scholarly journals Family tree of the admiral Stepan Osypovych Makarov: history of creation

Author(s):  
Vladislav V. Matskevich ◽  
Tatiana S. Mitkovskaya
Keyword(s):  
1975 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. M. S. Priestly

Summary The first family-tree diagram in August Schleicher’s (1821–68) published work appeared in 1853, seven years after his first printed discussion of the family-tree concept. In 1853 there also appeared Čteni o srovnavaci mluvnici slovanské by the Czech scholar František Ladislav Čelakovský (1799–1852); this book also contained a family-tree diagram. Since Čelakovský and Schleicher were contemporaries in Prague for over two years, their interrelationship is of interest: was this rivalry of collaboration? At first sight, a coincidence seems improbable. In the available work on and by Schleicher, Čelakovský is never mentioned; in the writings on and by Čelakovský, Schleicher’s name is never linked to his. However, the two had very many common interests. Apart from being colleagues at Charles University, they shared the same friends and enemies, were both interested in music and botany, and so on. Moreover, both were working on Slavic Historical Linguistics during the period in question. On the other hand, their personalities were such that the possibility of a mutual antipathy must not be excluded. Given the background to Čelakovský’s life and work, including the legends of the common origin of the Slavs and the obviously close interrelationships of the Slavic languages; the burgeoning of interest in Slavic history and linguistics, and in Panslavicism; the popularity of genealogy; and the developments in classificatory techniques along natural scientific lines, it is argued that Čela-kovský’s depiction of a family-tree for the Slavic languages could be quite naturally expected from him at this point in time, without any influence from Schleicher. On the other hand, Schleicher’s first family-tree diagrams were the next logical step in his own development. Moreover, the actual form of the diagrams in question suggests that they may indeed have been developed independently. This puzzle in the history of linguistics remains unsolved: collaboration, rivalry, and coincidence are all possible.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tore Nesset

<p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span lang="EN-US"><span style="font-family: Cambria; font-size: medium;">In chapter 1 you learned that Russian belongs to the Slavic language family, which evolved from a reconstructed ancestor language called “Proto-Slavic”. You may ask how we reconstruct ancestor languages and describe language change. This chapter addresses these questions and provides you with some linguistic tools you need in order to analyze the history of Russian.</span></span></p><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;"><span lang="EN-US"><span style="font-family: Cambria; font-size: medium;"> </span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Cambria',serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: 'MS Mincho'; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-US">Click on the links below to learn more!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Cambria',serif; font-size: 12pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family: 'MS Mincho'; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-fareast; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;" lang="EN-US"><a href="/index.php/SapEdu/article/downloadSuppFile/3493/146">3.4 Family Tree Model</a><br /></span></p>


2009 ◽  
Vol 44 (18) ◽  
pp. 8-8
Author(s):  
Joan Arehart-Treichel

2003 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 9
Author(s):  
ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΑ ΣΤΕΦΑΝΙΔΟΥ

The family trees of Santorine found in the archives of the Catholic Archdioceseof Santorine constitute research tools for the history of the social web existingduring the island's Roman Catholic era as well as in recent times. The starting pointof the family trees is focused on the period between the 15th and the 18th century.On the basis of the family trees it becomes clear that there are families of Italian,French and Spanish origin. The family trees provide information on the professionsheld by some members. Regarding the social and demographic situation, informationis provided on members of families who died young as well as those membersbelonging to the noble class. The reason for compiling the family trees is mentionedin the title accompanying them per il Legato Pio, that is to say to safeguard a certainecclesiastical legacy. In the Report of the Roman Catholic Bishop de Cigalla of1830 it is stated that the Legati PU of the families of Santorine safeguard the juspatronatus. As regards the use of the family trees as tools to study the archives ofthe Catholic Archdiocese of Santorine, extensive reference is made to the Syrigon-Vassalon family tree.


