senator, if fate wants me shot, too bad!" ("Mon cher Sénateur, si la fatalité veut que je sois atteint, tant pis"!) After the failed regicide the security of the king was questioned, because the glass of the landaus was 2 cm thick. Elsewhere in Europe, the news of this assassination attempt was received with alarm. Heads of state and the pope sent telegrams to the king congratulating him for surviving the assassination attempt.

The Belgians rejoiced that the king was safe. Later in the day, in the Théâtre Royal de la Monnaie before Tristan und Isolde was performed, the orchestra played the Brabançonne, which was sung loudly and ended with loud cheers and applause.

Leopold was the founder and sole owner of the Congo Free State, a private project undertaken on his own behalf. He used explorer Henry Morton Stanley to help him lay claim to the Congo, an area now known as the Democratic Republic of the Congo. At the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885, the colonial nations of Europe authorised his claim by committing the Congo Free State to improving the lives of the people.

From the beginning, Leopold ignored these conditions. Millions of Congolese inhabitants, including children, were mutilated, killed or died from disease during his rule.: 115, 118, 127  He ran the Congo using the mercenary Force Publique for his personal enrichment. Failure to meet rubber collection quotas was punishable by death. Meanwhile, the Force Publique were required to provide the hand of their victims as proof when they had shot and killed someone, as it was believed that they would otherwise use the munitions (imported from Europe at considerable cost) for hunting. As a consequence, the rubber quotas were in part paid off in chopped-off hands.

Leopold extracted a fortune from the Congo, initially by the collection of ivory, and after a rise in the price of rubber in the 1890s, by forced labour from the people to harvest and process rubber. Under his regime millions of Congolese people died. Modern estimates range from one million to fifteen million, with a consensus growing around 10 million. Several historians argue against this figure due to the absence of reliable censuses, the enormous mortality of diseases such as smallpox or sleeping sickness and the fact that there were only 175 administrative agents in charge of rubber exploitation.

Reports of deaths and abuse led to a major international scandal in the early 20th century, and Leopold was forced by the Belgian government to relinquish control of the colony to the civil administration in 1908.

Leopold fervently believed that overseas colonies were the key to a country's greatness, and he worked tirelessly to acquire colonial territory for Belgium. He envisioned "our little Belgium" as the capital of a large overseas empire. Leopold eventually began to acquire a colony as a private citizen. The Belgian government lent him money for this venture.

During his reign, Leopold saw the empires of the Netherlands, Portugal, and Spain as being in a state of decline and expressed interest in buying their territories. In 1866, Leopold instructed the Belgian ambassador in Madrid to speak to Queen Isabella II of Spain about ceding the Philippines to Belgium. Knowing the situation fully, the ambassador did nothing. Leopold quickly replaced the ambassador with a more sympathetic individual to carry out his plan. In 1868, when Isabella II was deposed as queen of Spain, Leopold tried to press his original plan to acquire the Philippines. But without funds, he was unsuccessful. Leopold then devised another unsuccessful plan to establish the Philippines as an independent state, which could then be ruled by a Belgian. When both of these plans failed, Leopold shifted his aspirations of colonisation to Africa.

After numerous unsuccessful schemes to acquire colonies in Africa and Asia, in 1876 Leopold organized a private holding company disguised as an international scientific and philanthropic association, which he called the International African Society, or the International Association for the Exploration and Civilization of the Congo. In 1878, under the auspices of the holding company, he hired explorer Henry Stanley to explore and establish a colony in the Congo region. Much diplomatic maneuvering among European nations resulted in the Berlin Conference of 1884-1885 regarding African affairs, at which representatives of 14 European countries and the United States recognized Leopold as sovereign of most of the area to which he and Stanley had laid claim. On 5 February 1885, the Congo Free State, an area 76 times larger than Belgium, was established under Leopold II's personal rule and private army, the Force Publique.

Lado Enclave

In 1894, King Leopold signed a treaty with Great Britain which conceded a strip of land on the Congo Free State's eastern border in exchange for the Lado Enclave, which provided access to the navigable Nile and extended the Free State's sphere of influence northwards into Sudan. After rubber profits soared in 1895, Leopold ordered the organization of an expedition into the Lado Enclave, which had been overrun by Mahdist rebels since the outbreak of the Mahdist War in 1881. The expedition was composed of two columns: the first, under Belgian Baron Dhanis, consisted of a sizable force, numbering around 3,000, and was to strike north through the jungle and attack the rebels at their base at Rejaf. The second, a much smaller force of 800, was led by Louis-Napoléon Chaltin and took the main road towards Rejaf. Both expeditions set out in December 1896.

Although Leopold had initially planned for the expedition to carry on much farther than the Lado Enclave, hoping indeed to take Fashoda and then Khartoum, Dhanis' column mutinied in February 1897, resulting in the death of several Belgian officers and the loss of his entire force. Nonetheless, Chaltin continued his advance, and on 17 February 1897, his outnumbered forces defeated the rebels in the Battle of Rejaf, securing the Lado Enclave as a Belgian territory until Leopold's death in 1909.

Exploitation, atrocities, and death toll

Leopold amassed a huge personal fortune by exploiting the natural resources of the Congo[citation needed ]. At first, ivory was exported, but this did not yield the expected levels of revenue. When the global demand for rubber exploded, attention shifted to the labor-intensive collection of sap from rubber plants. Abandoning the promises of the Berlin Conference in the late 1890s, the Free State government restricted foreign access and extorted forced labor from the natives. Abuses, especially in the rubber industry, included forced labour of the native population, beatings, widespread killings, and frequent mutilation when production quotas were not met. Missionary John Harris of Baringa was so shocked by what he had encountered that he wrote to Leopold's chief agent in the Congo, saying:

I have just returned from a journey inland to the village of Insongo Mboyo. The abject misery and utter abandon is positively indescribable. I was so moved, Your Excellency, by the people's stories that I took the liberty of promising them that in future you will only kill them for crimes they commit.

Estimates of the death toll range from one million to fifteen million, since accurate records were not kept. Historians Louis and Stengers in 1968 stated that population figures at the start of Leopold's control are only "wild guesses", and that attempts by E. D. Morel and others to determine a figure for the loss of population were "but figments of the imagination".

Adam Hochschild devotes a chapter of his book King Leopold's Ghost to the problem of estimating the death toll. He cites several recent lines of investigation, by anthropologist Jan Vansina and others, that examine local sources (police records, religious records, oral traditions, genealogies, personal diaries, and "many others"), which generally agree with the assessment of the 1919 Belgian government commission: roughly half the population perished during the Free State period. Hochschild points out that since the first official census by the Belgian authorities in 1924 put the population at about 10 million, these various approaches suggest a rough estimate of a population decline by 10 million.

Smallpox epidemics and sleeping sickness also devastated the disrupted population. By 1896, African trypanosomiasis had killed up to 5,000 Africans in the village of Lukolela on the Congo River. The mortality statistics were collected through the efforts of British consul Roger Casement, who found, for example, only 600 survivors of the disease in Lukolela in 1903.

Inspired by works such as Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness (1902), originally published as a three-part series in Blackwood's Magazine (1899) and based on Conrad's experience as a steamer captain on the Congo 12 years earlier, international criticism of Leopold's rule increased and mobilized. Reports of outrageous exploitation and widespread human rights abuses led the British Crown to appoint their consul Roger Casement to investigate conditions there. His extensive travels and interviews in the region resulted in the Casement Report, which detailed the extensive abuses under Leopold's regime. A widespread war of words ensued. In Britain, former shipping clerk E. D. Morel with Casement's support founded the Congo Reform Association, the first mass human rights movement. Supporters included American writer Mark Twain, whose stinging political satire entitled King Leopold's Soliloquy portrays the king arguing that bringing Christianity to the country outweighs a little starvation, and uses many of Leopold's own words against him.

Writer Arthur Conan Doyle also criticised the "rubber regime" in his 1908 work The Crime of the Congo, written to aid the work of the Congo Reform Association. Doyle contrasted Leopold's rule with British rule in Nigeria, arguing that decency required those who ruled primitive peoples to be concerned first with their uplift, not how much could be extracted from them. As Hochschild describes in King Leopold's Ghost, many of Leopold's policies, in particular those of colonial monopolies and forced labour, were influenced by Dutch practice in the East Indies. Similar methods of forced labour were employed to some degree by Germany, France, and Portugal where natural rubber occurred in their own colonies.

International opposition and criticism from the Catholic Party, Progressive Liberals and the Labour Party caused the Belgian parliament to compel the king to cede the Congo Free State to Belgium in 1908. The deal that led to the handover cost Belgium the considerable sum of 215.5 million Francs. This was used to discharge the debt of the Congo Free State and to pay out its bond holders as well as 45.5 million for Leopold's pet building projects in Belgium and a personal payment of 50 million to him. The Congo Free State was transformed into a Belgian colony known as the Belgian Congo under parliamentary control. Leopold went to great lengths to conceal potential evidence of wrongdoing during his time as ruler of his private colony. The entire archive of the Congo Free State was burned and he told his aide that even though the Congo had been taken from him, "they have no right to know what I did there".

The Congo was given independence in 1960.

On 17 December 1909, Leopold II died at Laeken, and the Belgian crown passed to Albert I, the son of Leopold's brother, Philippe, Count of Flanders. His funeral cortege was booed by the crowd in expression of disapproval of his rule of the Congo. Leopold's reign of exactly 44 years remains the longest in Belgian history. He was interred in the royal vault at the Church of Our Lady of Laeken.

Attention to the Congo atrocities subsided in the years after Leopold's death. Statues of him were erected in the 1930s at the initiative of Albert I, while the Belgian government celebrated his accomplishments in Belgium. The debate over Leopold's legacy was reignited in 1999 with the publication of King Leopold's Ghost by American historian Adam Hochschild, which recounts Leopold's plan to acquire the colony, the exploitation, and the large death toll. The debate then periodically resurfaced over the following 20 years.

In 2010, Louis Michel, a Belgian member of the European Parliament and former Belgian foreign minister, called Leopold II a "visionary hero." According to Michel, "To use the word 'genocide' in relation to the Congo is absolutely unacceptable and inappropriate. ... maybe colonisation was domineering and acquiring more power, but at a certain moment, it brought civilisation." Michel's remarks were countered by several Belgian politicians. Senator Pol Van Den Driessche replied, "[A] great visionary? Absolutely not. What happened then was shameful. If we measured him against 21st century standards, it is likely that Leopold would be hauled before the International Criminal Court in The Hague."

In June 2020, a Black Lives Matter demonstration in Brussels protested the murder of George Floyd, causing Leopold II's legacy to become once again the subject of debate. MPs agreed to set up a parliamentary commission to examine Belgium's colonial past, a step likened to the Truth and Reconciliation Committee set up in South Africa after the apartheid regime was abolished. On 30 June, the 60th anniversary of the Democratic Republic of the Congo's independence, King Philippe released a statement expressing his "deepest regret" for the wounds of the colonial past, and the "acts of violence and cruelty committed" in the Congo during colonisation but did not explicitly mention Leopold's role in the atrocities. Some activists accused him of not making a full apology.

Leopold II remains a controversial figure in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In the capital Kinshasa (known until 1966 as Leopoldville in his honor) his statue was removed after independence. Congolese culture minister Christophe Muzungu decided to reinstate the statue in 2005. He noted that the beginning of the Free State had been a time of some economic and social progress. He argued that people should recognize some positive aspects of the king as well as the negative, but hours after the six-metre (20ft) statue was installed near Kinshasa's central station, it was officially removed.

Several statues have been erected to honour the legacy of Leopold II in Belgium. According to Professor of Colonial History Idesbald Goddeeris of Leuven University (2018), most of the statues date from the interwar period, the peak of colonial-patriotic propaganda. The monuments were supposed to help get rid of the scandal after international commotion about the atrocities in the Congo Free State during Leopold II's rule, and to raise people's enthusiasm for the colonial enterprise in Belgian Congo.

Leopold's controversial regime in the Congo Free State has motivated proposals for these statues to be removed. During the international George Floyd protests against racism (May - July 2020), several statues of Leopold II were vandalised, and petitions calling for the removal of some or all statues were signed by tens of thousands of Belgians. Other petitions, also signed by tens of thousands, called for the statues to remain.

In early June 2020, a majority in the Brussels Parliament requested a committee to be set up to 'decolonise the public sphere' in the Brussels Capital Region. From 9 June 2020 onwards, authorities in Belgium gave way to public pressure and began removing some of the statues of Leopold, beginning with ones in Ekeren in the municipality of Antwerp and in the Warocqué Faculty of Economics and Management of the University of Mons on that day.

Leopold's sister became the Empress Carlota of Mexico. His first cousins included both Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom and her husband Prince Albert, as well as King Fernando II of Portugal.

He had four children with Queen Marie Henriette, of whom the youngest two have descendants living as of 2018:

Princess Louise of Belgium, born in Brussels on 18 February 1858, and died at Wiesbaden on 1 March 1924. She married Prince Philipp of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha on 4 February 1875, they had two children and divorced on 15 January 1906.

Prince Leopold, Duke of Brabant, Count of Hainaut (as eldest son of the heir apparent), later Duke of Brabant (as heir apparent), born at Laeken on 12 June 1859, and died at Laeken on 22 January 1869, from pneumonia, after falling into a pond.

Princess Stéphanie of Belgium, born at Laeken on 21 May 1864, and died at the Archabbey of Pannonhalma in Győr-Moson-Sopron, Hungary, on 23 August 1945. She married (1) Crown Prince Rudolf of Austria, the heir apparent to the throne of Austria-Hungary . In 1889, he died in a suicide pact with his mistress, Baroness Mary Vetsera, at the Mayerling hunting lodge. Stéphanie's second husband was (2) Elemér Edmund Graf Lónyay de Nagy-Lónya et Vásáros-Namény (created, in 1917, Prince Lónyay de Nagy-Lónya et Vásáros-Namény).

Princess Clémentine of Belgium, born at Laeken on 30 July 1872, and died at Nice on 8 March 1955. She married Prince Napoléon Victor Jérôme Frédéric Bonaparte (1862-1926), head of the Bonaparte family. The current head of the Imperial family, Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoléon is a direct descendant of King Leopold II.

Leopold also fathered two sons by Caroline Lacroix. They were adopted in 1910 by Lacroix's second husband, Antoine Durrieux. Leopold granted them courtesy titles that were honorary, as the parliament would not have supported any official act or decree:

Lucien Philippe Marie Antoine (9 February 1906 - 1984), duke of Tervuren

Philippe Henri Marie François (16 October 1907 - 21 August 1914), count of Ravenstein

1. Hochschild, A. ^ King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror and Heroism in Colonial Africa. Houghton Mifflin, 1999. pp. 111-112

2. ^ "Controverse over standbeelden van Leopold II: Waarom is de Belgische koning zo omstreden?". 5 June 2020.

3. Jean Stengers. "Critique de Livre de Hochschild" (PDF) (in French).

4. Sophie Mignon (22 December 2015). "Non, Léopold II n'est pas un génocidaire!" (in French).

5. ^ One or more of the preceding sentences incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Chisholm, Hugh, ed. (1911). "Leopold II., King of the Belgians". Encyclopædia Britannica. Vol. 16 (11th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 461.

6. ^ (in French) " mariage d'un palefrenier et d'une religieuse "

7. "Leopold II". The Belgian Monarchy.

8. (in French) " la patrie doit être forte, prospère, par conséquent posséder des débouchés à elle, belle et calme. " ^ The King to the Count of Flanders, 26 January 1888; The Count of Flanders's papers.

9. ^ Stengers, Jean (2008). L'action du Roi en Belgique depuis 1831: pouvoir et influence [The action of the King in Belgium since 1831: power and influence] (in French) (3rd ed.). Brussels: Racine. pp. 123-24. ISBN 978-2-87386-567-2.

10. Meuse (La) 17 November 1902

11. ^ Ewans, Sir Martin (2017). European Atrocity, African Catastrophe: Leopold II, the Congo Free State and its Aftermath. Abingdon, England: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315829173. ISBN 978-1317849070.

12. ^ Jalata, Asafa (March 2013). "Colonial Terrorism, Global Capitalism and African Underdevelopment: 500 Years of Crimes Against African Peoples". Journal of Pan African Studies. 5 (9). ISSN 0888-6601.

13. ^ Stanley, Tim (October 2012). "Belgium's Heart of Darkness". History Today. 62 (10): 49. ISSN 0018-2753.

14. ^ Hochschild, Adam (1998). King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror and Heroism in Colonial Africa. Mariner. ISBN 978-0-330-49233-1. OCLC 50527720.

15. ^ Ocampo, Ambeth (2009). Looking Back. Mandaluyong, Philippines: Anvil Publishing. pp. 54-57. ISBN 978-971-27-2336-0.

16. Roger Louis, William (2006). ^ Ends of British Imperialism. I.B. Tauris. ISBN 978-1-84511-347-6. p. 68.

17. Charles de Kavanagh Boulger, Demetrius (1898). ^ The Congo State: Or, The Growth of Civilisation in Central Africa. Congo: W. Thacker & Company. ISBN 0-217-57889-6. p. 214.

18. Pakenham, Thomas (1992). ^ The Scramble for Africa. Avon Books. ISBN 978-0-380-71999-0. pp. 525-26.

19. ^ "Lado Enclave". Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica, inc. 19 July 2011.

20. Neal Ascherson, ^ The King Incorporated: Leopold the Second and the Congo (Granta Books, 1999)

21. Dummett, Mark (24 February 2004). "King Leopold's legacy of DR Congo violence". BBC.

22. ^ Forbath, Peter (1977). The River Congo: The Discovery, Exploration and Exploitation of the World's Most Dramatic Rivers. Harper & Row. p. 278. ISBN 978-0-06-122490-4.

23. ^ Wertham, Fredric (1968). A Sign For Cain: An Exploration of Human Violence. ISBN 978-0-7091-0232-8.[page needed ]

24. ^ Louis, William Roger; Stengers, Jean (1968). E. D. Morel's History of the Congo Reform Movement. London: Clarendon. pp. 252-57. OCLC 685226763.

