what is the population of amherst nova scotia

In the 2016 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, the Town of Amherst recorded a population of 9,413 living in 4,372 of its 4,745 total private dwellings, a change of 2999690000000000000♠−3.1% from its 2011 population of 9,717. With a land area of 12.07 km2 (4.66 sq mi), it had a population density of 779.9/km2 (2,019.8/sq mi) in 2016.[1]

Amherst, Nova Scotia

Amherst is a town in northwestern Cumberland County, Nova Scotia, Canada. Amherst is located at the northeast end of the Cumberland Basin, an arm of the Bay of Fundy, Amherst is strategically situated on the eastern boundary of the Tantramar Marshes 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) east of the interprovincial border with New Brunswick and 65 kilometres southeast of the city of Moncton. It is 60 kilometres (37 mi) southwest of the New Brunswick abutment of the Confederation Bridge to Prince Edward Island at Cape Jourimain. Amherst is the shire town and largest population centre in Cumberland County.

According to Dr. Graham P. Hennessey, "The Micmac name was Nemcheboogwek meaning 'going up rising ground', in reference to the higher land to the east of the Tantramar Marshes. The Acadians who settled here as early as 1672 called the village Les Planches. The village was later renamed Amherst by Colonel Joseph Morse in honour of Lord Amherst, the commander-in-chief of the British Army in North America during the Seven Years' War."

The town was first settled in 1764 by immigrants from Yorkshire following the expulsion of the Acadians, with the original settlement being located three kilometres southwest of the present town on the shore of the Bay of Fundy.[citation needed] These settlers were joined by United Empire Loyalists (Loyalists who fled the American colonies during the American Revolution). A mill was built on the current townsite, and the residents moved there to be closer to work.

During the 19th century, Amherst became an important regional centre for shipbuilding and other services to outlying communities. An indication of the town's importance in Canadian history is seen with its four Fathers of Confederation: Edward B. Chandler, Robert B. Dickey, Jonathan McCully, and Sir Charles Tupper.

During the late 19th century, local industrialists and entrepreneurs constructed many fine Victorian and Edwardian homes along Victoria Street East, leading toward the farming hamlet of East Amherst. Many notable residents have lived in this district, including Tupper, Senator Thomas R. Black, the Barker Family, the Lamy Family, the Pugsley Family and Mary (Molly) Simmons Critchley. Amherst gained brief notoriety in the late 19th century as the location of alleged poltergeist phenomena afflicting Amherst resident Esther Cox in 1878 and 1879, which became known as the Great Amherst Mystery after the publication of a popular book on the affair.[2]

Amherst experienced unprecedented industrialization in the late 1870s after the Intercolonial Railway of Canada constructed its main line from Halifax to Quebec through the town in 1872. The location of the railway line away from the Bay of Fundy coast further consolidated the town at its present location as industry and commercial activity centred around this important transportation link. The economic boom created by the arrival of the Intercolonial Railway lasted through World War I and numerous foundries, factories and mills opened, giving rise to the nickname "Busy Amherst".

In 1908, the manufacturing output of Amherst's industries was not exceeded by any centre in the Maritime Provinces. Many of the fine old buildings along Victoria Street are considered industrial artifacts because they were constructed during a period of tremendous industry growth. Local contractors employed local craftsmen, who used local materials. Notice the emphasis on sandstone and brick, both locally produced and delightful detail which reflects the skilled craftsmanship prevalent in the 19th century.

Amherst's prosperity would not last as the failed economic policies of the federal and provincial governments, coupled with World War I, saw the town's industrial economy begin a slow decline during the 1910s. A prisoner-of-war and enemy alien camp was set up at Malleable Iron Foundry in Amherst from April 1915 to September 1919,[3] and Russian revolutionary Leon Trotsky was incarcerated there for one month after he was arrested in Halifax, Nova Scotia in April 1917.[4][5] Trotsky was transferred to the isolated Kapuskasing Interment Camp in northern Ontario until his release and expulsion after Soviet Russia signed the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, ending their involvement in the war.

During the Amherst general strike in 1919, worker unrest over social and economic conditions led to mass protests in sympathy with the Winnipeg general strike.