1984 ◽  
Vol 30 ◽  
pp. 91-116

Robert Kenneth Callow was born on 15 February 1901 at Goring -on - Thames, Oxfordshire. His father, a member of a Manx family, was Cecil Burman Bannister Callow; he was born in 1865 and died at an early age in 1912, when Kenneth was only 11 years old. Kenneth’s paternal grandfather, Edward Callow, had been very interested in the Isle of Man and in the history of his family. He was the author of a book entitled From King Orry to Queen Victoria , giving a history of the Isle of Man and an account of the various legends associated with that island. Kenneth inherited this interest in the history of his family, which led him back to Ballafagle-e-Callow, a hamlet southeast of Ramsey. Kenneth Callow could not confirm his grandfather’s belief that he was a descendant of William Callow, the Quaker (1629-75), who is buried in the old burial ground of the Manx Quakers at Ruillick-ny-Quackeryn, a nearby hill. The church ­ yards of various villages in the neighbourhood contain many memorials to Callows, but with the incompleteness of detail in early records the church registers do not enable the family tree to be constructed with any degree of reliability. The earliest record of Kenneth’s family is of Edward Callow, a shipwright of Douglas, who lived from 1754 to 1831. His grandson, Kenneth’s grandfather, described him self in 1846 as ‘of the Stock Exchange’. At some stage of his life his fortunes changed for the worse owing to some financial disaster, and he subsequently lived in retirement. Kenneth’s father, the youngest of six children, was apprenticed as an electrical engineer, held posts with various firms including the shipbuilders Thorneycroft in the Isle of Wight, and an electrical contractor at Goring-on-Thames, where Kenneth was born.


Author(s):  
Karl W. Luckert

This article is a slightly edited Danish version of the opening Fulbright address given at the Department of the History of Religions, Aarhus University. The article introduces definitions of religion, guilt, and religious behaviour, and then introduces a means by which the history of religion can be applied to the evolution of humankind and culture in a timeframe of several thousand years. The theme of guilt in the history of religious humanity is then discussed in three subsections. The first subsection concerns guilt, tools and divine predators, the goal of which is to illuminate the two major forms of guilt-and reconciliation bonding in the course of hominid evolution. This is reconstructed on the basis of recent anthropological theories of cultural evolution and the reshaping of the hominid family tree, from suspected similarities at pre-hominid levels of primate behaviour, as well as from extant Stone Age hunter traditions which, to this day, still contain soteriological solutions to problems of long ago. The second subsection concerns guilt, hunting and healing, the goal of which is to fill the scholastic lacuna concerning primitive hunters’ religious practices especially in relation to the entire primitive hunter-gatherer ethos. The bitter fact of the primitive hunter life, that trickery is a hunter’s actual guilt-producing lifestyle, has never dawned on educated connoisseurs of trickster tales. Primitive folks are portrayed, in spite of what they say or do, as though they face their gods with the same indifference as do their learned visitors. Data which I collected on Navajo hunter traditions substantiate the points in this subsection; while, on the one hand, a healing ceremonial can be understood as a delayed conciliatory hunting rite, it can also be seen, on the other hand, in its restorative function, as a reconciliation ceremony or peace treaty that is performed – on account of human guilt – in accordance with divinely ordained protocol. The third subsection concerns modern versus primitive hunting, the goal of which is to bridge the misunderstanding which academic studies reveal by underlining the extreme pre-suppositional differences between the two forms of hunting.


1987 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 661-681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barbara B. Diefendorf

Born in 1960 with the publication of Philippe Ariès's L'enfant et la vie familiale, family history as we know it has been tremendously fertile. Although the succession is disputed, its progeny are legion. It is not my intention here to trace the complex genealogy of Ariès's descendants or to separate dutiful heirs from rebels who have renounced their patrimony. The family tree is too prolific, its internal divisions too complex. I hope rather to focus on two main themes in the history of the family, themes which seem to me particularly fruitful where our understanding of the Renaissance is concerned. The first theme involves the fundamental structures of family life— ties of kinship and patterns of residence. The second is marriage and the role of women in the family. In both cases, I am particularly interested in the cultural values represented by these structures and behaviors.


Author(s):  
L.A. Sychenkova ◽  
◽  
M.D. Pirgo ◽  

This paper, for the first time, considers the Mariupol period of D.V. Ainalov’s life, as well as the history of his family and his ancestry from the Crimean-Azov Greeks. D.V. Ainalov’s personal documents concerning his family tree and the early period of his life were introduced into scientific circulation. His research focus (Hellenistic and Byzantine art) was determined by the inherent bond with the Greek culture, which had survived and flourished among the Azov Greeks. With the help of the archival documents, the atmosphere in D.V. Ainalov’s family was revealed in order to understand the conditions under which he developed his artistic abilities. Our findings confirm that the inner circle of D.V. Ainalov’s family, which included artists, prompted him to visual thinking and, therefore, played a key role in his subsequent interest in the study of art. An important evidence of D.V. Ainalov’s artistic abilities is his iconographic legacy. Refining the details of D.V. Ainalov’s biography helps to get a better insight into his creative “laboratory” and personal motives, thereby adding new dimensions to his historiographical image. The paper raises the issue of the urgent need for a special monographic research summarizing and covering in detail all stages of personal and creative biography of D.V. Ainalov.


1985 ◽  
Vol 15 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 61-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Mann ◽  
Linda C. Sobell ◽  
Mark B. Sobell ◽  
Daniel Pavan

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document