25. ^ Guy Vanthemsche (2012). Belgium and the Congo, 1885-1980. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521194211.

26. ^ "The 'Leopold II' concession system exported to French Congo with as example the Mpoko Company" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 27 March 2009.

27. ^ "Le rapport Casement annoté par A. Schorochoff" (PDF). Royal Union for Overseas Colonies.

28. ^ "Time". 16 May 1955. Archived from the original on 21 December 2007.

29. ^

30. ^ Jeremy Harding (20 September 1998). "Into Africa". New York Times. Archived from the original on 13 September 2001. a superb synoptic history of European misdemeanor in central Africa

31. ^ Michiko Kakutani (1 September 1998). "Genocide With Spin Control". The New York Times. Archived from the original on 18 April 2001. Hochschild has stitched it together into a vivid, novelistic narrative

32. ^ Luc Sante (27 September 1998). "Leopold's Heart of Darkness". San Francisco Chronicle. 'King Leopold's Ghost' is an absorbing and horrifying account

33. ^ Godwin Rapando Murunga (1999). "King Leopold's Ghost (review)". African Studies Quarterly. 3 (2). Archived from the original on 18 June 2012. King Leopold's Ghost tells the story of the Congo with fresh and critical insights, bringing new analysis to this topic.

34. Phillips, Leigh (22 June 2010). "Ex-commissioner calls Congo's colonial master a 'visionary hero'". EU Observer.

35. ^ "King Leopold II ruled Congo as a private slave state and brutal legacy is finally acknowledged". 26 June 2020.

36. ^ Vasagar, Jeevan (4 February 2005). "Leopold reigns for a day in Kinshasa". The Guardian.

37. ^ Yolan Devriendt (2018). "Belgische koloniale geschiedenis in het katholiek middelbaar onderwijs: vergeten verhaal of kritisch discours?" (PDF) (in Dutch). Ghent University. p. 13.

38. As documented in several autograph letters by the two unfortunate lovers ^ ANSA newsbrief (in Italian)

39. ^ "Le Petit Gotha"

Ascherson, Neal: The King Incorporated, Allen & Unwin, 1963. ISBN 1-86207-290-6 (1999 Granta edition).

Aronson, Theo: Defiant Dynasty: The Coburgs of Belgium, Bobbs-Merrill, 1968.

Emerson, Barbara: Leopold II of the Belgians, Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 1979, ISBN 0-297-77569-3.

Hochschild, Adam: King Leopold's Ghost: A Story of Greed, Terror, and Heroism in Colonial Africa, Mariner Books, 1998. ISBN 0-330-49233-0.

Petringa, Maria: Brazza, A Life for Africa, 2006. ISBN 978-1-4259-1198-0

Wm. Roger Louis and Jean Stengers: E.D. Morel's History of the Congo Reform Movement, Clarendon Press Oxford, 1968.

Ó Síocháin, Séamas and Michael O'Sullivan, eds: The Eyes of Another Race: Roger Casement's Congo Report and 1903 Diary. University College Dublin Press, 2004. ISBN 1-900621-99-1.

Ó Síocháin, Séamas: Roger Casement: Imperialist, Rebel, Revolutionary. Dublin: Lilliput Press, 2008.

Roes, Aldwin (2010). "Towards a History of Mass Violence in the Etat Indépendant du Congo, 1885-1908" (PDF). South African Historical Journal. 62 (4): 634-70. doi:10.1080/02582473.2010.519937. S2CID 144843155.

Stanard, Matthew G. Selling the Congo: A history of European pro-empire propaganda and the making of Belgian imperialism (U of Nebraska Press, 2012)

Vanthemsche, Guy (2012). Belgium and the Congo, 1885-1980 (Cambridge UP, ISBN 978-0521194211).

Vanthemsche, Guy (2006) 'The historiography of Belgian colonialism in the Congo" in C Levai ed., Europe and the World in European Historiography (Pisa University Press), pp. 89-119. online

Viaene, Vincent. "King Leopold's imperialism and the origins of the Belgian colonial party, 1860-1905." Journal of Modern History 80.4 (2008): 741-90.

Archive Léopold II, Royal museum of central Africa

Official biography from the Belgian Royal Family website

"The Political Economy of Power" Interview with political scientist Bruce Bueno de Mesquita, with a discussion of Leopold halfway through

Interview with King Leopold II Publishers' Press, 1906

Mass crimes against humanity in the Congo Free State

Congo: White king, red rubber, black death A 2003 documentary by Peter Bate on Leopold II and the Congo

The Crime of the Congo, 1909, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Archive.org

Grant, Kevin (2001). "Christian critics of empire: Missionaries, lantern lectures, and the Congo reform campaign in Britain". The Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History. 29 (2): 27-58. doi:10.1080/03086530108583118. S2CID 159607969.

Peffer, John (2008). "Snap of the Whip/Crossroads of Shame: Flogging, Photography, and the Representation of Atrocity in the Congo Reform Campaign". Visual Anthropology Review. 24: 55-77. doi:10.1111/j.1548-7458.2008.00005.x.

van den Braembussche, Antoon (2002). "The Silence of Belgium: Taboo and Trauma in Belgian Memory". Yale French Studies (102): 34-52. doi:10.2307/3090591. JSTOR 3090591.

Weisbord, Robert G. (2003). "The King, the Cardinal and the Pope: Leopold II's genocide in the Congo and the Vatican". Journal of Genocide Research. 5: 35-45. doi:10.1080/14623520305651. S2CID 73371517.

Langbein, John H. (January 1976). "The Historical Origins of the Sanction of Imprisonment for Serious Crime". The Journal of Legal Studies. 5 (1): 35-60. doi:10.1086/467543. JSTOR 724073. S2CID 29172387.

Gewald, Jan-Bart (2006). "More than Red Rubber and Figures Alone: A Critical Appraisal of the Memory of the Congo Exhibition at the Royal Museum for Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium". The International Journal of African Historical Studies. 39 (3): 471-86. JSTOR 40034827.

Pavlakis, Dean (2010). "The Development of British Overseas Humanitarianism and the Congo Reform Campaign". Journal of Colonialism and Colonial History. 11 (1). doi:10.1353/cch.0.0102. S2CID 162285976.

Newspaper clippings about Leopold II of Belgium in the 20th Century Press Archives of the ZBW

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leopold II ( French: Léopold Louis Philippe Marie Victor; 9 April 1835 - 17 December 1909) was the second King of the Belgians from 1865 to 1909 and, through his own efforts, the owner and absolute ruler of the Congo Free State from 1885 to 1908.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
一、 《奧本海默》的故事時間線

換句話說，電影是以類倒敘的方式進行，但實際上兩件事（安全聽證會與提名聽證會）也並非同時發生。

此處電影利用彩色呈現奧本海默的主觀視角，與黑白畫面呈現奧本海默的旁觀視角（或史特勞斯的主觀視角）；簡而言之，彩色畫面即自奧本海默在1954年的安全聽證會出發，黑白畫面則是史特勞斯在1959年的提名聽證會出發，兩起會議相差五年之久。

「核分裂」亦指較重（即原子序數較大）的原子，如「鈾」（Uranium，化學符號U，原子序為92）或「鈽」（Plutonium，化學符號Pu，原子序為94），其原子經由中子撞擊後分裂成為兩個較輕（即原子序數較小）的原子，並同時再釋放出更多中子去撞擊更多重原子，這種反應會形成「連鎖反應」，也就是一個變兩個，兩個變四個，一直不斷繼續下去，同時會釋放出伽瑪射線並產出巨大能量，這就是 原子彈或是商用核電廠最常見的原理。而原子彈和核電廠的差別，便是能不能有效控制連鎖反應。

至於「核融合」的概念是「核分裂」的相反；是指兩個較輕（即原子序數較小）的原子，利用強大能量融合成較重（即原子序較大）的原子；一般而言使用氫（Hydrogen，化學符號H，原子序為1）的同位素，氘（Deuterium，即氫原子核裡多了一顆中子）以及氚（Tritium，即氫原子裡多了兩顆中子），兩種元素透過外部能量（通常是高溫，甚至是利用核分裂的原子彈）來聚合在一起。 「核融合」目前並沒有找到能夠有效控制其反應的機制，因此無法作為商用核電廠使用，但人類已製造出「氫彈」，也就是威力比原子彈更大，使用核融合原理的核子武器。

回到電影，「分裂」和「融合」的意義除了是暗示奧本海默研發原子彈採用「核分裂」原理，以及史特勞斯在二戰後支持美國發展氫彈，採用「核融合」原理之外，同時也代表著人類發展核武器的進程；簡單而言，這就是電影在劇情最後奧本海默極力反對國際軍備競賽的擔憂，因為人類在追求恫嚇武力的同時，也害怕自己的武器敵不過別人，因此就發展出更具威力的武器來恫嚇對方，這似乎與「氫彈」利用「原子彈」啟動的概念相呼應；同時，也對比到1954年的奧本海默安全聽證會，也影響了後來1959年的史特勞斯提名聽證會。

1926年，英國劍橋大學 - 卡文迪許實驗室

這起毒蘋果事件情節來自於本片改編的原著書籍內容；書中描述他的老師差點吃了這顆毒蘋果，但電影裡是呈現來劍橋大學學術交流的波耳不小心吃到毒蘋果。不論是老師還是波耳，根據奧本海默的孫子 查爾斯奧本海默，近期向時代雜誌透露，就連原著作者也不知道有沒有發生毒蘋果事件，書中只是引述了兩、三人的口述，但並沒有直接證據證明奧本海默曾經做過這件事。

哥廷根大學是當時引領理論物理的重要學府，奧本海默在那裡和著名的科學家見面，包括在電影中出現的海森堡（Werner Heisenberg, 1901~1976）、包立（Wolfgang Pauli, 1900~1958）、費米（Enrico Fermi, 1901~1954）、愛德華泰勒（Edward Teller, 1908~2003）等。

但是不管是波耳還是毒蘋果事件，都是電影或書籍給予奧本海默前往德國求學的理由；事實上，較為可信的歷史事實為片中從波耳口中提及的德國理論物理學家 （Max Born, 1882~1970），以學術交流為由在劍橋大學與奧本海默有機會見面，因此建議不擅長做實驗的奧本海默前往哥廷根大學深探理論物理學；而後來奧本海默在哥廷根大學也確實受馬克思玻恩指導，最後與玻恩一同發表有關電子與原子核關係的論文，是為著名的 「玻恩-奧本海默近似法」（Born-Oppenheimer approximation，又稱BO近似）。

有趣的是，在真實歷史中，海森堡在二戰結束後連同其他德國科學家被同盟國軍隊俘虜，在二戰結束後一年重返哥廷根大學；他聲稱自己是在德國內部拖延納粹開發原子彈計畫；但這種說法不被一般科學界接受，因此也被稱之為「海森堡之謎」。

1928年，荷蘭萊頓大學 & 加州大學柏克萊分校
本篇專題文章將針對《奧本海默》的時間線按照真實歷史時間軸重新整理，並加入真實歷史事件的來龍去脈來解釋電影劇情細節；同時也會在當中加入名詞解釋、人物角色介紹，以及最後針對《奧本海默》這部電影的個人看法，希望能夠讓你在看完《奧本海默》這部電影之後能夠更加深刻，並深入了解本片所想要傳達的真正涵義。
奧本海默在進入哥廷根大學後，在短短一年內便取得物理學博士學位，當時他只有23歲。
當然，本篇文章含有暴雷成分（關鍵劇情），如果還沒有看過《奧本海默》這部電影的朋友請斟酌閱讀。
成為博士後的奧本海默，在1927年09月回到美國後便受到不少學校邀請；最後他在1927年上半學年於自己的母校哈佛大學教書，下半年則在加州理工任教；隔年，1928年他應荷蘭萊頓大學之邀講課。電影中也呈現了奧本海默在短短數週內便學會荷蘭語，甚至透過荷蘭語授課，讓不少人驚訝；有此一說，奧本海默的外語能力極強，一生當中會講29種語言，當然當中也包含了他對印度梵文充滿興趣，閱讀了不少經典書籍。

1930年代，經濟大蕭條、左派思想崛起 | 1936年，奧本海默與瓊塔特洛克相戀、西班牙內戰

瓊塔特洛克是一名精神科醫師，她在1930年代開始參與了政治立場偏左的激進組織，也認識了不少美國共產黨人士，奧本海默也在此時與她認識並接觸到共產黨員的活動。奧本海默和瓊塔特洛克在1936年相戀，期間奧本海默求婚兩次，但都被瓊拒絕；情緒不穩定、個性反覆的瓊讓奧本海默經歷了一場轟轟烈烈的戀愛，最後兩人在1939年分手。

此時共產黨或左派思想崛起，主因是 1929年爆發的華爾街大崩盤 ，全球經濟陷入空前的大蕭條時代；由於股市大崩盤發生前，縱使有種種跡象指出將有災難性的崩盤危機，但對資本主義至上的美國而言，自由市場會有一雙無形的手自動調節，因此放任銀行倒閉、股票變廢紙。有趣的是，1929年09月爆發的華爾街股災，平時不常閱讀報紙或注意時事的奧本海默，是在半年之後與勞倫斯在校園裡散步閒談才得知。 （可見奧本海默也不投資股票）

1936~1939年，西班牙內戰

歷史上並沒有直接的證據證明奧本海默公開加入過共產黨，但他和當時不少關心國際時事的知識分子時常聚會，捐贈財產給加州大學當作研究生獎學金，同時也有協助西班牙內戰的共和派組織募款。

是指發生於1936年至1939年期間，西班牙國內的共和派（共和軍和人民陣線），與西班牙獨裁者 （Francisco Franco, 1892~1975）所代表的國民軍、 （Falange Española）之間的內戰；這場戰爭被後世認為是第二次世界大戰的序章，也是因為西班牙國內左右派互相攻擊、政府改革失利而造成一發不可收拾的局面。

在這場戰爭期間，佛朗哥的右派陣營與當時的納粹德國、義大利合作，投入大量新型武器，最終取得這場內戰的勝利，進而帶領西班牙走向進入佛朗哥獨裁的時期；佛朗哥也因為反共的立場，讓他雖然在內戰期間與納粹德國合作，但在二戰結束後受到西方國家支持，讓他一直擔任西班牙攝政直到1975年過世為止。

有趣的是，當時受到納粹支持的佛朗哥，在二戰結束後因為反共的立場並沒有被西方世界清算，反而在冷戰時期被西方陣營所接納。他在獨裁統治期間名義上恢復西班牙王室統治權，實際上是挾王室之名行獨裁之實，但也因為他在1950年代末成功推動西班牙的經濟改革，讓他的一生毀譽參半。

1938年，愛因斯坦-西拉德信 & 核子武器發展競賽

1938年，德國化學家哈恩（Otto Hahn, 1879~1968）和施特拉斯曼（Fritz Straßmann, 1902~1980）發現「核分裂」現象，讓德國率先掌握核武器基礎，讓許多科學家相當憂心；隔年，匈牙利裔物理學家 （Leo Szilard, 1898~1964）、 （Eugene Wigner, 1902~1995）、 （Edward Teller, 1908~2003，電影中由班尼沙夫戴飾演）三人共同起草一封致美國總統羅斯福的信，最後交由愛因斯坦簽名並建議美國盡快展開對原子彈的研究，這就是美國展開「曼哈頓計畫」的原因，在電影中有特別提及。

但需要注意的是，雖然這封信最後由愛因斯坦簽名，但他並沒有直接參與信件內容的撰寫，以及後來的「曼哈頓計畫」。根據愛因斯坦本人的說法，他當時希望敦促美國製造原子彈，並在該信件上簽名，只是擔心納粹率先研發出原子彈。

1939年，第二次世界大戰爆發

理查托勒曼是一位擅長數學計算和統計的權威，他在愛因斯坦發表廣義相對論後繼續深化天文物理學的研究，也在後續「曼哈頓計畫」期間擔任科學顧問，是奧本海默在加州理工的同事。

1940年，奧本海默與凱薩琳結婚

當時凱薩琳和先生來到加州的帕薩迪納定居，凱薩琳則在加州大學洛杉磯分校當研究生，便在一場派對活動後與奧本海默發生一夜情；這段不倫戀最終因凱薩琳懷孕而曝光，在當時造成不少校內轟動。凱薩琳向丈夫提議離婚，但最初丈夫不肯；直到1940年秋天，凱薩琳才和哈里遜離婚，和奧本海默正式結婚。奧本海默成為凱薩琳的第四任丈夫。

然而，奧本海默並沒有因為和凱薩琳結婚後和瓊塔特洛克斷絕關係，反而在這段期間偶有聯絡；根據FBI對奧本海默的監控資料顯示，他至少在1943年前往當時苦於憂鬱症的瓊，並有過夜紀錄；但瓊塔特洛克最後在1944年01月04日自殺身亡，讓奧本海默十分悲痛。

在電影中，有不少場景都有暗示凱薩琳有嚴重的酗酒問題；事實上，凱薩琳確實是一個相當愛喝酒的人，甚至在1945年戰爭結束，奧本海默爆紅之後承受巨大壓力，而讓酗酒問題更加嚴重。他時常因為酒醉發生車禍或是跌倒而骨折，頻繁進出醫院。最後他在1972年10月27日於巴拿馬因肺栓塞過世，享壽62歲。

1942年，曼哈頓計畫

費米是一位來自義大利的科學家，他在1929年在羅馬大學任教期間被義大利獨裁者墨索里尼任命為義大利皇家科學院院士，同年加入法西斯黨；然而，當墨索里尼將義大利推向極端法西斯主義，並向納粹德國靠攏之際，他開始出面反對政府作為，使得他和幾位研究夥伴失業。為了逃離政局動盪的歐洲，他在1939年1月移居美國紐約，並開始在哥倫比亞大學任教。

由於奧本海默沒有獲得過諾貝爾獎，格羅夫斯和副官尼科爾斯在1942年10月與奧本海默在火車上見面討論，便決定讓他擔任計畫負責人；這個在火車上討論計畫內容以及建立實驗室的情節，也在電影中被呈現。