The eventual closure of companies such as Robb Engineering & Manufacturing (purchased by Canada Car and Foundry and then closed) and Amherst Pianos, among others led to a resignation of lost dreams as the town was overtaken by other newer manufacturing centres in central Canada during the 20th century. Amherst had a modest-sized industrial park constructed during the 1960s when the Trans-Canada Highway was being developed. Today the majority of the town's major employers are located there, including PolyCello and IMP Aerospace.

During World War II, the Royal Canadian Navy named a Flower class corvette HMCS Amherst.

The town is currently served by Via Rail's Halifax-to-Montreal train Ocean.

Amherst is the retail centre for Cumberland County and the southeastern part of Westmorland County (New Brunswick). The town has several big box stores, including Walmart, Sobeys, Atlantic Superstore, Canadian Tire, Kent Building Supplies, Giant Tiger and Dollarama in addition to several fast food restaurants and auto dealerships. Shoppers Drug Mart was the town's anchor pharmacy retail until its closure on October 8, 2015 due to the long periods of declining profits and change of shopping habits. Zellers was a long time anchor store in the area until the purchase of the majority of the chain by Target which promptly announced the closure of many Zellers locations in smaller centers such as Amherst. There are also smaller independent retailers and restaurants in the downtown area, situated among various historic buildings. The town's location on Highway 104 (part of the Trans-Canada Highway) has transformed South Albion Street and Robert Angus Drive into a highway service centre. Liberty Enterprises Limited, started in 1973, operates a brass and aluminum foundry.[6]

Amherst is home of the Amherst Ramblers, a Junior A Hockey League team from the Maritime Hockey League. All home games are played out of the 2,500 seat Amherst Stadium. The season usually runs from mid-September to early March every year. The Ramblers draw some of the largest crowds in the Maritime Hockey League, and have placed third in average attendance over the past few years. They won the Centennial Cup in 1993.

Amherst is home to a popular running club known as the 'Amherst Striders' that are recognized at almost every race in the Maritimes. Amherst Striders meet 3 to 4 times a week, do not charge any membership fees and open to anyone interested in running and living a healthy lifestyle.

Every August, Amherst hosts an eight-team little league baseball tournament, featuring four teams from New England.

Amherst experiences a humid continental climate (Dfb). The highest temperature ever recorded was 34.4 °C (94 °F) on 18 August 1935. The coldest temperature ever recorded was −37.2 °C (−35 °F) on 18 February 1922.[7]

Amherst is served locally by EastLink TV. The station also serves the communities of Springhill, Oxford, and others in the county, as well as Sackville, New Brunswick.


what is the solvency ratio for insurance company

The solvency ratio of an insurance company is the size of its capital relative to all risks it has taken. The solvency ratio is most often defined as:

Solvency ratio

A solvency ratio measures the extent to which assets cover commitments for future payments, the liabilities.

The solvency ratio is a measure of the risk an insurer faces of claims that it cannot absorb. The amount of premium written is a better measure than the total amount insured because the level of premiums is linked to the likelihood of claims.

Different countries use different methodologies to calculate the solvency ratio, and have different requirements.  For example, in India insurers are required to maintain a minimum ratio of 1.5.[1]

For pension plans, the solvency ratio is the ratio of pension plan assets to liabilities (the pensions to be paid). Another measure of the pension plan's ability to pay all pensions in perpetuity is the going concern ratio, which measures the cost of pensions if the pension plan continues to operate. For the solvency ratio, the pension liabilities are measured using stringent rules including the assumption that the plan will be close immediately so must purchase of annuities to transfer responsibility of the pensions to another party. This is more expensive so the solvency ratio is usually lower than the going concern ratio, which measures the pension plan's ability to pay pensions if it continues to operate.

In finance, the solvency ratio measures a company's cash flow compared to its liabilities:

Solvency ratio = (net income + depreciation) / liabilities


who is eligible to vote in indonesian elections

The voting age in Indonesia is 17 but anyone who has an ID card (Indonesian: Kartu Tanda Penduduk (KTP)) can vote, since persons under 17 who are or were married can get a KTP.