值得注意的是，在電影中呈現格羅夫斯第一次在柏克萊的教室中與奧本海默見面，軍銜為上校，也因此被奧本海默特別提出質疑，並讓當時的格羅夫斯說道：他會因為主持這個計劃而得到將軍的頭銜。事實上，早在1942年09月格羅夫斯正式接管「曼哈頓計畫」後便被晉升為准將（一顆星），隨後一步步升官成為少將（兩顆星），最終他在1948年退休時為中將（三顆星）。因此，可以注意到電影中旁人對格羅夫斯的稱呼，從最初的上校，到曼哈頓計畫執行期間被稱呼為少將，最後在安全聽證會時被稱呼為中將。

1943年，洛斯阿拉莫斯國家實驗室

洛斯阿拉莫斯國家實驗室（Los Alamos National Laboratory, LANL），是「曼哈頓計畫」中的「Y計畫」重要的建設；由於「曼哈頓計畫」的研究單位涉及規模廣大，大多都分散在美國各地的大學，因此在奧本海默的建議之下，找到他在年輕時時常造訪的新墨西哥洛斯阿拉莫斯牧場，作為計畫的主要研究設施。

事實上，有關洛斯阿拉莫斯這個地點的歷史，可以回溯至奧本海默在1928年回到美國應加州大學柏克萊分校任教之際；他在返回美國後不久便染上肺結核，他和弟弟法蘭克在新墨西哥州的一個農場中休養，最後慢慢愛上了這塊土地。最初兩人只是租用這個農場，最後直接買下來當作他們時常放鬆度假的地方。

由於「曼哈頓計畫」屬於高度機密的國家計畫，洛斯阿拉莫斯國家實驗室規劃為一個與世隔絕的機構，裡頭除了研究機構外，還設有教堂、學校、員工宿舍、運動場、交誼廳、禮堂等生活機能設施，等同於一個能夠自給自足的小鎮。

而早在曼哈頓計畫正式開始前，便著手研究核反應堆的費米研究團隊，在亞瑟康普頓的領導之下，於芝加哥大學成立 ，即費米後來成功建造「芝加哥一號堆」的地點。其他像是位於華盛頓州的 、加拿大的 等地，都是「曼哈頓計畫」的其中一部份。

1940~1943年，英軍破壞挪威重水工廠

有趣的是，電影裡的波耳向眾人解釋，當時的英國飛行員將他藏在轟炸機的炸彈艙內，但因為不會用氧氣面罩而缺氧昏迷；事實上，波耳確實被飛行員藏在炸彈艙，但因為有通話功能的飛行帽尺寸不合而沒有戴上，也因此沒有聽到飛行員指示戴上氧氣面罩的指令。當飛機為了越過當時被德國佔領的挪威上空而爬升高度，波耳這時因高空缺氧而昏迷，直到飛機來到北海上空降低高度後才又醒了過來。來到英國後的波耳輾轉來到美國，與當時在洛斯阿拉莫斯的奧本海默終於見面。

特別需要提到的是，波耳也是一位極力建議美國將原子彈計畫資訊與蘇聯共享的人物；他認為如此一來才能夠加速曼哈頓計畫的進度，以追趕由海森堡主持的德國和武器開發進程。然而，在1944年羅斯福與邱吉爾在海德公園的會談中，可以特別見到條款中有提及，針對波耳的救援行動以及向蘇聯共享資訊的建議必須加以保密。等於是波耳的建議後來被羅斯福和邱吉爾否決。

另外，電影中也提到波耳向眾人揭示德國使用重水開發原子彈；事實上，這與1943年英國制定的「松雞」（Grouse）、「新鮮人」（Freshman）、「岡納賽德」（Gunnerside）行動有關。這場行動是英國透過特種部隊空降至挪威的重水工廠進行破壞，該工廠是當時歐洲少數生產重水的重要地點；起初行動因工廠地點隱密而失敗，特戰人員不僅被俘，甚至在後續遭到蓋世太保嚴刑逼供致死；最後在第二次的「岡納賽德」時才成功破壞工廠。

然而，根據事後調查，當時納粹德國總共需要大約5噸的重水運作核反應堆，但最終工廠僅生產出500公斤的重水被運往德國。

有別於納粹德國使用重水，費米在芝加哥研究團隊建造的「芝加哥一號堆」採用石墨做為減速劑，因此不需要使用生產技術門檻相對高的重水（但就必須使用濃縮鈾）。

1945年，三位一體核試驗

正如同電影中所描述，「曼哈頓計畫」在進行「三位一體」核試驗前，科學家們針對原子彈的爆炸方式進行多方討論：

「槍式」的引爆方式可靠又簡單，但由於濃縮鈾的生產量並不足以讓當時的美國生產第二顆槍式原子彈，因此這種投入實戰的槍式原子彈「小男孩」甚至根本沒有經過測試便打頭陣，成為人類歷史上第一顆在戰爭中使用的核子武器；而「曼哈頓計畫」在考量濃縮鈾取得不易，以另一種可分裂的元素「鈽」做為原子彈原料，因此計畫當中兵分兩路，生產鈾和鈽兩種原料。

然而，1943年科學家嘗試利用「槍式」裝置引爆生產出來的鈽時，發現這些透過反應爐生產出來的鈽-239（即原子量為239的鈽元素，是能夠做為核分裂的有效同位素）含量太低，導致大部分的鈽-239吸收了一個中子成為鈽-240。更糟的是，這種鈽-240要再分離成鈽-239的技術更加困難，因此奧本海默決定放棄槍式鈽彈設計，改採「內爆式」設計鈽原子彈。

「內爆式」設計就是將未達「臨界質量」的鈽-239成球體，再利用炸藥使其往內壓縮；如此一來，體積變小、鈽的密度增加，原子捕獲中子的機會便會提升，進而使該鈽球達到臨界值；但這種「內爆式」設計考量到圍繞在鈽球周圍的炸藥必須同時往內壓縮，炸藥往內壓縮的速度也需要精準計算。因此電影中我們看到科學家們不斷透過測試，確保每一個炸藥包能夠在通電後引爆。

而電影與史實相符的是，時任美國總統杜魯門在得知「三位一體」成功後，在波茲坦會議上與史達林透露美國已掌握新型武器，但並沒有透露太多細節；然而，杜魯門不知道的是，當時蘇聯已透過間諜得知原子彈研發進度，因此就算杜魯門不跟史達林說，史達林也早就知道了。

1945年，第二次世界大戰結束，法蘭克報告

這份報告在1945年06月12日由詹姆斯法蘭克呈交給當時由美國總統杜魯門所建置的「暫定委員會」（Interim Committee），但最終被委員會所否決；這個委員會由戰爭部長史汀生所主持，召集政治、軍事、工業等代表商討核能相關事務，可說是美國原能會的前身。

電影中也呈現了奧本海默在二戰結束後於洛斯阿拉莫斯的頒獎典禮上向群眾致詞，這事實上是真實發生於1945年10月16日於洛斯阿拉莫斯的「陸海軍傑出生產獎頒獎典禮」；在這個頒獎典禮上，包括格羅夫斯和奧本海默在內等20名科學家、合作廠商、曼哈頓計畫的工作人員，獲得總統功勳獎章。

1945年，奧本海默與杜魯門會面

1948年11月08日，奧本海默登上當時的《時代》和《生活》雜誌封面，其中《時代》雜誌更以「原子彈之父」來稱呼奧本海默，也就是電影中所呈現的畫面；而在電影中，奧本海默和杜魯門見面最後不歡而散的場景，實際上是發生於1945年10月25日，因此奧本海默在見到杜魯門之前，在白宮橢圓形辦公室外等待時看到《時代》雜誌封面上的自己，史實的時間上是對不起來的。

事實上並沒有紀錄是杜魯門在當下直接說，但有關「愛哭鬼」（Crybaby Scientist）的說法，是出現在由作家雷蒙克（Ray Monk）2012年所撰寫的傳記《羅伯特奧本海默的內心世界》（Robert Oppenheimer: A Life inside the Center）提到，是杜魯門私下向助理抱怨奧本海默的說法。

但奧本海默對核能發展的態度始終希望將此事提升到國際事務，而不是由美國政府所把持；杜魯門和奧本海默的立場衝突，最後鬧得不歡而散。但在前述雷蒙克的書籍中提到，當時杜魯門詢問奧本海默蘇聯何時會製造出原子彈，奧本海默回答不知道；此時的奧本海默已認知到杜魯門對核能發展的態度，是希望能夠獨佔此項技術，而非向世界共享，因此驗證了自己對美蘇兩國的核軍備競賽擔憂。

1946年，十字路口核試驗

因此，在「十字路口行動」中美國進行了兩場核試驗，分別是1946年07月01日的「Able」核試驗，是由B-29轟炸機在空中投下核彈的測試；以及1946年07月25日的「Baker」核試驗，是在水下引爆核彈的測試。

這場核試驗中，美國也將日本投降後的海軍軍艦，以及海軍欲淘汰的戰艦群做為核試驗的靶船，更邀集許多媒體在核試驗現場的外圍進行拍攝，因此留下了許多相當震憾的影像畫面；這些靶船受到核爆摧毀，但最讓人出乎預料的是，「Baker」核試驗所造成的核污染，是過去「三位一體」、廣島和長崎原爆、「Able」這些在高空的核爆影響來得更加嚴重。

不少事後進入「Baker」核爆現場進行善後的海軍水手，因為缺乏核輻射清除經驗，在缺乏有效的保護裝置下受到了輻射傷害；除此之外，「Baker」在水下引爆當下造成有核輻射污染的海水被拋上高空再傾瀉而下，形成該區域中相當全面的核輻射污染水瀑，使得美軍原訂要進行第三次核試驗的計畫終止。

在電影中，雖然沒有呈現「十字路口行動」，但1946年的奧本海默卸下「曼哈頓計畫」洛斯阿拉莫斯實驗室主持人職務，由當時負責「小工具」組中作業的科學家諾里斯布拉德柏里（Norris Bradbury, 1909~1997）接任，但奧本海默仍持續在洛斯阿拉莫斯實驗室以及加州大學之間來回，並舉行有關核武器的研討會；電影中呈現奧本海默在台下聽取有關日本原爆受難者照片的簡報，事實上是反應了1946年於洛斯阿拉莫斯舉行代號「超級」（Super）有關氫彈的研討會。

而曼哈頓計畫也在「十字路口行動」後不久，於1946年12月31日正式終止，並於1947年01月01日被美國原子能委員會接管。

1947年，普林斯頓高等研究院院長，美國原能會顧問

二戰結束後，世界局勢出現巨大改變；同屬同盟國的美國和蘇聯雖然成功將軸心國擊敗，但在戰後也開始在政治或軍事上較勁。

就政治上，二戰後美國代表的 （又稱之為「民主陣營」）和蘇聯所代表的 （又稱之為「共產陣營」）雙方對戰後的歐洲版圖和國界上出現分歧，因為不同的意識形態而抱持著不同立場。西方陣營認為需要建立一個國際組織（前美國總統羅斯福在二戰前提出來「聯合國」概念），透過民主議會討論的方式來協調世界各國的紛爭，這也使得世界各國在二戰結束後成立 ，以避免重蹈一戰後成效不彰的「 」覆轍；但以蘇聯為首的東方陣營認為，歐洲在承受戰爭的巨大傷害，有權決定歐洲各國，特別是民族文化複雜的東歐和巴爾幹半島地區的未來走向，並以蘇聯為首的共產主義為核心來拓展和重建社會秩序。

（Institute for Advanced Study, IAS）是一所位於美國紐澤西州普林斯頓的科研機構，但很常被誤會是普林斯頓大學的一部份，兩地雖然距離相近但事實上並沒有關聯。這所研究院是由猶太富商、百貨巨擘班伯格（Bamberger）兄妹於1930年所贊助建立，集結了當時相當著名的科學家，電影中出現的 （Albert Einstein, 1879~1955，電影中由湯姆康蒂所飾演），便是在1933年逃避納粹來到普林斯頓高等研究院科學常駐的其中一位著名科學家。

有趣的是，奧本海默在成為普林斯頓高等研究院院長之前，曾經因為學術交流而造訪過該地；他曾經寫過一封信給他的弟弟法蘭克（Frank Oppenheimer, 1912~1985，電影中由狄倫阿諾所飾演），表示普林斯頓高等研究院其實是個「瘋人院」，因為如愛因斯坦這種屬於支持古典物理的科學家，對他而言都是屬於舊時代的學者；也因此奧本海默在1947年擔任院長後，提拔了多位年輕學者，包括後來因為「 」獲得諾貝爾物理學獎的華人科學家 （1922~）和 （1926~）。另外，電影中也有一個小細節是奧本海默在德國求學時，看的一本由詩人 （Thomas Stearn Eliot, 1888~1965）所撰寫的詩集《 》，事實上反應的是奧本海默後來在擔任院長期間設立的短期人文學科職位，當時他邀請的其中一位研究員正是T.S. 艾略特。

1949年，RDS-1原子彈試爆

1949年08月29日，蘇聯成功在哈薩克的賽米巴拉金斯克（Semipalatinsk-21）試驗場，成功引爆了蘇聯研發的第一顆原子彈RDS-1；這顆原子彈的外觀和「三位一體」的「小工具」，以及投擲在長崎的「胖子」原子彈外觀和構造類似，是較為複雜的「內爆式原子彈」。美國透過放射性落塵（Nuclear fallout）監控察覺，發現蘇聯成功試爆原子彈，並在1949年09月23日由杜魯門總統公開發表蘇聯擁有原子彈技術的事實。

據傳，不論是在英國還是美國，他不斷將研究成果，包括計算數據、設計方案、實驗成果等資料洩漏給英國和蘇聯，因此在後續被英美共同合作的反間諜單位鎖定，並在1950年被指控包括叛國罪等四項罪名。然而，因為他在美國期間洩密給英國，對英國而言也是間接獲得了後續國內發展原子彈技術的重要情報，因此只有被英國取消英國國籍和14年有期徒刑，最後在1959年06月提前獲釋，定居東德，成為東德科研機構的重要人物。

正如同電影裡所描述，蘇聯RDS-1原子彈的成功，以及「核間諜」造成的恐慌，奧本海默所擔心的核軍備競賽成真；就在1949年蘇聯成功試爆RDS-1原子彈，1952年英國在澳洲的蒙泰貝洛群島成功試爆原子彈，是為「 」（Operation Hurricane）；法國也在1960年在阿爾及利亞的撒哈拉大沙漠中成功試爆原子彈，代號「 」（Gerboise Bleue）；中共也在1966年於新疆羅布泊成功試爆原子彈、1967年成功試爆氫彈，是中共所稱的「 」；印度也在1974年進行「 」核試驗。電影片尾呈現奧本海默所言，他們雖然沒有在「三位一體」讓全球大氣發生連鎖效應，實際上另一種連鎖效應真實上演。

1950年，麥卡錫主義、美國第二次紅色恐慌、胡佛局長

該名單當中最知名的人物，莫過於後來撰寫出《羅馬假期》《萬夫莫敵》《出埃及記》等知名作品的編劇 （Dalton Trumbo, 1905~1979）；他在被判藐視國會後入獄服刑，出獄後只能用假名或代筆的名義撰寫劇本，更在之後因為《 》和《 》獲得兩座奧斯卡金像獎。但這兩次得獎他都沒有出席領獎，直到1959年道頓莊柏在接受電視專訪時才公開承認，他就是這兩部奧斯卡獎的電影編劇；但直到2011年12月19日，美國編劇協會才正式宣布道頓莊柏擔任《羅馬假期》編劇，也在當時推出的DVD中，才以數位修復的方式將他的名字寫在工作人員名單裡。然而，道頓莊柏在1976年因心臟病過世，並沒有看到自己的作品正式被平反。有關這段故事，大家可以參考由「絕命毒師」 所主演的《 》（Trumbo, 2015）電影，當中有針對麥卡錫主義和好萊塢黑名單的歷史詳細解說。

焦點回到奧本海默，在「麥卡錫主義」最高峰的時刻，擔任美國原子能顧問的奧本海默也在當時遭到調查，但他在1947年因參與「曼哈頓計畫」取得「安全許可」後，一直都被政府單位所保護；直到1953年艾森豪總統上台後，加強由杜魯門總統所提出的忠誠審查制度，美國原能會提出的新版安全審核機制，讓奧本海默的忠誠度再次受到質疑。

胡佛的一生可說是和FBI綁在一起，從他1935上任局長開始，到他1972年過世為止，當了37年局長；若要把調查局時期也算進去，總共當了47年又358天，是美國歷史上任職最久的調查局局長；據說，胡佛之所以能夠在調查局局長的位子上這麼久，就是因為他掌握了不少政治人物的把柄，甚至透過非法手段收集證據，特別是冷戰時期以反間諜為名，讓許多原本想要動他腦筋的政客拿他沒辦法。

這也是為什麼當史特勞斯提及「胡佛」的名字，聽證會上的議員們便警告史特勞斯不要轉移話題，因為「胡佛」就是個狠角色，沒人敢跟他扯上關係啊！

1954年，奧本海默的安全聽證會

這場電影中呈現的1954年奧本海默安全聽證會，其實就是針對奧本海默取得的「安全許可」作攻擊；這種「安全許可」等於是現在公務員要進入政府機關工作時所做的身家調查，過去的所作所為都會被血淋淋地挖出來被審視，只不過當時奧本海默的聽證會是秘密進行的。

另外，奧本海默在1930年代參加的共產黨活動、在校園內組織工會、捐款給西班牙內戰共和派等過往也被一一挖出。可說是毫無隱私可言，被赤裸裸地公開檢視。而壓垮最後一根稻草的，則是愛德華泰勒在出席聽證會時表示：「我認為奧本海默是個對國家忠誠的人，但我個人認為將公共事務交由其他人管理會比較安全。」縱使沒有直接否認奧本海默，但也暗示性詆毀了奧本海默的名聲。

值得一提的是，由於愛德華泰勒的不利證詞，也讓他本來就不好的人際關係雪上加霜；這讓過去同樣在「曼哈頓計畫」或「洛斯阿拉莫斯實驗室」一同工作的同事們相當不諒解，也讓他在科學界成為眾矢之的。