Elections in Indonesia

Elections in Indonesia have taken place since 1955 to elect a legislature. At a national level, Indonesian people did not elect a head of state – the president – until 2004. Since then, the president is elected for a five-year term, as are the 560-member People's Representative Council (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, DPR) and the 128-seat Regional Representative Council (Dewan Perwakilan Daerah).[1]

Members of the People's Representative Council are elected by proportional representation from multi-candidate constituencies. Currently, there are 77 constituencies in Indonesia and each returns 3-10 Members of Parliament based on population. Under Indonesia's multi-party system, no one party has yet been able to secure an outright victory; parties have needed to work together in coalition governments. Members of the Regional Representative Council are elected by single non-transferable vote. There, Indonesia's 34 provinces treated as constituencies and, regardless of the size and population, every provinces return 4 senators.

Starting from the 2015 unified local elections, Indonesia started to elect governors and mayors simultaneously on the same date.

Indonesia's first general election elected members of the DPR and the Constitutional Assembly of Indonesia (Konstituante). The election was organised by the government of Prime Minister Ali Sastroamidjojo. Sastroamidjojo himself declined to stand for election, and Burhanuddin Harahap became Prime Minister.

The election occurred in two stages:

The five largest parties in the election were the National Party of Indonesia (Partai Nasional Indonesia), Masyumi, Nahdlatul Ulama, the Communist Party of Indonesia (Partai Komunis Indonesia, PKI), and the Indonesian Islamic Union Party (Partai Sarekat Islam Indonesia).

The first election after the establishment of the "New Order" took place on 5 July 1971. Ten political parties participated.

The five largest political parties were Golkar, Nahdlatul Ulama, the Muslim Party of Indonesia (Parmusi), the Indonesian National Party and the Indonesian Islamic Union Party.

Five further legislative elections were held under the government of President Suharto. In accordance with the legislation, these were contested by two parties (PPP and PDI) and one functional group (Golkar). All elections in this period were won by Golkar.

On every March after the legislative election, the People's Consultative Assembly would held General Sessions in which included the election of President and soon after, the Vice President. On all occasions, Suharto was the only person ever stood as presidential candidate, thus enabling him to be elected unanimously. On vice-presidential elections, all candidates endorsed by Golkar (and the military faction) went on to be elected unanimously.

To ensure that Golkar always won more than 60 percent of the popular vote, the New Order regime used a number of tactics. These included:

The 1999 election was the first election held after the collapse of the New Order. It was held on 7 June 1999 under the government of Jusuf Habibie. Forty-eight political parties participated.

The six largest parties which passed the electoral threshold of 2% were the Indonesian Democratic Party-Struggle (Partai Demokrasi Indonesia Perjuangan), the reformed Golkar Party, the United Development Party (Partai Persatuan Pembangunan), the National Awakening Party (Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa), the National Mandate Party (Partai Amanat Nasional), and the Crescent Star Party (Partai Bulan Bintang).

Under the constitution, the new President was elected by members of both houses of Parliament in a joint sitting. This meant that although the Indonesian Democratic Party-Struggle won the largest share of the popular vote, the new President was not its nominee, Megawati Sukarnoputri, but Abdurrahman Wahid from the National Awakening Party. Megawati became Vice-President.

During its 2002 annual session, the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) added 14 amendments to the Constitution of Indonesia. Included in these amendments were measures to reorganise the Indonesian legislature. Beginning in 2004, the MPR would be composed of the existing People's Representative Council (DPR) and a new Regional Representative Council (DPD). Because all the seats in the MPR would be directly elected, this called for the removal of the military from the legislature, whose 38 seats for the 1999â€“2004 period were all appointed.[7] This change and an amendment for direct election of the President and Vice-President were major steps for Indonesia on the road towards a full democracy.[8]

The 2004 legislative election was held on 5 April 2004. A total of 24 parties contested the election. The Golkar Party won the largest share of the vote, at 21.6%, followed by the Indonesian Democratic Party-Struggle, the National Awakening Party, the United Development Party and newly formed Democratic Party. 17 parties won legislative seats.