為期四週的聽證會，最終雖然沒有直接證據證明奧本海默是共產黨員，但也讓奧本海默自1947年開始擁有的「安全許可」被取消；這意味著奧本海默無法繼續擔任的原能會顧問，同時也沒有辦法直接對美國政府機關進行影響。

1954年的安全聽證會後，奧本海默在學術圈的影響力也受到了影響；縱使奧本海默仍然繼續擔任普林斯頓高等研究院院長直到他過世的前一年（1966年），但他在聽證會之後，便和妻子與孩子們時常造訪美屬維京群島的聖約翰島，甚至最後還在1957年，買下了0.81公頃的吉布尼海灘（Gibney Beach）的一部份土地，蓋了一個簡樸的小屋當作是遠離塵囂的避風港。而這座海灘也被命名為「奧本海默海灘」，每年吸引不少遊客朝聖造訪。

1959年，史特勞斯的提名聽證會

就在成功打擊奧本海默後，史特勞斯持續擔任原能會主席，直到1958年06月任期結束；當時的美國總統艾森豪原本想要重新再次任命他，但史特勞斯擔心1954年的「奧本海默事件」可能讓他在原能會內部或參議院民主黨人士大作文章，因此他和艾森豪協商擔任另外的內閣職務。

起初，艾森豪提出白宮辦公室主任、國務卿等位子，但都遭史特勞斯拒絕，最後被艾森豪塞進了他「商務部長」的名單之中。然而，在1958年艾森豪宣布提名後，史特勞斯的提名隨即遭到參議院和原能會的強烈反對。

有趣的是，電影中特別安排了史特勞斯在1947年邀請奧本海默擔任普林斯頓高等研究院院長時，自己調侃了一下自己的姓氏，Strauss，並說到雖然念法叫做「史特勞斯」，實際上用南方口音會變成「史勞斯」；這事實上是反應了當時在1958年，史特勞斯提名商務部長爭議爆發後，不少奧本海默的支持者、史特勞斯的反對人士，用史特勞斯 Strauss的姓氏，稱呼他們是「the Last Straws Committee」，意指「壓垮他最後一根稻草委員會」。

史特勞斯在1959年失勢後，便淡出美國政壇，往後也因為過去在政壇上豎立許多敵人而漸漸失去了影響力。他在1962年出版了個人回憶錄《Men and Decisions》，揭露了過去擔任政府要職時的內幕；這本書在當時的《紐約時報》暢銷書排名中居高不下，但不少歷史學家認為這本回憶錄觀點過於偏頗，有失公允。然而，史特勞斯在淡出政壇後致力於慈善和猶太民族活動，並在自己的農場內從事養牛的工作。直到1974年01月21日，他因淋巴癌過世在維吉尼亞州的農場家中；而他的妻子愛麗絲（Alice Hanauer Strauss）則是在2004年，以高齡101歲過世。

1963年，奧本海默獲頒恩里科費米獎

恩里科費米獎（Enrico Fermi Award），以前述成功製造出「芝加哥一號堆」的義大利裔科學家費米為名，由美國原能會所頒發的國際獎項，於1954年設立，費米則是第一位獲得此獎的科學家，用於獎勵在核物理有高度成就的傑出人士，每年由美國全國科學院院士、科學學會的官員投票選出。由於這個獎項不像諾貝爾獎是以單一研究成果作為評斷標準，而是以候選人的整體科學成就為評斷標準，因此也被認為是科學家們的終身成就獎。

就在奧本海默在1954年被取消安全許可後九年，奧本海默被授予費米獎；這是在當時對史特勞斯投下不信任票的甘迺迪總統，在生前極力推薦並爭取的結果，但可惜的是甘迺迪在1963年11月22日頒獎前一個禮拜遭到槍殺，最後由繼任總統林登詹森頒發，而甘迺迪總統的遺孀 賈姬甘迺迪也在現場觀禮。

值得一提的是，電影中特別安排不少奧本海默的科學家好友在現場與奧本海默握手致意，其中也包含曾經在1954年安全聽證會上對他作出不利證詞的愛德華泰勒；事實上，奧本海默能夠獲頒費米獎也是經由愛德華泰勒爭取而來，是泰勒本人希望藉由此機會能修補破裂的關係。

然而，縱使奧本海默獲得費米獎，讓他在科學圈的名聲得以恢復，但他的安全許可仍被取消。

二、 該如何欣賞《奧本海默》？

《奧本海默》的電影劇情涉及眾多歷史事件和人物，特別是近代科學史相當知名的科學家，同時也關係到這些科學家的研究成就，因此入門門檻不低；加上電影節奏快速，對白量大，同時又有180分鐘的片長內容，在影像處理、運鏡、實景特效，以及人物編排、剪輯、配樂等技術上，確實是一部兼具深度以及娛樂感的作品。

而克里斯多夫諾蘭第一次挑戰人物傳記電影，打破了過去直線敘事的方式，將許多歷史事件以及其背後所代表的意涵融合，做出了不同的歷史詮釋，是我個人認為本片令我最驚豔之處。

因為當我們在闡述「歷史」之際，可能包含著「歷史事實」以及「歷史解釋」；「歷史事實」即何年何月何日所發生的人事時地物，是既定事實無法改變，但「歷史解釋」則是每個人透過不同觀點或立場，對該事物做出的價值觀判斷。正如電影中，以1954年奧本海默的安全聽證會破題，再到1959年的史特勞斯提名聽證會，來回顧奧本海默的傳奇一生；事實上，正是透過不同的時空、角度出發，來看待「歷史事實」所做出的不同「歷史解釋」。

在1940年代參與原子彈研發的奧本海默，是否能夠用1950年代的價值觀標準回頭評價，研發原子彈是否正確？又或者是，在1945年美國投下原子彈，是否就是開啟冷戰核武器競賽的罪魁禍首？特別的是，電影中特別利用檢察官以新版人事任命標準，問及當時將奧本海默找進「曼哈頓計畫」的格羅夫斯將軍，你是否還會聘用奧本海默當作計畫主任，格羅夫斯答道：不會，但所有的科學家都不會。

也因此，電影拋出了一個值得思考的問題：我們該如何看待「歷史」？因為我們似乎無法利用現在的價值觀，去對「歷史事實」做出客觀評斷；也正因為社會的風氣會變、世界的局勢也會變，人隨著時間也會成長，觀念也會變。那麼，我們是不是更應該記住歷史帶給我們的教訓，而非僅止於批判過去的所作所為？

諷刺的是，人類在歷史中學到的教訓，就是永遠學不到教訓。不論是從第一次世界大戰後的經濟大恐慌，進而造成左派思想的崛起，再到納粹興起後人類再度承受第二場浩劫；不斷追求毀滅力量，甚至創造出更可怕的武器，以制衡我們可能面臨到的威脅。這樣的人性、或是歷史悲劇，似乎都是再不斷上演。

就算是奧本海默這樣天才般的科學家，也沒辦法料到最後自己會被自己研發出的東西給反將一軍；也沒辦法在當時預測自己研發出來的東西能不能真正獲得實現。當美國傾全國之力，投注經費在沒有人知道結果的原子彈上時，我們是否也另類驗證了，人類科技的進步，似乎只有當面臨危機時才會有重大突破呢？這說來十分諷刺，不是嗎？

正如同電影中最後奧本海默對凱薩琳所言，「時間將證明一切」。很多「歷史」或「事件」當下發生時飽受負面批評，但經過時間的鍛鍊卻成為永垂不朽的傳奇；而一時得利、趁勢而為的人事物，長時間過後回頭來看，似乎也就那麼曇花一現般地微不足道。

或許，《奧本海默》花了180分鐘說了這麼大段的歷史故事，就如同原子彈啟動爆炸後的那一瞬間般，造成的「連鎖反應」或是對後世的影響，才是最直接也最致命的。

如今，我成為了死神，世界的毀滅者。

奧本海默在「三位一體」核試驗後引用《薄伽梵譚》的內容，始終令人津津樂道；但我認為這句話從奧本海默的口中說出，道盡了多少無奈與感慨啊！誰有權力掌握如此巨大的毀滅能力？又有誰能夠真的控制這般毀滅工具？又或是後世該如何看待這樣的毀滅開端？

或許，真的也只有時間能夠道盡一切了。

人類就是如此渺小：盡自己的全力、堅持做對得起良心的事，就是亙古不變的道理。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
完全看懂！《奧本海默》Oppenheimer 全解析 - 讓你一次看懂電影裡的劇情時間+人物角色+歷史意義

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
由克里斯多夫諾蘭所執導的《奧本海默》，描述「原子彈之父」羅伯特奧本海默（J. Robert Oppenheimer, 1904~1967）在第二次世界大戰期間，參與著名的「曼哈頓計畫」研發原子彈，以及他在二戰後因被懷疑是共產黨員而遭到政府調查的故事。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
奧本海默_電影學習指導單

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
搞什麼歷史? 看什麼電影!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
【H&M 365 EP.293】好萊塢黑名單 - 你共產黨！你全家都是共產黨！ /《好萊塢的黑名單》Trumbo, 2015 | PODCAST

# data[].attributes.body
可能由格列高里七世所頒布的教令集，引發授職權之爭，並認定教宗可以罷免皇帝，教權至上

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
教宗訓令 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
《教宗訓令》（拉丁語：Dictatus papae）是一份可能由教宗額我略七世簽署的關於27條應屬教宗之權力的文件。[1]一些歷史學家認為這就是額我略七世本人寫下或口述的，另一些認為是後人所撰，其中的每一條訓令也有不同來源。[2]1087年，德吾樞機發行了一系列獻給維克托三世的赦令集，其中所包含的教會法來自他搜集的各種資源。《教宗訓令》與該赦令集是如此之相似，以至於有人認為宗教訓令就是在該訓令集的基礎上寫成的，所以其年代一定比1087年還遲。[3]

# data[].attributes.headline
1059尼閣二世的教宗詔書《以上主之名》

# data[].attributes.subject
1059尼閣二世的教宗詔書《以上主之名》

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
( Latin for In the name of the Lord) is a papal bull written by Pope Nicholas II. The bull was issued on 13 April 1059 and caused major reforms in the system of papal election, most notably establishing the cardinal-bishops as the sole electors of the pope, with the consent of minor clergy.

Until the publication of the bull, the election of the pope was often decided by a puppet electoral process. The Holy Roman Emperor often directly named a deceased pope's replacement, or the pontiff named his own successor. Such a nomination under the canon law was not a valid election and the legal electors would have to ratify the choice, though undoubtedly they would naturally be swayed by circumstances to give effect to the imperial preference.

In the 1050s, Cardinal Hildebrand (the future Pope Gregory VII) began to challenge the Holy Roman Emperor's right of approbation. The predecessor of Nicholas II, Stephen IX, had been elected during a period of confusion following the death of Emperor Henry III and, twelve months later, the death of Pope Victor II, whom Henry III had installed as pope. Stephen IX's election had obtained the consent of the empress-regent, Agnes of Poitou, despite the omission of the traditional preliminaries and the waiting of the cardinals for the imperial nomination.

Soon after his appointment as pope in 1058, upon the death of Stephen IX, Nicholas II called a synod at Sutri, with imperial endorsement provided by presence of an imperial chancellor. The first task of the synod was to denounce and excommunicate the irregularly elected Antipope Benedict X, who was a puppet of the powerful Count of Tusculum and presently in Rome.

Accompanied by troops provided by the Duke of Lorraine, Godfrey the Bearded, Nicholas made his way to Rome, and Benedict fled. Nicholas was consecrated pope on 24 January 1059 with wide acceptance of the Roman people. Keen to avoid future controversy in papal elections and to curb the outside influence exerted by non-ecclesiastical parties, in April 1059 he summoned a synod in Rome. In nomine Domini was the codification of the synod's resolutions.

The bull curtailed the rights of the emperor in papal elections. Specifically the following was brought into the canon law:

Implicitly, the right of approbation of the Roman Pontiff by the emperor was abolished.

Nicholas also introduced reforms to combat scandals within the church at the time, especially concerning the lives of priests and religious. The following prohibitions were published:

The major part of the bull deals with papal elections. The procedure and rules can be summarised as follows:

When a pope dies, the cardinal-bishops should confer among themselves as to a candidate.

The remainder of the clergy and laity retain the right of acclaiming their choice.

Robert Guiscard is proclaimed by Pope Nicholas II as a duke as the cardinal-bishops look on.

The bull was followed by an alliance between the papacy and Robert Guiscard, who was made Duke of Apulia and Calabria and Sicily by the Holy See in exchange for annual tribute and him guaranteeing the security of the See of Saint Peter. Notwithstanding the bull, Nicolas II's successor, Alexander II, was consecrated without the approbation of the empress-regent, and was thus opposed by the imperial nominee Honorius II.

The electoral reforms of the bull were not received well in all quarters. The precedent that only cardinal-bishops could vote in elections was met with disdain by the minor Roman clergy. The cardinal-bishops, because of their offices, were "distinctly non-Roman," thus removing the control held by the Roman metropolitan church over the election of the pontiff. The bull was also a setback for the cardinal-priests and cardinal-deacons, from whom, in theory, the next pope had to be chosen before the bull was issued.

In nomine Domini was the first in a series of bulls which radically reformed the process of election to the Chair of Saint Peter. The bull did not, however, totally remove the influence of the imperial faction. Rather, the power of the Holy Roman Emperor was gradually eroded until he was deprived of his privilege of papal appointment at the Concordat of Worms in 1122.

The bull was also instrumental in the establishment of the College of Cardinals, which did not fully come into force until the election of Innocent II in 1130. For the first time cardinals were distinguished as a group set apart for the highest privileges of the church, including the election of the successor of Saint Peter.

1. ^ Depuydt, Leo (1987). "A.D. 297 as the Beginning of the First Indiction Cycle". Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists. 24 (3-4). The Bulletin of the American Society of Papyrologists: 137-139.

2. ^ Smith, S. B. (24 December 2009) [1805]. "Ecclesiastical punishments". Elements of Ecclesiastical Law. BiblioBazaar - reprint of historic original. pp. 83-85. ISBN 978-1113699565.

3. ^ Heinrich, Friedrich (1877). "The ecclesiastical election of popes / Pope Nicholas II., 1059". In Fairfax, Edward (ed.). Church and state: their relations historically developed. Book on Demand. pp. 193-197. Unknown ID:B007OFIHQ8.

4. ^ Mann, Horance K. (1929). "Pope Nicholas II". The Lives of the Popes in the Middle Ages. B. Herder. pp. 226-260. ASIN B001DIPEJA.

5. ^ Gurugé, Anura (16 February 2012). "1059: The Beginning Of The Cardinals As The Exclusive Electors". The Next Pope: After Pope Benedict XVI]. WOWNH LLC. pp. 94-96. ISBN 978-0615353722.

6. ^ Henderson, Ernest F. (translator) (1903). Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages. George Bell. pp. 19. Unknown ID:B002GD0RAW.

7. ^ Colmer, Joseph M.; McLeane, Iain (1998). "Electing Popes: Approval Balloting and Qualified-Majority Rule". The Journal of Interdisciplinary History. 29 (1). MIT Press: 1-22. doi:10.1162/002219598551616. S2CID 145296691. Archived from the original on 20 December 2012.

8. ^ Panvinii (also known as Panvinio), Onofrio (1929). Onuphrii Panvinii De episcopatibus, titulis, et diaconiis cardinalium liber]. Unstated (Venetian provenance). p. 19. Unknown ID:B0017C7VX4.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
( Latin for In the name of the Lord) is a papal bull written by Pope Nicholas II. The bull was issued on 13 April 1059 and caused major reforms in the system of papal election, most notably establishing the cardinal-bishops as the sole electors of the pope, with the consent of minor clergy.