Legislative elections for the Regional Representatives Council and the People's Representative Council were held in Indonesia on 9 April 2009. The presidential election was held on 8 July, with President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono winning enough of the vote to make the run-off election unnecessary.[9]

Legislative elections for the Regional Representatives Council and the People's Representative Council were held in Indonesia on 9 April 2014.[10] The presidential election was held on 9 July 2014, with Joko Widodo winning the election.[11]


who was the piano player in battlestar galactica

Alan Sepinwall of The Star-Ledger found that the episode was an excellent showcase for both Katee Sackhoff and Grace Park, and praised director Michael Nankin who "[infused] this episode with the qualities of a nightmare."[6] Michael Saba of Paste Magazine called the episode an "exercise in building tension through omission" and felt the episode was "excellent".[7] IGN writer Eric Goldman praised the writers of the show for the plot turns in the episode, in particular the fact that Boomer's returning to the fleet with Ellen Tigh was in fact just a ruse. Goldman felt the subplot involving Kara was "a bit meandering" but that Katee Sackhoff and Roark Critchlow gave strong performances.[8] Cinema Blend felt the writers "threw a neat little curveball" with the Roark Critchlow piano playing character being Thrace's father.[9] Marc Bernardin of Entertainment Weekly felt the Boomer storyline was "awesome" but was less impressed by the storyline involving Thrace, feeling "that it didn't tell us anything new" and that the writers had written a very obvious ending to the subplot.[10]

Someone to Watch Over Me (Battlestar Galactica)

"Someone to Watch Over Me" is the nineteenth episode in the fourth season of the reimagined Battlestar Galactica. It aired on television in the United States and Canada on February 27, 2009. The survivor count shown in the title sequence is 39,556.

Kara Thrace is depressed that her husband, Samuel Anders, is still in a coma, with little good news from Dr. Cottle concerning his condition. She has returned to a bleak daily routine after the events of her leading the fleet to Earth, when she had felt special, as if she had a purpose and knew what she was doing for the first time in her life. She is also plagued by nightmares of the body that was presumably her own, crashed on Earth.

Thrace makes friends with the bar's piano player, and slowly reveals to him that her father used to play the piano too. During the process, she discusses her childhood and her feelings towards her father, who left the family and never contacted her or her mother again, much as the piano player did with his own family. Thrace assists the piano player with writing a new song. Eventually, he convinces a reluctant Thrace to play the piano too. The piano player shows affection towards Starbuck much in the same way her father did. Together they play a song she faintly remembers from her childhood, and eventually she realizes a drawing given to her earlier by Hera Agathon is not a drawing of stars, as Hera said, but a sequence of musical notes that matches the song from her memory.

Together, Thrace and the piano player reconstruct the song, which turns out to be the music the four of the Final Five present on Galactica heard throughout the events of Crossroads Pt. II. Saul Tigh, Ellen Tigh, and Tory Foster, who were all lingering in the bar while Thrace and the piano player were reconstructing the song, confront her about the song's origin, to which she replies that she used to play it as a child with her father. A flashback to Kara's childhood reveals that Kara's father looked exactly like the piano player. When Kara turns to the piano player, he has mysteriously vanished.

In the meantime, Sharon "Boomer" Valerii is about to be extradited by the Colonial fleet to the rebel Cylons, who plan to try her for treason for siding with Cavil. They seek the death penalty; now that there is no Cylon resurrection available anymore, death would be permanent. Boomer tricks Galen Tyrol into helping her to leave the Galactica by claiming that she still sees a future for them together. Through Cylon mental projection, she shows Tyrol a home she has "constructed" for them both, including their child.

She beats Sharon "Athena" Agathon and ties her up, putting her in a closet, just before Karl "Helo" Agathon walks in on them. She has sex with him, while the tied up Athena watches through an opening, gagged and unable to speak. She then kidnaps Hera, escapes by stealing a Raptor, and causes damage to the Galactica by performing an FTL jump too close to the ship. The episode ends with Tyrol's devastation after realizing that Boomer tricked him and he has unwittingly helped her kidnap Hera.

"Someone to Watch Over Me" was seen by 1.657 million viewers (live viewing plus same day digital video recorder viewing), about 100,000 more viewers than for the previous episode.[1]

Writer David Weddle comments on Boomer's motives: "It's difficult to say someone who did that loves the Chief, and yet in her damaged way, I think she did and still does love him."[2]

Due to the musical focus in this episode, composer Bear McCreary was involved in production of the episode from the earliest drafts.[3][4][5] While attempting to compose a new song together with Kara Thrace, the piano player (Slick) moves his fingers across the keyboard searching for a melody, a riff which Thrace recognizes as sounding similar to a classical piece called “Nomion’s 3rd Sonata, 2nd Movement” which in actuality is the opening fanfare to the original Battlestar Galactica: a piece called “Exploration” written by Stu Phillips.[4]


what is the relationship between texas and the federal government

Republic of Texasâ€“United States relations refers to the historical foreign relations between the now-defunct Republic of Texas and the United States of America. Relations started in 1836 after the Texas Revolution, and ended in 1845 upon the annexation of Texas by the United States.