# data[].attributes.body
內中呈現了中世紀修道院的生活

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
THE NAME OF THE ROSE Full Movie | Sean Connery | Christian Slater | The Midnight Screening

# data[].attributes.headline
義大利旅行必看！文藝復興藝術風格、理念、核心城市、發展脈絡全梳理

# data[].attributes.subject
義大利旅行必看！文藝復興藝術風格、理念、核心城市、發展脈絡全梳理

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
義大利旅行必看！文藝復興藝術風格、理念、核心城市、發展脈絡全梳理！

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
文藝復興盛期 - 【名畫檔案】

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
以義大利為中心的16世紀早期文藝復興盛期是初期時藝術革命的頂點，用天賦才華在歷史上形成巨大的轉變，有三位顯著的藝術家達文西LeonardodaVinci，米開朗基羅MichelangeloBuonarroti，和拉斐爾Raphael。在此時…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Timeline of Renaissance Architecture || World Architecture History || Part 8

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Characteristics of Renaissance Architecture / Renaissance Architectural History

# data[].attributes.headline
羅浮宮的演變-從堡壘到宮殿

# data[].attributes.subject
羅浮宮的演變-從堡壘到宮殿

# data[].attributes.headline
淺談但丁《神曲》在西方藝術史之中的啟發與詮釋

# data[].attributes.subject
淺談但丁《神曲》在西方藝術史之中的啟發與詮釋

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
【藝術解謎】 淺談但丁《神曲》在西方藝術史之中的啟發與詮釋。 - 非池中藝術網

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
若將一部文學作品被藝術家詮釋的次數，做為一個討論的切入點（或進行排名）。那麼詩人但丁Dante Alighieri（1265-1321）所撰寫的《神曲》（義：Divina Commedia / 英：D…

# data[].attributes.headline
Why should you read Dante’s “Divine Comedy”?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why should you read Dante’s “Divine Comedy”?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why should you read Dante’s “Divine Comedy”? - Sheila Marie Orfano

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The 17th Century Crisis: Crash Course European History #11

# data[].attributes.body
阿姆斯特丹為什麼有三個「ＸＸＸ」？一個謎樣又美麗的城市故事，被打了三個大叉叉的城市～ @走走停停，小燈泡在旅行 https://share.google/rEkDixA369skpQDh6

# data[].attributes.body
考慮到世界上九大小麥進口國都是中東國家：“其中七個國家在2011年爆發了政治抗議活動，致使平民死亡，”斯滕伯格說。“在那些經歷了政治動蕩的國家中，家庭平均花費超過35%的收入購買食物，”而發達國家中這個比例不到10%。

所有這些都是相互聯繫的：中國的乾旱和俄羅斯的森林火災，引起小麥短缺導致了麵包價格上漲，從而使解放廣場(Tahrir Square)上的抗議加劇。斯滕伯格把這種現象稱作“危險”的全球化。

聯合國與其他國際機構2009年報告說，有80多萬敘利亞人因嚴重乾旱而失去了全部生計，所以“大批農民、牧民以及依賴農業的農村家庭背井離鄉來到城市”，加劇了動蕩局面。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
世界九大小麥進口國都在中東，2011年，其中七國發生了政治動蕩。也許萬事無不相關：從中國旱情、俄羅斯野火到糧食減產，再到阿拉伯革命。

# data[].attributes.headline
阿拉伯之春十年：中東、北非地區的現況與未來發展

# data[].attributes.subject
阿拉伯之春十年：中東、北非地區的現況與未來發展

# data[].attributes.body
現況與未來發展

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
一塊麵包觸發革命！那一年有48個國家發生暴動，糧價指數落在「這個數字」就是引爆點

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
2010年，巴雅和他的團隊正在研究兩年前撼動全世界的一場危機，並非登上各國頭條的金融危機，而是2008年的「全球糧食危機」。在2005年至2008年間，全球糧食價格上升了百分之83，小麥的價格幾乎翻了兩倍。隨著糧價飆漲，光是2008年，就有超過1億5500萬人被迫成為貧窮人口，有8千萬人只能挨餓。從印度、埃及到阿根廷，共有48個國家爆發暴動，就連義大利也受到了「義大利麵抗議」（Pasta Protest）的衝擊。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
重磅腥聞
Bombshell

監製

AJ·迪克斯（AJ Dix）

貝絲·基諾（Beth Kono）

查爾斯·蘭道夫

傑·洛基

瑪格麗特·萊利（Margaret Riley）

編劇

查爾斯·蘭道夫

主演

製片商

片長

109 分鐘

產地

美國

語言
英語

上映日期

2019年12月13日（美國）

2019年12月19日（香港、澳門）

2020年1月2日（馬來西亞）

2020年1月10日（台灣）

2020年1月30日（新加坡）

發行商
獅門影視公司

預算

3200萬美元[1]

票房

6140萬美元[2] [3]

中國大陸

爆炸新聞

香港

爆炸性醜聞

臺灣

重磅腥聞

馬來西亞

重磅腥聞

該片由 獅門影視公司 負責發行，於2019年12月13日在美國上映。這部電影獲得中等偏正面為主的評價，其中莎莉·賽隆、妮可·基嫚和瑪格·羅比的演技、電影的核心主題尤其獲得媒體與影評界的青睞，受評論家批評的部分則在於電影改編未能深入事件。

福斯新聞頻道的負責人 羅傑·艾爾斯，是現實生活中對電視網絡佔主導地位的保守派人物。電影的集中重點在 新聞女主播梅根·凱利、及複合角色凱拉·波士比西爾（Kayla Pospisil）。凱利是該網絡最受歡迎的新聞主播之一，並跟其他人合作主持。在辯論大會的當天，她生病又嘔吐，但她仍對 唐納·川普（Donald Trump）對女性的評論表示質疑。為了報復，他於辯論大會後在推特上侮辱她，其他人也效仿。某日，一名狗仔隊在她家門外跟蹤凱利的家人以偷拍其孩子的 照片 ，此事促使凱利的丈夫把入侵者趕出去。福斯新聞後來為凱利聘請安保人員，艾爾斯則擔心辯論那天有人會毒殺她。

卡爾森被免去作為人氣節目《》的共同主持人之職，並被調至不太受歡迎的節目。 性別歧視 評論斷斷續續地充斥於她的生活，她會見律師，對方告訴她指於拒絕艾爾斯以性交換晉升機會後被解僱了。他們將會計劃對艾爾斯提起性騷擾訴訟，但告訴卡爾森，她將需要其他女性的證據和證詞。

凱拉·波士比西爾是福斯新聞的最新僱員，她跟卡爾森一同工作，但很快就接受了《》的一項工作。比爾·奧雷利在她上班的第一天就把她開除了，她喝醉了，並跟福斯的潔西·卡爾睡了。當她們醒來的時候，波士比西爾說自己並非 女同性戀，她看見卡爾的希拉蕊·柯林頓海報時不禁震驚。當被問到為何一個自由黨的女同性戀者會替福斯工作時，卡爾說她申請了許多工作，但只有福斯是僱用她的網絡頻道，現在沒有人願意僱用。波士比西爾後來被邀請到艾爾斯的 辦公室 ，在那裡他要求她掀起裙子至讓他看見內褲的位置。她把此事告訴卡爾，然而對方不想介入其中。

卡爾森在節目中表態，她表示支持突擊武器禁令，此促使艾爾斯召見她。她在沒有給出明確的原因下被解僱，她決定控告艾爾斯職場 性騷擾。他與妻子貝絲，跟律師及 魯迪·朱利安尼 會面，他否認指控。所有女職員都被要求跟福斯新聞頻道站在同一陣線，但凱利不予置評。

當訴訟提出後，沒有其他女性挺身而出，這使卡爾森的期望破滅了。觀眾使她激動起來。凱利找到其他受害女性，當中包括波士比西爾，然而遭到艾爾斯及奧萊利的性騷擾。

波士比西爾說她服從艾爾斯保護自己的工作，但現在希望挺身而出。凱利大聲說知道還有22位受害女性。埃斯特里奇告訴艾爾斯，卡爾森已經錄製了可以讓她勝訴的對話。艾爾斯會見了福斯的聯合創始人 魯珀特·梅鐸 ，對方告訴他指將會被解僱。艾爾斯要求發布該消息，但默多克拒絕。當默多克說他要接管福斯時，卡爾拒絕說出來，波士比西爾知道自己將會被解僱，所以辭職了。

同時，卡爾森從福斯那裡得到$2,000萬美元的賠償和道歉，但她不能說自己的案件。她告訴觀眾，她不在乎是否喜歡她，只是需要他們相信她。

2017年5月18日， 福斯新聞頻道的聯合創始人、前董事長暨執行長 羅傑·艾爾斯離世不久之後，宣佈開發這部電影，主要講述福斯新聞頻道的數名女性員工對艾爾斯提出職場 性騷擾控告，其中包括 梅根·凱利和， 查爾斯·蘭道夫將執筆編劇。2018年5月22日，確認執導影片。2018年8月1日，AJ·迪克斯（AJ Dix）、貝絲·基諾（Beth Kono）、查爾斯·蘭道夫、傑·洛基和瑪格麗特·萊利（Margaret Riley）共同擔當監製， 莎莉·賽隆的丹佛和黛利拉製作公司負責影片製作。2018年10月9日，由於電影預算增長，安納普爾納影業退出製作團隊。仍參與製作，影片監製正在向 焦點影業等製作公司尋求資金支持。接下來的一周， 獅門影視公司開始與監製商談。10月底，雙方達成協議，影片確定由獅門影視公司負責分銷發行。2018年12月，確定為影片作曲，擔當攝像。電影最初的 暫定名稱為的「公正與平衡」（ Fair and Balanced）。2019年8月，影片的正式名稱確定為「重磅腥聞」（ Bombshell ）。

隨著編導團隊正式確定， 莎莉·賽隆與製作組進入商談階段，有望出演 福斯新聞頻道的前主播 梅根·凱利。2018年8月1日，莎莉·賽隆確認領銜出演梅根·凱利， 妮可·基嫚和 瑪格·羅比與製作組進入商談階段，妮可·基嫚將出演，瑪格·羅比出演的角色原型取材於福斯新聞頻道的多名助理節目製作人。2018年8月22日， 約翰·李斯高確認飾演 羅傑·艾爾斯。2018年9月， 艾莉森·珍妮和 凱特·麥金儂加入劇組，艾莉森·珍妮出演律師，凱特·麥金儂出演虛構的電視台節目製作人。2018年10月， 麥坎·邁道爾確認出演 魯柏·梅鐸， 馬克·杜普拉斯出演， 艾莉絲·伊芙出演。2018年11月， 布莉姬·朗迪-潘恩和 麗芙·休森加入劇組，出演兩名虛構角色。、 伊麗莎白·羅姆、、、 艾希莉·葛林、、麥克·比伊（Michael Buie）、和分別出演、、 肖恩·漢尼提、貝絲·艾爾斯（Beth Ailes）、、艾琳娜·布里甘特（Irena Brigante）、 布萊特·拜爾、和。2018年12月，加入劇組， 阿娜·歐蕾莉 將出演。2019年6月，加入劇組。

影片的 主體拍攝於2018年10月22日在 加利福尼亞州洛杉磯 開機。

電影於2019年12月20日在美國上映，之後提前至2019年12月13日以 限量放映 的方式發行，直至12月20日才擴大上映。

2019年8月21日， 獅門影視公司 釋出第一支先行預告片。

1. ^ Keegan, Rebecca. Making of 'Bombshell': How Charlize Theron, Nicole Kidman and Margot Robbie Re-Created the "Pervasive Paranoia" of Roger Ailes's Fox News. The Hollywood Reporter. 2019-12-05 . （原始內容存檔於2019-12-08）.

2. ^ Walsh, Kate. Charlize Theron's Bombshell Transformation Wows at First Los Angeles Screening. Vanity Fair. October 14, 2019 . （原始內容存檔於October 16, 2019）.

3. ^ Mendoza, Manuel. How actress Holland Taylor's 'visionary' moment created 'Ann,' now headed to Dallas Theater Center. The Dallas Morning News. October 9, 2019 . （原始內容存檔於October 15, 2019）.

4. ^ D'Alessandro, Anthony. Jay Roach's Untitled Roger Ailes Movie: Nazanin Boniadi To Play Former Fox News Reporter Rudi Bakhtiar. Deadline Hollywood. . （原始內容存檔於2019-04-02）.

5. ^ McNary, Dave. Film News Roundup: Patrick Schwarzenegger Joins Amy Poehler's Drama 'Moxie' . Variety. 2019-10-29 . （原始內容存檔於2019-10-30）.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
重磅腥聞 - 維基百科，自由的百科全書

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
重磅腥聞 Bombshell 監製 AJ·迪克斯（AJ Dix） 貝絲·基諾（Beth Kono） 查爾斯·蘭道夫 傑·洛基 瑪格麗特·萊利（Margaret Riley） 編劇 查爾斯·蘭道夫 主演 製片商 片長 109 分鐘 產地 美國 語言 英語 上映日期 2019年12月13日（美國） 2019年12月19日（香港、澳門） 2020年1月2日（馬來西亞） 2020年1月10日（台灣） 2020年1月30日（新加坡） 發行商 獅門影視公司 預算 3200萬美元[1] 票房 6140萬美元[2] [3] 中國大陸 爆炸新聞 香港 爆炸性醜聞 臺灣 重磅腥聞 馬來西亞 重磅腥聞 該片由 獅門影視公司 負責發行，於2019年12月13日在美國上映。這部電影獲得中等偏正面為主的評價，其中莎莉·賽隆、妮可·基嫚和瑪格·羅比的演技、電影的核心主題尤其獲得媒體與影評界的青睞，受評論家批評的部分則在於電影改編未能深入事件。 福斯新聞頻道的負責人 羅傑·艾爾斯，是現實生活中對電視網絡佔主導地位的保守派人物。電影的集中重點在 新聞女主播 梅根·凱利、及複合角色凱拉·波士比西爾（Kayla

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
明清類書、叢書與法國十八世紀百科全書之比較研究

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The American Civil War - OverSimplified (Part 1)

# data[].attributes.headline
聖丹尼斯大教堂-大多數的法國國王之墓

# data[].attributes.subject
聖丹尼斯大教堂-大多數的法國國王之墓

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Basilica of Saint-Denis (French: Basilique royale de Saint-Denis, now formally known as the Basilique-cathédrale de Saint-Denis) is a large former medieval abbey church and present cathedral in the commune of Saint-Denis, a northern suburb of Paris. The building is of singular importance historically and architecturally as its choir, completed in 1144, is widely considered the first structure to employ all of the elements of Gothic architecture.

The basilica became a place of pilgrimage and a necropolis containing the tombs of the Kings of France, including nearly every king from the 10th century to Louis XVIII in the 19th century. Henry IV of France came to Saint-Denis to formally renounce his Protestant faith and become a Catholic. The Queens of France were crowned at Saint-Denis, and the royal regalia, including the sword used for crowning the kings and the royal sceptre, were kept at Saint-Denis between coronations.

The site originated as a Gallo-Roman cemetery in late Roman times. The archaeological remains still lie beneath the cathedral; the graves indicate a mixture of Christian and pre-Christian burial practices. Around the year 475 AD, St. Genevieve purchased some land and built Saint-Denys de la Chapelle. In 636, on the orders of Dagobert I, the relics of Saint Denis, a patron saint of France, were reinterred in the basilica. The relics of St-Denis, which had been transferred to the parish church of the town in 1795, were brought back again to the abbey in 1819.

In the 12th century, the Abbot Suger rebuilt portions of the abbey church using innovative structural and decorative features. In doing so, he is said to have created the first truly Gothic building. In the following century the master-builder Pierre de Montreuil rebuilt the nave and the transepts in the new Rayonnant Gothic style.

The abbey church became a cathedral on the formation of the Diocese of Saint-Denis by Pope Paul VI in 1966 and is the seat of the Bishop of Saint-Denis, currently (since 2009) Pascal Delannoy. Although known as the "Basilica of St Denis", the cathedral has not been granted the title of Minor Basilica by the Vatican.

The 86-metre (282-foot) tall spire, dismantled in the 19th century, is to be rebuilt. The project, initiated more than 30 years ago, was to have begun in May 2020, and is expected to take about 11 years at a cost of about €28 million.

The cathedral is on the site where Saint Denis, the first bishop of Paris, is believed to have been buried. According to the "Life of Saint Genevieve", written in about 520, he was sent by Pope Clement I to evangelise the Parisii. He was arrested and condemned by the Roman authorities. Along with two of his followers, the priest Eleutherus and deacon Rusticus, he was decapitated on the hill of Montmartre in about 250 AD. According to the legend, he is said to have carried his head four leagues to the Roman settlement of Catulliacus, the site of the current church, and indicated that it was where he wanted to be buried. A martyrium or shrine-mausoleum was erected on the site of his grave in about 313 AD, and was enlarged into a basilica with the addition of tombs and monuments under Saint Genevieve. These including a royal tomb, that of Aregonde, the wife of King Clothar I.

Dagobert I, King of the Franks (reigned 628 to 637), transformed the church into the Abbey of Saint Denis, a Benedictine monastery in 632. It soon grew to a community of more than five hundred monks, plus their servants.

Dagobert also commissioned a new shrine to house the saint's remains, which was created by his chief councillor, Eligius, a goldsmith by training. An early of Saint Eligius describes the shrine:

Above all, Eligius fabricated a mausoleum for the holy martyr Denis in the city of Paris with a wonderful marble ciborium over it marvelously decorated with gold and gems. He composed a crest [at the top of a tomb] and a magnificent frontal and surrounded the throne of the altar with golden axes in a circle. He placed golden apples there, round and jeweled. He made a pulpit and a gate of silver and a roof for the throne of the altar on silver axes. He made a covering in the place before the tomb and fabricated an outside altar at the feet of the holy martyr. So much industry did he lavish there, at the king's request, and poured out so much that scarcely a single ornament was left in Gaul and it is the greatest wonder of all to this very day.

During his second coronation at Saint-Denis, King Pepin the Short made a vow to rebuild the old abbey. The first church mentioned in the chronicles was begun in 754 and completed under Charlemagne, who was present at its consecration in 775. By 832 the Abbey had been granted a remunerative whaling concession on the Cotentin Peninsula.

Most of what is now known about the Carolingian church at St Denis resulted from a lengthy series of excavations begun under the American art historian Sumner McKnight Crosby in 1937. The structure altogether was about eighty meters long, with an imposing facade, a nave divided into three sections by two rows of marble columns, a transept, and apse and at the east end. During important religious celebrations, the interior of the church was lit with 1250 lamps. Beneath the apse, in imitation of St. Peter's in Rome, a crypt was constructed, with a Confession, or martyr's chapel, in the center. Inside this was a platform on which the sarcophagus of Denis was displayed, with those of his companions Rusticus and Eleutherus on either side. Around the platform was a corridor where pilgrims could circulate, and bays with windows. Traces of painted decoration of this original crypt can be seen in some of the bays.

The crypt was not large enough for the growing number of pilgrims who came, so in about 832 the abbot Hilduin built a second crypt, to the west of the first, and a small new chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary was constructed next to the apse. The new crypt was extensively rebuilt under Suger in the 12th century.

Abbot Suger (c. 1081 - 1151), the patron of the rebuilding of the Abbey church, had begun his career in the church at the age of ten, and rose to become the Abbot in 1122. He was a school companion and then confidant and minister of Louis VI and then of his son Louis VII, and was a regent of Louis VII when the King was absent on the Crusades. He was an accomplished fund-raiser, acquiring treasures for the cathedral and collecting an enormous sum for its rebuilding. In about 1135 he began reconstructing and enlarging the abbey. In his famous account of the work undertaken during his administration, Suger explained his decision to rebuild the church, due to the decrepit state of the old structure and its inability to cope with the crowds of pilgrims visiting the shrine of St Denis.

In the 12th century, thanks largely, to Suger, the Basilica became a principal sanctuary of French Royalty, rivalling Reims Cathedral, where the Kings were crowned. The Abbey also kept the regalia of the coronation, including the robes, crowns and sceptre. Beginning in 1124, and until the mid-15th century, the Kings departed for war carrying the oriflamme, or battle flag, of St. Denis, to give the King the protection of the Saint. It was taken to the Abbey only when France was in danger. The flag was retired in 1488, when the Parisians opened the gates of Paris to invading English and Burgundian armies.

First Phase: the west front (1135-1140)

Suger began his rebuilding project at the western end of St Denis, demolishing the old Carolingian facade with its single, centrally located door. He extended the old nave westwards by an additional four bays and added a massive western narthex, incorporating a new façade and three chapels on the first floor level.

In the new design, massive vertical buttresses separated the three doorways and horizontal string-courses and window arcades clearly marked out the divisions. This clear delineation of parts was to influence subsequent west façade designs as a common theme in the development of Gothic architecture and a marked departure from the Romanesque. The portals themselves were sealed by gilded bronze doors, ornamented with scenes from Christ's Passion. They clearly recorded Suger's patronage with the following inscription:

On the lintel below the great tympanum showing the Last Judgement, beneath a carved figure of the kneeling Abbot, was inscribed the more modest plea;

Receive, stern Judge, the prayers of your Suger, Let me be mercifully numbered among your sheep.

Second Phase: the new choir, (1140-1144)

Suger's western extension was completed in 1140 and the three new chapels in the narthex were consecrated on 9 June of that year, but the Romanesque nave between was yet unchanged. He wrote about the new narthex at the west end and proposed chapels at the east: "Once the new rear part is joined to the part in front, the church shines with its middle part brightened. For bright is that which is brightly coupled with the bright, and bright is the noble edifice which is pervaded by the new light."

The new architecture was full of symbolism. The twelve columns in the choir represented the twelve Apostles, and the light represented the Holy Spirit. Like many French clerics in the 12th century AD, he was a follower of Pseudo-Dionysius the Areopagite, a 6th century mystic who equated the slightest reflection or glint with divine light. Suger's own words were carved in the nave: "For bright is that which is brightly coupled with the bright/and bright is the noble edifice which is pervaded by the new light." Following Suger's example, large stained glass windows filling the interior with mystical light became a prominent feature of Gothic architecture.

The Portal of Valois was the last of the Gothic structures planned by Suger. It was designed for the original building, but was not yet begun when Suger died in 1151. In the 13th century it was moved to the end of the new transept on the north side of the church. The sculpture of the portal includes six standing figures in the embracements and thirty figures in the voussures, or arches, over the doorway, which probably represent the Kings of the Old Testament. The scene in the Tympanum over the doorway depicts the martyrdom of Saint Denis. In their realism and finesse, they were a landmark in Gothic sculpture.

The new structure was finished and dedicated on 11 June 1144, in the presence of the King. The Abbey of St Denis thus became the prototype for further building in the royal domain of northern France. Through the rule of the Angevin dynasty, the style was introduced to England and spread throughout France, the Low Countries, Germany, Spain, northern Italy and Sicily.

The glazed triforium (center level) and upper clerestory, where windows fill almost the entire wall, a prominent feature of Rayonnant Gothic. (present windows from 19th c.)

Suger died in 1151 with the Gothic reconstruction incomplete. In 1231, Abbot Odo Clement began work on the rebuilding of the Carolingian nave, which remained sandwiched incongruously between Suger's Gothic works to the east and west. Both the nave and the upper parts of Suger's choir were replaced in the Rayonnant Gothic style. From the start it appears that Abbot Odo, with the approval of the Regent Blanche of Castile and her son, the young King Louis IX, planned for the new nave and its large crossing to have a much clearer focus as the French 'royal necropolis', or burial place. That plan was fulfilled in 1264 under Abbot Matthew of Vendôme when the bones of 16 former kings and queens were relocated to new tombs arranged around the crossing, eight Carolingian monarchs to the south and eight Capetians to the north. These tombs, featuring lifelike carved recumbent effigies or gisants lying on raised bases, were badly damaged during the French revolution though all but two were subsequently restored by Viollet le Duc in 1860.

The dark Romanesque nave, with its thick walls and small window-openings, was rebuilt using the very latest techniques, in what is now known as Rayonnant Gothic. This new style, which differed from Suger's earlier works as much as they had differed from their Romanesque precursors, reduced the wall area to an absolute minimum. Solid masonry was replaced with vast window openings filled with brilliant stained glass (all destroyed in the Revolution) and interrupted only by the most slender of bar tracery-not only in the clerestory but also, perhaps for the first time, in the normally dark triforium level. The upper facades of the two much-enlarged transepts were filled with two spectacular 12m-wide rose windows. As with Suger's earlier rebuilding work, the identity of the architect or master mason remains unknown. Although often attributed to Pierre de Montreuil, the only evidence for his involvement is an unrelated document of 1247 which refers to him as 'a mason from Saint-Denis'.

During the following centuries, the cathedral was pillaged twice; once during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453) and again during the Wars of Religion (1562-1598). Damage was largely limited to broken tombs and precious objects stolen from the altars and treasury. Many modifications were made under Marie de' Medici and later royal families. These included the construction of chapel adjoining the north transept to serve as a tomb for the monarchs of the Valois Dynasty (later demolished). A plan of circa 1700 by Félibien shows the Valois Chapel, a large mortuary chapel in the form of a domed colonnaded " rotunda", adjoining the north transept of the basilica and containing the tomb of the Valois. and the display of the skeleton of a baleine whale in the nave in 1771. Greater harm was done with the removal of the early Gothic column-statues which Suger had used to decorate the west front. (They were replaced with replicas in the 19th century). In 1700, reconstruction began of the monastic buildings adjacent to the church. This was not completed until the mid-18th century. Into these buildings Napoleon installed a school for the daughters of members of the French Legion of Honour, which still is in operation.

Due to its connections to the French monarchy and proximity to Paris, the abbey of Saint-Denis was a prime target of revolutionary vandalism. On Friday, 14 September 1792, the monks celebrated their last services in the abbey church; the monastery was dissolved the next day. The church was used to store grain and flour. In 1793, the National Convention, the revolutionary government, ordered the violation of the sepulchres and the destruction of the royal tombs, but agreed to create a commission to select those monuments which were of historical interest for preservation. In 1798, these were transferred to the chapel of the Petit-Augustins, which later became the Museum of French Monuments.

Most of the medieval monastic buildings were demolished in 1792. Although the church itself was left standing, it was profaned, its treasury confiscated and its reliquaries and liturgical furniture melted down for their metallic value. Some objects, including a chalice and aquamanile donated to the abbey in Suger's time, were successfully hidden and survive to this day. The jamb figures of the façade representing Old Testament royalty, mistakenly identified as images of royal French kings and queens, were removed from the portals and the tympana sculpture defaced.

In 1794, the government decided to remove the lead tiles from the roof, to melt them down to make bullets. This left the interior of the church badly exposed to the weather.

After Napoleon's downfall, the ashes of the previous king, Louis XVI, were ceremoniously moved from the cemetery of the Madeleine to Saint-Denis. The last king to be entombed in Saint-Denis was Louis XVIII in 1824.

In 1813 François Debret was named the chief architect of the cathedral; he proceeded, over thirty years, to repair the Revolutionary damage. He was later best known for his design of the Salle Le Peletier, the primary opera house of Paris before the Opéra Garnier in 1873. He replaced the upper stained glass windows in the nave with depictions of the historic kings of France, and added new windows to the transept depicting the renovation, and the July 1837 visit to the Cathedral of King Louis Philippe. On 9 June, the spire of the tower was struck by lightning and destroyed. Debret rapidly put into place a new spire, but he did not fully understand the principles of Gothic architecture. He made errors in his plans for the new structure, which resulted in the spire and tower collapsing under their own weight in 1845.

Debret resigned and was replaced by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, who had the support of Prosper Mérimée, the French author who led campaign for the restoration of ruined Gothic architecture in France. Viollet-le-Duc continued working on the Abbey until his death in 1879, and replaced many of the creations conceived by Debret. Viollet-le-Duc focused on the tombs, rearranging and transforming portions of the interior into a vast museum of French sculpture. In the 1860s Emperor Napoleon III asked Viollet-le-Duc to construct an imperial section in the crypt for him and his dynasty, but he was deposed and went into exile before it was begun.

In 1895, when the chapter created by Napoleon was dissolved, the church lost its cathedral rank and reverted to being a parish church. It did not become a cathedral again until 1966, with the creation of the new diocese of Saint-Denis. The formal title is now the "Baslilique-cathédrale de Saint-Denis".

In December 2016, 170 years after the north tower's dismantlement and following several false starts, the Ministry of Culture again proposed its reconstruction after concluding it was technically feasible-albeit without public funding. An association, Suivez la flèche ("Follow the Spire"), chaired by Patrick Braouezec, has since been established to support the reconstruction, with the aim of raising the necessary funds by opening the reconstruction works to the general public, along the model of the Guédelon Castle. In March 2018, the culture ministry signed an accord with the association, officially launching the reconstruction project, with works expected to commence in May 2020. However, as of spring 2021, work had not begun.

This new façade, 34 metres (112 ft) wide and 20 metres (66 ft) deep, has three portals, the central one larger than those either side, reflecting the relative width of the central nave and lateral aisles. This tripartite arrangement was clearly influenced by the late 11th century Norman-Romanesque façades of the abbey churches of St Etienne It also shared with them a three-storey elevation and flanking towers. Only the south tower survives; the north tower was dismantled following a tornado which struck in 1846.

The bronze doors of the central portal are modern, but are a faithful reproduction of the original doors, which depicted the Passion of Christ and the Resurrection.

The chevet, at the east end of the cathedral, was one of the first parts of the structure rebuilt into the Gothic style. The work was commissioned by Abbot Suger in 1140 and completed in 1144. It was considerably modified under the young King Louis IX and his mother, Blanche of Castille, the Regent of the Kingdom, beginning in 1231. The apse was built much higher, along with the nave. Large flying buttresses were added to the chevet, to support the upper walls, and to make possible the enormous windows installed there. At the same time, the transept was enlarged and given large rose windows in the new rayonnant style, divided into multiple lancet windows topped by trilobe windows and other geometric forms inscribed in circles. The walls of the nave on both sides were entirely filled with windows, each composed of four lancets topped by a rose, filling the entire space above the triforium. The upper walls, like the chevet, were supported by flying buttresses whose bases were placed between the chapels alongside the nave.

The Porte de Valois, or north portal, was originally built in the 12th century, near the end of Suger's life, then rebuilt at the end of the north transept in the 13th century. According to Suger, the original entrance on the north did not have sculpture, but mosaic, which Suger replaced by sculpture in 1540. It is considered an important step in the history of Gothic sculpture, because of the skill of the carving, and the lack of rigidity of the figures. There are six figures in the embrasures and thirty figures in the voussures, or arches above the door, which represent Kings, probably those of the Old Testament, while the tympanum over the door illustrates the martyrdom of Saint-Denis and his companions Eleuthere and Rusticus. This portal was among the last works commissioned by Suger; he died in 1151, before it was completed. The original sculpture that was destroyed in the Revolution was replaced with sculpture from the early 19th century, made by Felix Brun.

The tympanum of the south portal illustrates the last days of the Denis and his companions before their martyrdom. The piedroits are filled with medallions representing the labours of the days of month

The nave, the portion to the west of the church reserved for ordinary worshippers, and the choir, the portion to the east reserved for the clergy, were rebuilt into the Gothic style in the 13th century, after the apse at the east and the west front. Like the other Gothic churches in the Ile-de-France, its walls had three levels; large arcades of massive pillars on the ground floor; a narrow triforium or passageway midway up the wall; originally windowless; and a row of high windows the clerestory, above. Slender columns rose from the pillars up the walls to support the four-part rib vaults. As a result of the Rayonnant reconstruction in the triforium was given windows, and the upper walls were entirely filled with glass, which reached upward into the arches of the vaults, flooding the church with light.

The chevet had been constructed by Suger in record time, in just four years, between 1140 and 1144, and was one of the first great realisations of Gothic architecture. The double disambulatory is divided not by walls but by two rows of columns, while the outside walls, thanks to buttresses on the exterior, are filled with windows. The new system allowed light to pass into the interior of the choir. The disambulatory connects with the five radiating chapels at the east end of the cathedral, which have their own large windows. To give them greater unity, the five chapels share the same system of vaulted roofs. To make the walls between the chapels even less visible, they are masked with networks of slender columns and tracery.

The apse with its two ambulatories and axial chapels was extensively rebuilt in the 12th century, to connect harmoniously with the new and larger nave, but a major effort was made to save the early Gothic features created by Suger, including the double disambulatory with its large windows. To accomplish this, four large pillars were installed in the crypt to support the upper level, and the walls of the first traverse of the sanctuary were placed at an angle to connect with the wider transept.

The basilica retains stained glass of many periods (although most of the panels from Suger's time have been removed for long-term conservation and replaced with photographic transparencies), including exceptional modern glass, and a set of 12 misericords.

The role of St. Denis as the necropolis of French kings formally began under Hugh Capet (987-996), but the tombs of several earlier kings were already located there. The site was chosen because of its association with St. Denis, the first Bishop of Paris and one of the earliest Christian leaders in France, who was buried there All but three of the monarchs of France from the 10th century until 1793 have their remains here. The remains of some monarchs, including Clovis I (465-511), were moved to St. Denis from other churches.

The crypt beneath the church is divided into two sections; the older, called archeological crypt, is located under the transept, and was originally built in about 775 AD, when the abbey was reconstructed by Abbot Fuldiad. It had a disambulatory, passage which allowed pilgrims to circulate around the relics of Saint Denis and his companions on display in the center. It was lit by alternating small windows in the walls and lamps placed in niches.

The crypt was rebuilt and extended eastward by Suger. The walls were decorated with blind arches, divided by columns whose capitals illustrate Biblical scenes and scenes from the life of St. Denis. Thirty-nine of the original Romanesque sixty-two capitals are still in place. Sugar constructed a new disambulatory connected with radiating chapels.

During the reign of Henry IV, the central portion of this crypt was devoted the Bourbon dynasty, but the tombs themselves were simple lead coffins in wood cases. The effigies of many of the kings and queens are on their tombs, but during the French Revolution their bodies were thrown out of their coffins, dumped into three trenches and covered with lime to destroy them. The older monarchs were removed in August 1793 to celebrate the revolutionary Festival of Reunion, the Valois and Bourbon monarchs in October 1793 to celebrate the execution of Marie Antoinette. Preservationist Alexandre Lenoir saved many of the monuments by claiming them as artworks for his Museum of French Monuments. The bodies of several Plantagenet monarchs of England were likewise removed from Fontevraud Abbey during the French Revolution. Napoleon Bonaparte reopened the church in 1806, but left the royal remains in their mass graves. In 1817 the restored Bourbons ordered the mass graves to be opened, but only portions of three bodies remained intact. The remaining bones from 158 bodies were collected into an ossuary in the crypt of the church, behind marble plates bearing their names.

In later years, tombs were placed along the aisles that surrounded around the choir and the nave. In the 13th century King Louis IX (Saint Louis) commissioned a number of important tombs of earlier kings and French historical figures, whose remains were collected from other churches. These included the tombs of Clovis I, Charles Martel, Constance of Castille, Pepin the Short, Robert the Pious, and Hugh Capet (which disappeared during the Revolution). The new tombs were all made in the same style and costume, with a reposing figure holding a staff, to illustrate the continuity of the French Monarchy.

The tombs of the Renaissance expressed are theatrical and varied. The largest is that of Louis XII (died 1515) and his wife, Anne of Brittany (died 1514). It takes the form of a white marble temple filled and surrounded with figures. Inside it, the King and Queen are depicted realistically in their dying agonies, Allegorical figures seated around the temple depict the virtues of the King and Queen. On the roof of the tomb, the King and Queen are shown again, kneeling and calmly praying, celebrating their victory over death, thanks to their virtues.

The monument to Henry II of France and Catherine de Medici (1559) followed a similar format; a Roman temple, in this case designed by the celebrated Renaissance architect Primatrice with sculpture on the roof depicting the King and Queen in prayer. The King places his hand on his heart illustrating his Catholic faith a period of religious conflicts.

In the 19th century, following the restoration of the monarchy, Louis XVIII had the remains of Louis XVI and Marie-Antoinette brought to St. Denis. The body of the Dauphin, who died of illness and neglect at the hands of his revolutionary captors, was buried in an unmarked grave in a Parisian churchyard near the Temple. During Napoleon's exile in Elba, the restored Bourbons ordered a search for the corpses of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. They were found on 21 January 1815, brought to Saint-Denis and placed in the archeologi crypt. Their tombs are covered with black marble slabs installed in 1975.

Louis XVIII, upon his death in 1824, was buried in the centre of the crypt, near the graves of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette. The coffins of royal family members who died between 1815 and 1830 were also placed in the vaults. Under the direction of architect Viollet-le-Duc, church monuments that had been taken to the Museum of French Monuments were returned to the church. The corpse of Louis VII, who had been buried at Barbeau Abbey and whose tomb had not been touched by the revolutionaries, was brought to Saint-Denis and buried in the crypt. In 2004, the mummified heart of the Dauphin, the boy who would have been Louis XVII, verified to be authentic by DNA testing, was placed in a crystal vase and sealed into the wall of the crypt.

The Sacristy, the room where the clergy traditionally donned their vestments, was transformed by the architect Jacques Cellerier in 1812 into a Neo-classical gallery of murals which depict scenes from the history of the cathedral. A work added to the Sacristy is "Allegory of the Divine Word", a painting by Simon Vouet, which originally had been commissioned by Louis XIII for the retable of the Chateau of Saint-Germain-en-Laye. It was acquired for the cathedral by administration of national monuments in 1993. The wall cases also display a selection of precious objects from the cathedral's collection.

Abbot Suger commissioned a large amount of stained glass for the new chevet, but only very small amount of the original glass from the time of Suger survived intact. In the 19th century it was collected by Eugène Viollet-le-Duc, and was integrated into windows in the chevet. Original glass includes the figure of Suger prostrating himself at the feet of Christ, in the window called "The Childhood of Christ"; the Tree of Jesse, illustrating the genealogy of Christ, in the Axis chapel; the "Allegories of Saint Paul" and "The Life of Moses" in the fourth radiating chapel on the north; "The vision of Ezekiel under the sign of tau", originally from a group illustrating the Passion of Christ, in the fourth rayonnant chapel on the south, in the left bay and third register. Another piece of original window from Suger's time, depicting mythical Griffonsa a symbol of Paradise, is found in the second radiating chapel on the north. Other scenes which Suger described, showing the pilgrimage of Charlemagne and the Crusades, have disappeared.