Republic of Texas–United States relations

Following Mexico's independence from the Spanish Empire in 1821, the population of Texas numbered only 4000 Tejanos.[1] The new Mexican government, eager to populate the region, invited Americans to help settle the region; by 1830 the number of American settlers in Texas topped 30,000.[2] Slavery was brought to Texas by the settlers even though the 1824 Mexican constitution declared the process illegal; in 1831 the Mexican government began to combat slavery in Texas, intensifying the desire of the Texans to seek independence.[3] By 1835, Sam Houston and other Texans initiated the battle for independence. The United States decided to support the revolution by providing arms and supplies to the Texas rebels, eventually leading to the independence and creation of the Republic of Texas.[4]

The United States recognized Texan independence on March 3, 1836, when U.S. President Andrew Jackson nominated Alcée La Branche as Minister to Texas. Diplomatic relations began when the U.S. Secretary of State accepted the credentials of William Harris Wharton, Texan Minister to the United States, on March 6, 1837. Alcée La Branche, the appointed Chargé d'Affaires of the U.S. Legation in Houston, then functioning as the seat of government, presented his credentials sometime between October 23 and 27, 1837. In 1841 The United States' chargé d'affairs to Texas opened a legation in Austin, in 1841 The Republic of Texas opened an embassy in Washington, DC.[5]

Prior to Texan independence, a consulate was established at Galveston, and Joseph Washington Eliot Wallace was confirmed as consul on March 29, 1830. Additional consulates existed at the following locations:

Although Texas entered the United States as a state on December 29, 1845, relations formally ended during the transfer of Texan sovereignty to the United States on February 19, 1846. Despite this, Andrew J. Donelson, the last U.S. ChargÃ© d'Affaires, left his post on or shortly after August 9, 1845.

On April 11, 1838, the U.S. concluded a Claims Convention with the Republic of Texas. This agreement was signed by Alcée La Branche, the U.S. Chargé d'Affaires near the Republic of Texas and R.A. Irion, the Secretary of State of the Republic of Texas, and served to set Texan indemnity to the United States for injuries suffered by U.S. Citizens by Texan authorities as well as indemnity to compensate U.S. merchants for the capture, seizure, and confiscation of two U.S. vessels.

On April 25, 1838, the U.S. and the Republic of Texas signed a convention to mark the boundary between the two states.

Relations between Texas and the US were strong; however, Texas had become unstable and unfit to fully defend or sustain itself, prompting the US to consider annexation. Upon annexation, Mexico declared war on the US.[6]

One of the issues at play in the interactions between the United States and the Republic of Texas was the eventual annexation of Texas by the U.S. There were two main difficulties with the issue of Texas joining the United States at the time: first, incorporating Texas into the Union might provoke Mexico; and second, Texas wished to join as a slave state.

On August 23, 1843, Mexican Foreign Minister Bocanegra informed U.S. Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to Mexico, Waddy Thompson, that U.S. annexation of Texas would be grounds for war. On March 1, 1845, U.S. President John Tyler signed a congressional joint resolution favoring the annexation of Texas. On March 4, 1845, U.S. President James Knox Polk noted his approval of the “reunion” of the Republic of Texas with the United States in his inaugural address. In response, the Mexican Minister of Foreign Affairs informed U.S. Minister to Mexico, Wilson Shannon, on March 28, 1845, that Mexico was severing diplomatic relations with the United States. In December 1845 Texas was admitted to the union as the twenty-eighth state. In April 1846, Mexican troops attacked what they perceived to be invading U.S. forces that had occupied territory claimed by both Mexico and the United States, and on May 13, the U.S. Congress declared war against Mexico.