Much of the current stained glass dates to the 19th century, as the church began to be restored from the damage of the Revolution. The architect François Debret designed the first Neo-Gothic windows of the nave in 1813. these include the upper windows of the nave, which represent the Kings and Queens of France. Later upper windows of the south transept depict the restoration of the church, and particularly the visit there of Louis Philippe I, the last King of France, in 1837. This large group of windows was designed by the painter Jean-Baptiste Debret, the brother of the architect.

The new west front sculpture of St. Denis had an important influence on Gothic style. The influential features of the new façade include the tall, thin statues of Old Testament prophets and kings attached to columns ( jamb figures) flanking the portals (destroyed in 1771 but recorded in Montfaucon's drawings). These were also adopted at the cathedrals of Paris and Chartres, constructed a few years later, and became a feature of almost every Gothic portal thereafter.

Above the doorways, the central tympanum was carved with Christ in Majesty displaying his wounds with the dead emerging from their tombs below. Scenes from the martyrdom of St Denis were carved above the south (right hand) portal, while above the north portal was a mosaic (lost), even though this was, as Suger put it 'contrary to the modern custom'. Of the original sculpture, very little remains, most of what is now visible being the result of rather clumsy restoration work in 1839. Some fragments of the original sculptures survive in the collection of the Musée de Cluny.

The choir stalls, the seats reserved for the clergy, have particularly fine carvings, particularly on the misericord, the small seat on each stall on which the clergy could rest when standing for long periods of time. The stalls were made in the 16th century, and were originally located in the high chapel of the Chateau de Gaillon in the Eure Department. In 1805 Napoleon Bonaparte decided to create three new chapels at Saint-Denis, as well as a chapter of bishops under the authority of his uncle, Cardinal Fesch. The stalls were moved to Saint-Denis and installed for their use. Besides the carved wood, the stalls are decorated with elaborate multi-coloured religious scenes in marquetry.

It contains numerous innovations introduced in the romantic area, in particular the very first Barker lever. With three manuals and pedals, it is protected by the Monument historique label. It was restored in 1901 by Charles Mutin, and between 1983 and 1987 by Jean-Loup Boisseau and Bertrand Cattiaux. Pierre Pincemaille, sole titular organist for 30 years (between 1987 and 2018), held many recitals (between 1989 and 1995, then between 2014 and 2017), and recorded eight CDs using this instrument.

The cathedral contained an extensive treasury, mainly constituted by the Abbot Suger. It contained crowns (those of Charlemagne, Saint Louis, and Henry IV of France), a cross, and liturgical objects.[citation needed ]

All but four of the Kings of France were buried in the basilica (with Charlemagne, Louis XI, Charles X, & Louis Philippe I buried elsewhere), as well as a few other monarchs. The remains of the early monarchs were removed from the destroyed Abbey of St Genevieve. Some of the more prominent monarchs buried in the basilica are:

Clovis I (466-511)

Childebert I (496-558)

Aregund (515/520-580)

Fredegund (third wife of Chilperic I), (died 597)

Dagobert I (603-639)

Clovis II (634-657)

Charles Martel (686-741)

Pepin the Short (714-768) and his wife, Bertrada of Laon (born 710-727, died 783)

Charles the Bald (823-877) (his brass monument was melted down during the Revolution) and his first wife, Ermentrude of Orléans (823-869)

Carloman II (866-884)

Robert II of France (972-1031) and his third wife, Constance of Arles (986-1032)

Henry I of France (1008-1060)

Louis VI of France (1081-1137)

Louis VII of France (1120-1180) and his second wife, Constance of Castile (1140-1160)

Philip II of France (1165-1223)

St. Louis IX of France (1214-1270)

Charles I of Naples (1227-1285), an effigy covers his heart burial

Philip III of France (1245-1285) and his first wife, Isabella of Aragon, Queen of France (1248-1271)

Philip IV of France (1268-1314)

Leo V, King of Armenia (1342-1393) (cenotaph)

Charles VII, King of France (1403-1461)

Charles VIII, King of France (1470-1498)

Louis XII of France (1462-1515)

Francis I of France (1494-1547)

Henry II (1519-1559) and Catherine de' Medici (1519-1589)

Francis II (1544-1560)

Charles IX (1550-1574) (no monument)

Henry III (1551-1589), also King of Poland (heart burial monument)

Henry IV (1553-1610)

Louis XIII (1601-1643)

Louis XIV (1638-1715)

Louis XV (1710-1774)

Louis XVI (1754-1793) and Marie Antoinette (1755-1793)

Louis XVII (1785-1795) (only his heart; his body was dumped into a mass grave)

Louis XVIII (1755-1824)

Blanche of France (daughter of Philip IV)

Nicolas Henri, Duke of Orléans (1607-1611), son of Henry IV

Gaston, Duke of Orléans (1608-1660), son of Henry IV

Henrietta Maria of France (1609-1669), wife of Charles I of Scotland and England

Philippe I, Duke of Orléans (1640-1701), brother of Louis XIV

Maria Theresa of Spain (1638-1683), consort of Louis XIV

Louis of France (1661-1711), le Grand Dauphin

Maria Anna Victoria of Bavaria (1660-1690), Dauphin of France, wife of Louis

Princess Anne Élisabeth of France (1662), daughter of Louis XIV

Princess Marie Anne of France (1664), daughter of Louis XIV

Marie Thérèse of France (1667-1672), daughter of Louis XIV

Philippe Charles, Duke of Anjou (1668-1671), Duke of Anjou, son of Louis XIV

Louis François of France (1672), Duke of Anjou, son of Louis XIV

Philippe II, Duke of Orléans (1674-1723), Regent of France

Louis of France (1682-1712), Duke of Burgundy

Charles of France (1686-1714), Duke of Berry

Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Orléans (1695-1719), Duchess of Berry

Na (not baptized) d'Alençon (1711)

Charles d'Alençon(1713) Duke of Alençon

Marie Louise Élisabeth d'Alençon (1714)

Marie Leszczyńska (1703-1768), consort of Louis XV

Louise Élisabeth of France (1727-1759), Duchess of Parma

Henriette of France (1727-1752), daughter of Louis XV and twin of the above

Louise of France (1728-1733), daughter of Louis XV

Louis of France (1729-1765), Dauphin of France (only his heart; his body was buried in the Cathedral of Saint-Étienne)

Philippe of France (1730-1733), Duke of Anjou

Princess Marie Adélaïde of France (1732-1800), daughter of Louis XV

Princess Victoire of France (1733-1799), daughter of Louis XV

Princess Sophie of France (1734-1782), daughter of Louis XV

Princess Louise of France (1737-1787), daughter of Louis XV,

Louis Joseph, Dauphin of France (1781-1789), first son of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette

Princess Sophie Hélène Béatrice of France (1786-1787), second daughter of Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette

Henri de La Tour d'Auvergne, Vicomte de Turenne (1611-1675), Maréchal General de France.

c. 250 a.d. - Martyrdom of Saint Denis

after 313 - Construction of first basilica

451-459 - Basilica enlarged by Saint Genevieve

626-639 - Further enlargement by Dagobert, first King to have sepulchre in the church

775 - New church dedicated in presence of Charlemagne

1122-1151 - Suger is Abbot of Saint-Denis

1140-1144 - Reconstruction of the chevet with Gothic features

1231 - Reconstruction of the upper chevet and the nave

1267 - Louis IX inaugurates the royal necropolis

c. 1320-1324 - Construction of six chapels along the north side of nave

1364 - Charles V of France commissions his tomb in the church

1572 - Beginning of the construction of the mausoleum of the Valois dynasty

1771 - Removal of the statue-columns installed by Suger on the west front

1792 - Final office celebrated by the monks, following the French Revolution

1805 - Beginning of restoration ordered by Napoleon

1813 - New restoration begun by architect François Debret

1845 - Collapse of Debret's rebuilt north spire. Eugène Viollet-le-Duc becomes chief architect of restoration

1862 - The basilica is classified a French historical monument

1966 - The basilica becomes the cathedral of the new Department of Seine-Saint-Denis.

2004 - The heart of Louis XVII is transferred to the chapel of the Bourbons.

1. ^ Site of the Basilique-cathédrale de Saint-Denis, retrieved 23 November 2020

2. ^ Enclopaedia Britannica on-line, "Gothic Architecture", retrieved 23 November 2020

3. "Saint Denis Cathedral spire". Paris Digest. 2019.

4. ^ Doublet, Dom (1625). Histoire de l'abbaye de Saint-Denys en France. pp. 164-165.

5. ^ DeSmet, W.M.A. (1981). Mammals in the Seas: General papers and large cetaceans. Whaling During the Middle Ages. ISBN 978-9251005132.

6. ^ Bruce Watson, Light: A Radiant History from Creation to the Quantum Age. Bloomsbury, 2016, p 52.

7. H. Honour and J. Fleming, ^ The Visual Arts: A History. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2005. ISBN 0131935070

8. ^ "L'affaire de la tour nord : La querelle des anciens et des modernes". Basilique Cathédrale de Saint-Denis (in French). Seine-Saint-Denis Tourisme.

9. ^ Bourdon, Gwenaël (30 January 2017). "Basilique Saint-Denis : le chantier de la flèche freiné dans son élan". Le Parisien (in French).

10. ^ "Accord définitif de l'Etat : la flèche de la Basilique sera remontée". Basilique Cathédrale de Saint-Denis (in French). Seine-Saint-Denis Tourisme.

11. Lindsay, Suzanne Glover (18 October 2014). "The Revolutionary Exhumations at St-Denis, 1793". Center for the Study of Material & Visual Cultures of Religion. Yale University.

12. ^ Broughton, Philip Delves (7 June 2004). "Tragic French boy king's heart finds a final resting place after 209 years". Daily Telegraph. London, UK. ISSN 0307-1235. Archived from the original on 12 January 2022.

13. Base Palissy: PM93000477, Ministère français de la Culture. (in French)

14. Knecht, 227. Henry's gesture is now unclear, since a ^ missal, resting on a prie-dieu (prayer desk), was removed from the sculpture during the French revolution and melted down.

15. ^ Timeline events from Plagnieux, Philippe, "La basilique cathédrale de Saint-Denis",(1998), p. 49

16. ^ "Birth of the Gothic: Abbot Suger and the Ambulatory at St. Denis". Smarthistory at Khan Academy. Archived from the original on 3 November 2014.

Félibien, Michel. 1973. Histoire de l'abbaye royale de Saint-Denys en France: Lettre-préf. de M. le Duc de Bauffremont. Introd. de Hervé Pinoteau. 1. [Nachdr. d. Ausg. Paris, 1706]. - 1973. - 524 S. Paris: Éd. du Palais Royal.

O'Hanlon, John (1873), Lives of the Irish saints

Saint-Denis Cathedral, Alain Erlande-Brandenburg, Editions Ouest-France, Rennes

Gerson, Paula Lieber. (1986). Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis: a symposium, New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art. ISBN 978-0870994081

Conrad Rudolph, Artistic Change at St-Denis: Abbot Suger's Program and the Early Twelfth Century Controversy over Art (1990)

Conrad Rudolph, "Inventing the Gothic Portal: Suger, Hugh of Saint Victor, and the Construction of a New Public Art at Saint-Denis," Art History 33 (2010) 568-595

Conrad Rudolph, "Inventing the Exegetical Stained-Glass Window: Suger, Hugh, and a New Elite Art," Art Bulletin 93 (2011) 399-422

Watson, Bruce, Light: A Radiant History from Creation to the Quantum Age, (London and NY: Bloomsbury, 2016).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Basilica of Saint-Denis (French: Basilique royale de Saint-Denis, now formally known as the Basilique-cathédrale de Saint-Denis) is a large former medieval abbey church and present cathedral in the commune of Saint-Denis, a northern suburb of Paris.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
＊本文內含劇情，若您有被雷的顧忌，建議您觀影後再行閱讀。

《在地圖結束的地方》（Timbuktu）是一部2014年上映，由法國與 茅利塔尼亞 合拍的電影，得到當年度法國凱薩獎包括最佳影片與最佳導演在內的7項大獎，入圍坎城影展主競賽片並拿到普世評審團獎，也得到了奧斯卡金像獎最佳外語片的提名。

電影的背景設定在西非國家 馬利共和國中部的 廷巴克圖 ，為了向讀者勾勒出電影呈現的氛圍，讓我們先介紹一下這個陌生的地名。

馬利共和國是西非的一個內陸國家，國土面積是台灣的34倍，人口卻只有台灣的6成，官方語言是法語，官方文字為法語和 班巴拉語 ，但事實上境內有許多民族語言通用，識字率大約只有三分之一。人均GDP為631美元，台灣的GDP是這個數字的34倍，平均壽命更是只有45歲。

光看數字就粗可了解這個國家的困頓，與許多其他西非國家類似的，這個有一半國土是沙漠的國家，自1960年從法國的殖民中獨立之後，就不斷地落入獨裁者手中，一直到1992年才擁有了自己的第一次民主選舉，但很不幸的，2012年的武裝叛亂又讓它陷入戰火。這部電影就是以飽受伊斯蘭激進份子、反政府武裝以及分離主義者蹂躪下的馬利共和國為舞台。

而廷巴克圖是馬利共和國領土中央的城市，人口只有五萬人，但它在歷史上曾經散發過傲人的光彩。在歐洲勢力侵入西非之前，廷巴克圖由於身處陸運要衝而成為西非的文化重鎮，商業、教育、文化興盛，曾經在這一座城市中就存有120座圖書館。過去有句諺語說：「鹽來自北方，黃金來自南方，安拉的教導和智慧的寶藏來自廷巴克圖。」可見廷巴克圖過往的地位。

但自從歐洲人踏上西非的土地開始，海運的重要性漸漸凌駕陸運，廷巴克圖的發展也快速衰退，現在只是一座貧窮的觀光小城而已。2012年，從北方南下的伊斯蘭激進份子實質控制了廷巴克圖，他們帶來的新律法與當地既有的傳統習俗和宗教信仰間產生了衝突。

電影中分散地用許多不同角度描述衝突的發生，一位賣魚的婦女在荷槍實彈的士兵面前大聲抗議女性必須戴上手套的新規定，表示這會使得她無法謀生；男性的褲裝被規定必須露出腳踝，年老的男子只好在大街上脫下外褲以符合要求；士兵們在夜晚的城鎮裡默默搜索唱歌奏樂的鎮民，原來快樂吟唱的女孩被判在廣場上受鞭刑，她忍著痛楚一面受刑，一面仍倔強的放聲歌唱，令人動容。

導演特別用了三個片段來表現「禁止足球」這件事，一方面士兵們在街道上追查一顆足球的主人是誰，被問到的人忙不迭地否認，另一方面士兵們卻私下興奮地討論法國的足球明星席丹，顯見對足球其實充滿熱情，最後再用一段沒有足球的足球比賽作結。攻擊的、防守的、射門的、守門的、傳球的、抄球的、甚至還有裁判，在沒有足球的足球比賽裡卑微地靠想像互相取暖，呈現出人類需求永遠無法真正被暴力壓抑的本質。

甚至，導演安排了地方上的宗教領袖，以近乎平鋪直敘的方式教諭這些伊斯蘭激進份子領袖，質疑他們擁護的律法與伊斯蘭教義不合之處。

在電影的後半段，導演將兩大一小的家庭從眾多故事線中拉了出來，用男人的誤殺鄰里、女人的犧牲共死，以及女兒失依的命運為電影畫下了一個悲劇性的結尾。

當然，這部電影中第一個被看見的主題，是伊斯蘭激進份子強將自身信奉的價值與律法，用暴力加於鎮民身上的行為。鎮民的生活習慣與民俗，是依據真實的需求和歷史脈絡自然發展出來的。伊斯蘭激進份子無視當地的真實需要，強迫推銷自以為的正義，不但無助於聖戰目標的實現，更造成了悲劇的發生。

這是電影的主軸，也是所有影評或介紹這部電影的文章共同的主張，但是，如果只從這個角度看這部電影，未免過於膚淺，也小看了導演的視野。

要偷懶地把這些伊斯蘭激進份子都描寫成冷血無理的惡魔黨很簡單，但這麼做就流於媚俗又刻板。事實上，他們也是活生生的人，也有七情六慾喜怒哀樂。加入聖戰就算不是為了理想，也是迫於生活，沒有人是因為單純想要作惡而為之的。

激進份子頭目喜歡上有夫之婦，大獻殷勤之際被冷眼拒絕，雖然離開後為了發洩怨氣掃射草叢，但在當下也只得以禮相待；受命搜索黑夜中歌聲出處的士兵，在找到歌聲源頭後回報上級時，刻意地提到歌曲內容終究是為了讚頌安拉；誤殺鄰里的男人被關在牢裡的時候，哀求獄卒借電話讓他打給家人，獄卒也沒有二話大方出借。

在整部電影中，除了依律法判決的鞭刑與槍決之外，沒有任何的暴力行為，士兵沒有一天到晚拿槍指著鎮民，沒有惡毒的謾罵或威脅，沒有掠奪也沒有壓榨，他們的確是用武力實質控制了這座城市，但並沒有甚麼虐待與剝削鎮民的意圖。

在表演上，只是聽命行事的士兵們在傳達禁制規定時，神情總是猶豫虛弱的，甚至有時看起來像是打個商量；激進份子頭目們在規定被質疑時，也常出現彷彿經歷內心掙扎般的大段沉默，即使最後這些律法終究還是被維持了，但可以看出其中更可能的原因，是政治性的不得不為。

揚棄了過於單純的善惡二元，才能貼近更為複雜的現實世界，並直指問題的核心，也就是「宗教成為政治的工具」這個主題。

當在地的宗教領袖直白地質疑新律法與伊斯蘭教義扞格之處，激進份子的首領並沒有回嘴，他的沉默不是因為他在思考宗教大哉問，他很清楚真正的教義為何。他的沉默是真實的反省─即使是個無法改過的反省，而這才是悲劇的本質。

責任編輯：闕士淵
核稿編輯：楊士範

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
《在地圖結束的地方》：不媚俗不刻板地說伊斯蘭激進份子的故事 - TNL The News Lens 關鍵評論網

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
我們是一群對於現今媒體不滿又想要做出一些改變的人。有一直在媒體產業的編輯，有多年在海外各地工作的專業經理人，還有對於網路技術有熱情的開發者，以及一群對於我們這個夢想有興趣，願意一起幫忙的實習生、朋友以及許多外稿作者。 ...