Another issue raised by the debate over Texan annexation was that of slavery. Since the early nineteenth century, Texas was a producer of cotton. It was also dependent upon slave labor to produce its cotton. The question of whether or not the United States should annex Texas came at a time of increased tensions between the Northern and Southern states of the Union over the legality and morality of slavery; thus the possibility of admitting Texas as another slave state proved to be contentious.

Additionally, there was another issue raised by the Texas-cotton nexus: that of the market for raw cotton. One of the largest export markets for North American raw cotton in the mid-nineteenth century was to Great Britain. As long as Texas remained an independent state, it could give Southern U.S. cotton plantation owners competition in terms of setting prices â€“ to force them to be more competitive.


who was on zeus' side in the titanomachy

Rhea brought Zeus to a cave in Crete, where he was raised by Amalthea. Upon reaching adulthood, he masqueraded as Cronus' cupbearer. Once Zeus had been established as a servant of Cronus, Metis gave him a mixture of mustard and wine which would cause Cronus to vomit up his swallowed children. After freeing his siblings, Zeus led them in rebellion against the Titans.

Titanomachy

The Twelve Titans

Children of Cronus

Children of Oceanus

Children of Hyperion

Children of Coeus

Sons of Iapetus

Sons of Crius

In Greek mythology, the Titanomachy (/ˌtaɪtəˈnɒməki/ Greek: Τιτανομαχία Titanomakhia, "Titan battle") was a ten-year[1]  series of battles fought in Thessaly, consisting of most of the Titans (an older generation of gods, based on Mount Othrys) fighting against the Olympians (the younger generations, who would come to reign on Mount Olympus) and their allies. This event is also known as the War of the Titans, Battle of the Titans, Battle of the Gods, or just the Titan War. The war was fought to decide which generation of gods would have dominion over the universe; it ended in victory for the Olympian gods.

Greeks of the Classical Age knew of several poems about the war between the gods and many of the Titans. The dominant one, and the only one that has survived, is the Theogony attributed to Hesiod. A lost epic, Titanomachia, attributed to the blind Thracian bard Thamyris, himself a legendary figure, was mentioned in passing in an essay On Music that was once attributed to Plutarch. The Titans also played a prominent role in the poems attributed to Orpheus. Although only scraps of the Orphic narratives survive, they show interesting differences from the Hesiodic tradition.

The stage for this important battle was set after the youngest Titan, Cronus (Kronos), overthrew his own father, Uranus (Ουρανός, the sky and ruler of the cosmos), with the help of his mother, Gaia (Γαία, the earth).

Uranus drew the enmity of Gaia when he imprisoned her children the Hecatonchires and Cyclopes in Tartarus. Gaia created a great sickle and gathered together Cronus and his brothers to convince them to castrate Uranus. Only Cronus was willing to do the deed, so Gaia gave him the sickle and placed him in ambush.

When Uranus met with Gaia, Cronus attacked Uranus, and, with the sickle, cut off his genitals, casting them into the sea. In doing so, he became the King of the Titans. But Uranus made a prophecy that Cronus's own children would rebel against his rule, just as Cronus had rebelled against his own father. Uranus' blood that had spilled upon the earth, gave rise to the Gigantes, Erinyes, and Meliae. From his semen or blood of his cut genitalia, Aphrodite arose from the sea:

...so soon as he had cut off the members with flint and cast them from the land into the surging sea, they were swept away over the main a long time: and a white foam spread around them from the immortal flesh, and in it there grew a maiden..."[2]

Cronus took his father's throne after dispatching Uranus.  He then secured his power by re-imprisoning his siblings the Hecatonchires and Cyclopes in Tartarus.

Cronus, paranoid and fearing the end of his rule, now turned into the terrible king his father Uranus had been, swallowing each of his children whole as they were born from his sister-wife  Rhea. Rhea, however, managed to hide her youngest child Zeus, by tricking Cronus into swallowing a rock wrapped in a blanket instead.