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWnquYVCGU8

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
《 聖誕快樂》（法語： Joyeux Noël，英語： Merry Christmas），2005年的 電影。故事由 第一次世界大戰期間發生的真人真事改編，講述1914年的英法聯軍與德軍三方協議 聖誕節休戰。此電影後來入圍 第78屆奧斯卡金像獎 。

第一次世界大戰，同盟國陣營之德國軍隊與協約國陣營之英法兩軍對峙。戰場上三方僵持不下。 蘇格蘭士兵喬納森（Jonathan）和兄弟威廉參戰，威廉戰死，他感到無比的孤獨和自責。與喬納森和威廉來自同一個村莊的神父帕爾馬（Palmer）在 戰場 上冒險救人，結果被上級責罵。

歐德貝赫（Audebert，法國）十分掛念 懷孕的 妻子，可是妻子卻被困於淪陷區；他收到 消息，不久後要去接受 炮兵訓練，可是他並不想去。歐德貝赫的侍從波檞（Ponchel）原為 髮型師 ，十分懷念其母親，他隨身攜帶一個鬧鐘，每到十點鬧鈴聲響遍戰場，這是他平日與母親一起喝咖啡的時間。

丹麥女高音 女高音安娜（Anna）掛念在戰場上的 情人-- 男高音史賓克（Sprink，德國），終於她想到一個妙計跟他見面：請 德國王子允許她和史賓克在 平安夜 為王子與其他高級將領獻唱。

霍斯特麥爾（Horstmayer，德國）頗討厭身為 藝術家 的史賓克，認為他沒用。史賓克和安娜難得見面，但高歌後史賓克堅持返回戰場，安娜冒險跟他回去。

蘇格蘭軍隊收到一批 樂器（ 蘇格蘭風笛 ），神父帕爾曼和其他士兵忍不住吹奏，激起思鄉之情。

德軍收到一堆 聖誕樹。史賓克引吭高歌，蘇格蘭軍隊和奏。三方軍官決定停戰。在此夜，眾人無分彼此，相互分享食物，共同喝 酒、吃 巧克力、聊彼此家人......神父帕爾曼主持 彌撒 。

由於德法地理相連，三方軍官聊至家人時，霍斯特麥爾懷念與妻子共遊法國，歐德貝赫分享自己畫的不像的妻子畫作，告知遺失唯一的妻子照片。令人意外的是霍斯特麥爾竟在戰場拾獲歐德貝赫的錢包想著戰後循錢包內的地址交還，因為錢包裡的照片，讓霍斯特麥爾立即物歸原主，而歐德貝赫也再度找回妻子的照片。

次日，三方軍官再度協議，繼續休戰，各自安葬陣亡遺體。然後大家踢 足球、玩 撲克牌。之後三方回各陣地，但此時霍斯特麥爾得知德國軍隊即將進行轟炸，不忍敵國二軍朋友受傷，竟叫全部士兵們都來自己的 戰壕 暫避。當砲擊結束，各國士兵打算返回各自陣地時，英軍蘇格蘭軍官克里斯多福（Christopher）卻說：還沒完，你們射完後，換我們回擊！

於是三方士兵又一同從德國陣地移至英法陣地。

波檞為了得到自己 母親和歐德貝赫妻子的消息，假冒成德國士兵，去德國陣營打聽消息，回來時卻不幸被喬納森射死。史賓克將被 囚禁兩星期， 罪名是違反命令。史賓克和安娜為了在一起，寧當別國的 戰俘 。

眾人寫的書信不幸被軍方看見。神父帕爾曼被他教區之上的主教斥責。歐德貝赫失去成為炮兵的機會，並要調往另一戰區。霍斯特麥爾和部下被派往 俄國戰鬥，經過家鄉卻罰不准下車探望家人，還被德國王子 侮辱 。

儘管大家被調不同戰區，未必再能相見，可是眾人似乎都相信，那天的決定沒有錯。

《夢迴故里》（I'm Dreaming of Home）

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
聖誕快樂 (2005年電影) - 维基百科，自由的百科全书

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
《 聖誕快樂》（法語： Joyeux Noël，英語： Merry Christmas），2005年的 電影。故事由 第一次世界大戰期間發生的真人真事改編，講述1914年的英法聯軍與德軍三方協議 聖誕節休戰。此電影後來入圍 第78屆奧斯卡金像獎 。 第一次世界大戰，同盟國陣營之德國軍隊與協約國陣營之英法兩軍對峙。戰場上三方僵持不下。 蘇格蘭士兵喬納森（Jonathan）和兄弟威廉參戰，威廉戰死，他感到無比的孤獨和自責。與喬納森和威廉來自同一個村莊的神父帕爾馬（Palmer）在 戰場 上冒險救人，結果被上級責罵。 歐德貝赫（Audebert，法國）十分掛念 懷孕的 妻子，可是妻子卻被困於淪陷區；他收到 消息，不久後要去接受 炮兵 訓練，可是他並不想去。歐德貝赫的侍從波檞（Ponchel）原為 髮型師 ，十分懷念其母親，他隨身攜帶一個鬧鐘，每到十點鬧鈴聲響遍戰場，這是他平日與母親一起喝咖啡的時間。 丹麥女高音 女高音安娜（Anna）掛念在戰場上的 情人-- 男高音史賓克（Sprink，德國），終於她想到一個妙計跟他見面：請 德國 王子允許她和史賓克在 平安夜 為王子與其他高級將領獻唱。 霍斯特麥爾（Horstmayer，德國）頗討厭身為 藝術家 的史賓克，認為他沒用。史賓克和安娜難得見面，但高歌後史賓克堅持返回戰場，安娜冒險跟他回去。 蘇格蘭軍隊收到一批 樂器（ 蘇格蘭風笛 ），神父帕爾曼和其他士兵忍不住吹奏，激起思鄉之情。 德軍收到一堆 聖誕樹。史賓克引吭高歌，蘇格蘭軍隊和奏。三方軍官決定停戰。在此夜，眾人無分彼此，相互分享食物，共同喝 酒、吃 巧克力、聊彼此家人......神父帕爾曼主持 彌撒 。 由於德法地理相連，三方軍官聊至家人時，霍斯特麥爾懷念與妻子共遊法國，歐德貝赫分享自己畫的不像的妻子畫作，告知遺失唯一的妻子照片。令人意外的是霍斯特麥爾竟在戰場拾獲歐德貝赫的錢包想著戰後循錢包內的地址交還，因為錢包裡的照片，讓霍斯特麥爾立即物歸原主，而歐德貝赫也再度找回妻子的照片。 次日，三方軍官再度協議，繼續休戰，各自安葬陣亡遺體。然後大家踢 足球、玩 撲克牌。之後三方回各陣地，但此時霍斯特麥爾得知德國軍隊即將進行轟炸，不忍敵國二軍朋友受傷，竟叫全部士兵們都來自己的 戰壕 暫避。當砲擊結束，各國士兵打算返回各自陣地時，英軍蘇格蘭軍官克里斯多福（Christopher）卻說：還沒完，你們射完後，換我們回擊！ 於是三方士兵又一同從德國陣地移至英法陣地。 波檞為了得到自己 母親和歐德貝赫妻子的消息，假冒成德國士兵，去德國陣營打聽消息，回來時卻不幸被喬納森射死。史賓克將被 囚禁兩星期， 罪名是違反命令。史賓克和安娜為了在一起，寧當別國的 戰俘 。 眾人寫的書信不幸被軍方看見。神父帕爾曼被他教區之上的主教斥責。歐德貝赫失去成為炮兵的機會，並要調往另一戰區。霍斯特麥爾和部下被派往 俄國戰鬥，經過家鄉卻罰不准下車探望家人，還被德國王子 侮辱 。 儘管大家被調不同戰區，未必再能相見，可是眾人似乎都相信，那天的決定沒有錯。 《夢迴故里》（I'm Dreaming of Home）

# data[].attributes.body
這是一個因內戰被摧毀的城市，佛朗哥刻意保留了這個城市，做為其功績表現

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
造成近50萬人死亡的西班牙內戰，給全世界對戰爭的省思是？｜青書閱世界｜謝哲青｜青春愛讀書

# data[].attributes.headline
4-3政治與反殖民運動興起

# data[].attributes.subject
4-3政治與反殖民運動興起

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Cold War Explained (1945 - 1991) - A Complete History Overview

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
女性主義不等於厭男主義！女性主義相信男人與女人都該被賦予同等的權利以及機會。

哈利波特永遠經典，妙麗在我們心中留下慧黠聰穎的印象，而現實中的艾瑪華森毫不遜色，她的人生甚至比在魔法世界裡的妙麗更精彩！2014 年 5 月，Emma 從布朗大學順利畢業，隨即被選為聯合國全球親善大使（U.N. Women global goodwill ambassador）。

24 歲的艾瑪華森曾多次公開表示自己是女性主義者，將致力爭取女性權益，也曾公開聲援土耳其總理禁止女性在公開場合大笑的事件，而近日，她於紐約出席聯合國會議的演講更是相當震撼人心，她呼籲全世界的男孩男人都該一同加入爭取性別平等的 HeforShe 運動！語畢，引起全場觀眾歡聲雷動。

Heforshe 是什麼意思？當女性主義漸漸成為「厭惡男人」的負面標籤，艾瑪華森又如何看待「女性主義」？一起來聽聽 Emma Watson 這場動人的演講，聽完之後對於女性主義或是性別平等，你會有更深刻的感受，你會知道這本該是一件再自然不過的事！Emma Watson rocks！

以下是 Emma Watson 的演講內容：

今天，我代表聯合國告訴大家，我們要開始推動一個名為 HeForShe 的運動。我之所以站在這裡拿著麥克風，因為這個運動需要你的幫忙。我們想要終止性別不平等，但這個信念需要所有人一起參與。

這是聯合國第一個此類的運動，我們希望能激勵男人以及男孩一起加入，因為你們都會是性別平等的最佳代言人。我們不想只是談論或是想像著性別平等到來的一天，我們希望能看著它發生。

從六個月前，我當上親善大使並且開始談論女性主義時，我發現「爭取女性權益的女性主義」在大家眼中已經漸漸地變成「厭惡男人」的代名詞。而我明白，這樣的定義並不正確，這樣的誤解必須停止。

女性主義不等於厭男主義！女性主義相信男人與女人都該被賦予同等的權利以及機會，女性主義爭取著兩性在政治、經濟、社會上的平等地位。

我還記得在我八歲的時候，因為我想要執導一齣表演給爸媽的兒童戲劇，而被大家說我很「bossy」，從那時候開始我就對於不同性別被給予的角色有了懷疑。

這樣的情況越演越烈，我 15 歲的時候，我身邊的女性朋友因為不想看起來「太過男性化」，因此從她喜愛的球隊裡頭毅然退出；我 16 歲的時候，我身邊的男性友人告訴我即便難過，他也不敢表達出自己的脆弱，因為他說他是一個男生。

就在那一刻，我發覺自己是個女性主義者。而時至今日，「女性主義者」漸漸變成一個具有負面意義的詞彙，人人急忙撇清自己不是女性主義者，因為害怕被貼上「太過激進」、「太具攻擊性」、「太孤立」、「厭惡男人」以及「喪失吸引力」的標籤。

但是為什麼我們這麼害怕女性主義？我們對於女性主義有什麼誤解？

從我自己開始說起。我來自英國，我相信女人在職場上值得擁有跟男人同樣的薪水，我相信女人對於自己的身體該有全權的掌握，我相信在我的國家，女人該有參與政治以及決策的權利，我相信女人值得和男人同等的社會尊重。但是，直至今日，世界上仍沒有一個國家女人能夠享有上述這些權利，也沒有一個國家敢說他們已經達到性別平等。

但我認為在成長過程中，我還算是個幸運的小孩。我的爸媽並未因為我是個女孩，而少愛了我一點；我不會因為我是女孩而被剝奪了上學的權利；我的導師並未因為我是未來可能生孩子的女人，而假設我的成就會比較低。他們或許並未意識到自己所做的對於一個小女孩有多大的影響力，但他們都是無形的性別平等大使，讓我能夠成為今日的自己。而我們的社會，需要更多這樣的「他們」。

如果你還是不喜歡「女性主義」這個詞，我想告訴你其實真正重要的不是「女性主義」這個詞，而是它背後代表的理念以及抱負。因為我知道這個世界上有許多女人並沒有像我一樣這麼幸運，許多女人的成長過程因為身為女性的身份，讓她們遭遇到更多困難以及岐見，讓她們的路走得更加困難。

1997 年，希拉蕊在北京做了一場關於女權的演說，可惜的是，當時她的許多訴求仍尚未實現。但是更讓我驚訝的是，當時在場的觀眾只有 30% 的比例是男性。如果男性並未被邀請加入這場對話，我們該如何改變這個性別僵化的世界？

因此親愛的男人，我希望能公開的邀請你，因為性別平等也是你該爭取的權益。因為性別的限制，對於你們而言，其實也是痛苦的根源。

因為時至今日，我知道許多年輕男子因為無法開口要求幫助、不願當眾表達脆弱而深受精神疾病所苦，因為他們害怕表露情緒會讓他們看起來失去男子氣概，而事實上在英國，20～49 歲的男人自殺的比例遠遠操過了交通意外、癌症、心臟疾病，名列死因第一。我更知道男人會因無法達到社會上對「男性成功」的要求，隨之而來的挫敗。對於男人而言，他們同樣也感受到了性別不平等的壓力。

我們並不常談論男人受困於性別的框架之中，但是這個情況確實存在。所以我們爭取的不只是女性的權益，更是兩性共同的權益。我相信男人以及女人都應該能自由地表達脆弱；男人以及女人也都應該能自由地顯現堅強，不受限於他們的性別。

我們應該開始將「性別」視為一道流動的光譜，而不是兩個對立的性別理想定型。

同場加映： 擁有他的帥和她的美！中性模特兒 Erika Linder

HeForShe 的運動，其實是為了爭取兩性的自由。我希望男人可以一起扛起這個擔子（take up this mantle）讓他們的女兒、姐妹以及母親能夠免於性別歧視，同時他們的兒子也能夠展現脆弱，無論哪個性別都能找回他不被社會允許展現的部分，並且成為更真誠以及更完整的自己。

在座的許多人可能會想這個哈利波特裡的角色站在這裡做什麼？以及她為什麼有能耐站上聯合國的舞台。這是個很好的問題，相信我，我也一直持續問著自己這個問題。事實上，我不知道自己是不是夠格站在這裡，但我只知道我很重視這個問題，而我想要盡我所能的改變現況，讓兩個性別都能活得更好。

我看過身邊的例子太多，所以當有這個機會出現，我知道我絕對該站出來說些什麼。愛爾蘭的政治及演說家 Edmund Burke 說過：「邪惡勝利其實很簡單，只要男人女人什麼都不想改變就行了。」這句話對我的影響很深。

我對於這個演講其實緊張，我對於自己其實有過懷疑，但我決定堅定地問自己：如果不是我，那會是誰？如果不是現在，那是什麼時候？接著我發現我等不及了，因為我們的訴求總是一說再說卻從未見實現的曙光。

以目前的現實來說，要男女同工同酬至少還得等上一百年；至少有 1500 萬個少女會在她尚未成年之前就被強迫嫁掉；最後研究顯示，直至 2086 年以前，非洲偏鄉的女孩都無權接受中等教育。

如果你相信上述的事情不該發生，如果你相信平等，你就是那無形的性別平等大使。為此，我想給你一個掌聲。

我們仍舊為了讓這個世界更好努力著，而我們現在有個團結起來的活動，叫做 HeForShe，我要邀請你往前再站一步，邀請你說出你的想法，邀請你成為為了兩性自由奮鬥的他或她。並且問問自己，如果不是我，那會是誰？如果不是現在，那會是什麼時候（Ask yourself if not me, Who? If not now, When?）？

謝謝大家。

Ask yourself if not me, who? if not now, when? 女人迷希望分享這個精彩的演說給你，讓我們一起走在追求更好、更平等的世界路上，不只是為了爭取女權，更是為了不同性別都能成為更自在、更完整的自己。Fight for women, Fight for men, And Fight for Gender Equality!

吾思傳媒股份有限公司（統一編號 53099678）致力提供公開平台，提供多元與共融視角，本文代表創作者觀點，幫助更多人成為自己。

作者

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
作者 Womany Audrey Ko 曾任女人迷總編，現為女人迷品牌策略總監，享受世界上總有可學的事情，與一貓虎吉生活在台北。出過兩本書《如果理想生活還在半路》與《四時瑜伽》，現正跟女人迷團隊一起打造多元共融的世界。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
艾瑪華森震撼人心的聯合國演講全文：「不只爭取女權，而是兩性都能自由！」｜性別力 Gender Power

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
喜歡艾瑪華森 Emma Watson 的你，一定知道她於今年開始擔任聯合國婦女署的全球親善大使！而近日，她在紐約的聯合國會議的演講更是撼動在場的所有人。以 HeForShe 為題，Emma Watson 讓爭取兩性平等權益不再只是女人的事，而是男人女人都該共同努力的目標！請分享給身邊的男人女人，一起感受這場演說帶給我們的感動。

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
911事件到伊斯蘭國，恐怖主義為何從中東蔓延全球？｜國際為什麼 EP3

# data[].attributes.body
蘇伊士運河

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
蘇伊士運河不是19世紀才挖的？2500年前就存在！現在的運河又是怎麼誕生的｜企鵝交通手札【探奇交流道】

# data[].attributes.headline
Jay Chou 周杰倫【Children of the Sun 太陽之子】 Official Music Video

# data[].attributes.subject
Jay Chou 周杰倫【Children of the Sun 太陽之子】 Official Music Video

# data[].attributes.body
MV內容包含了從多個時代的藝術作品

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jay Chou 周杰倫【Children of the Sun 太陽之子】 Official Music Video

# data[].attributes.body
https://share.gemini.google/qCLHEYfVjmux