Zeus then waged a war against his father with his disgorged brothers and sisters as allies: Hestia, Demeter, Hera, Hades, and Poseidon. Zeus released the Hecatonchires and the Cyclopes from the earth (where they had been imprisoned by Cronus) and they allied with him as well. The Hecatonchires hurled stones, and the Cyclopes forged for Zeus his iconic thunder and lightning. Fighting on the other side allied with Cronus were the other Titans with the important exception of Themis and her son Prometheus who allied with Zeus (NB. for Hesiod, Clymene is the mother of Prometheus). Atlas was an important leader on the side of Cronus. The war lasted ten years, but eventually Zeus and the other Olympians won, the Titans were imprisoned in Tartarus, and the Hecatonchires were made their guards. Atlas was given the special punishment of holding up the sky. In some accounts, when Zeus became secure in his power he relented and gave the Titans their freedom.[3]

Hyginus relates the Titanomachy differently: "After Hera saw that Epaphus, born of a concubine, ruled such a great kingdom (Egypt), she saw to it that he should be killed while hunting, and encouraged the Titans to drive Zeus from the kingdom and restore it to Cronus (Saturn). When they tried to mount heaven, Zeus with the help of Athena, Apollo, and Artemis, cast them headlong into Tartarus. On Atlas, who had been their leader, he put the vault of the sky; even now he is said to hold up the sky on his shoulders."[4]

Following their final victory, the three brothers divided the world amongst themselves: Zeus was given domain over the sky and the air, and was recognized as overlord.  Poseidon was given the sea and all the waters, whereas Hades was given the Underworld, the realm of the dead.  Each of the other gods was allotted powers according to the nature and proclivities of each.  The earth was left common to all to do as they pleased, even to run counter to one another, unless the brothers (Zeus, Poseidon and Hades) were called to intervene.

A somewhat different account of the Titanomachy appeared in a poem that is now lost. The poem was traditionally ascribed to Eumelus of Corinth, a semi-legendary bard of the Bacchiad ruling family in archaic Corinth,[5] who was treasured as the traditional composer of the Prosodion, the processional  anthem of Messenian independence that was performed on Delos.

Even in Antiquity many authors cited Titanomachia without an author's name. The name of Eumelos was attached to the poem as the only name available.[6] From the very patchy evidence, it seems that "Eumelos"' account of the Titanomachy differed from the surviving account of Hesiod's Theogony at salient points. It was written in the late seventh-century BC at the earliest.[6]

The Titanomachy was divided into two books.  The battle of Olympians and Titans was preceded by some sort of theogony, or genealogy of the Primeval Gods, in which, the Late Roman writer Lydus remarked,[7] the author of Titanomachy placed the birth of Zeus, not in Crete, but in Lydia, which should signify on Mount Sipylus.


where were the early centers of crop domestication

Cereal crops were first domesticated around 9000 BCE in the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East. The first domesticated crops were generally annuals with large seeds or fruits. These included pulses such as peas and grains such as wheat. The Middle East was especially suited to these species; the dry-summer climate was conducive to the evolution of large-seeded annual plants, and the variety of elevations led to a great variety of species. As domestication took place humans began to move from a hunter-gatherer society to a settled agricultural society. This change would eventually lead, some 4000 to 5000 years later, to the first city states and eventually the rise of civilization itself.

Domestication

Domestication is a sustained multi-generational relationship in which one group of organisms assumes a significant degree of influence over the reproduction and care of another group to secure a more predictable supply of resources from that second group.[1] Charles Darwin recognized the small number of traits that made domestic species different from their wild ancestors. He was also the first to recognize the difference between conscious selective breeding in which humans directly select for desirable traits, and unconscious selection where traits evolve as a by-product of natural selection or from selection on other traits.[2][3][4] There is a genetic difference between domestic and wild populations. There is also such a difference between the domestication traits that researchers believe to have been essential at the early stages of domestication, and the improvement traits that have appeared since the split between wild and domestic populations.[5][6][7] Domestication traits are generally fixed within all domesticates, and were selected during the initial episode of domestication of that animal or plant, whereas improvement traits are present only in a proportion of domesticates, though they may be fixed in individual breeds or regional populations.[6][7][8]

The dog was the first domesticated vertebrate,[9][10][11] and was established across Eurasia before the end of the Late Pleistocene era, well before cultivation and before the domestication of other animals.[10] The archaeological and genetic data suggest that long-term bidirectional gene flow between wild and domestic stocks – including donkeys, horses, New and Old World camelids, goats, sheep, and pigs – was common.[7][12] Given its importance to humans and its value as a model of evolutionary and demographic change, domestication has attracted scientists from archaeology, palaeontology, anthropology, botany, zoology, genetics, and the environmental sciences.[13] Among birds, the major domestic species today is the chicken, important for meat and eggs, though economically valuable poultry include the turkey, guineafowl and numerous other species. Birds are also widely kept as cagebirds, from songbirds to parrots. The longest established invertebrate domesticates are the honey bee and the silkworm. Terrestrial snails are raised for food, while species from several phyla are kept for research, and others are bred for biological control.

The domestication of plants began at least 12,000 years ago with cereals in the Middle East, and the bottle gourd in Asia. Agriculture developed in at least 11 different centres around the world, domesticating different crops and animals.

Domestication, from the Latin domesticus, 'belonging to the house',[14] is "a sustained multi-generational, mutualistic relationship in which one organism assumes a significant degree of influence over the reproduction and care of another organism in order to secure a more predictable supply of a resource of interest, and through which the partner organism gains advantage over individuals that remain outside this relationship, thereby benefitting and often increasing the fitness of both the domesticator and the target domesticate."[1][15][16][17][18] This definition recognizes both the biological and the cultural components of the domestication process and the impacts on both humans and the domesticated animals and plants. All past definitions of domestication have included a relationship between humans with plants and animals, but their differences lay in who was considered as the lead partner in the relationship. This new definition recognizes a mutualistic relationship in which both partners gain benefits. Domestication has vastly enhanced the reproductive output of crop plants, livestock, and pets far beyond that of their wild progenitors. Domesticates have provided humans with resources that they could more predictably and securely control, move, and redistribute, which has been the advantage that had fueled a population explosion of the agro-pastoralists and their spread to all corners of the planet.[18]

Houseplants and ornamentals are plants domesticated primarily for aesthetic enjoyment in and around the home, while those domesticated for large-scale food production are called crops. Domesticated plants deliberately altered or selected for special desirable characteristics are cultigens. Animals domesticated for home companionship are called pets, while those domesticated for food or work are known as livestock.

This biological mutualism is not restricted to humans with domestic crops and livestock but is well-documented in nonhuman species, especially among a number of social insect domesticators and their plant and animal domesticates, for example the ant–fungus mutualism that exists between leafcutter ants and certain fungi.[1]

Domestication syndrome is the suite of phenotypic traits arising during domestication that distinguish crops from their wild ancestors.[5][19] The term is also applied to vertebrate animals, and includes increased docility and tameness, coat color changes, reductions in tooth size, changes in craniofacial morphology, alterations in ear and tail form (e.g., floppy ears), more frequent and nonseasonal estrus cycles, alterations in adrenocorticotropic hormone levels, changed concentrations of several neurotransmitters, prolongations in juvenile behavior, and reductions in both total brain size and of particular brain regions.[20]

The domestication of animals and plants began with the wolf (Canis lupus) at least 15,000 years before present (YBP), which then led to a rapid shift in the evolution, ecology, and demography of both humans and numerous species of animals and plants.[21][7] The sudden appearance of the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) in the archaeological record was followed by livestock and crop domestication, and the transition of humans from foraging to farming in different places and times across the planet.[21][22][23] Around 10,000 YBP, a new way of life emerged for humans through the management and exploitation of plant and animal species, leading to higher-density populations in the centers of domestication,[21][24] the expansion of agricultural economies, and the development of urban communities.[21][25]

A 2018 domestication study looked at the reasons why the archeological record that is based on the dating of fossil remains often differed from the genetic record contained within the cells of living species. The study concluded that our inability to date domestication is because domestication is a continuum and there is no single point where we can say that a species was clearly domesticated using these two techniques. The study proposes that changes in morphology across time and how humans were interacting with the species in the past needs to be considered in addition to these two techniques.[26]

The domestication of animals is the mutual relationship between animals with the humans who have influence on their care and reproduction.[1] Charles Darwin recognized the small number of traits that made domestic species different from their wild ancestors. He was also the first to recognize the difference between conscious selective breeding in which humans directly select for desirable traits, and unconscious selection where traits evolve as a by-product of natural selection or from selection on other traits.[2][3][4] There is a genetic difference between domestic and wild populations. There is also such a difference between the domestication traits that researchers believe to have been essential at the early stages of domestication, and the improvement traits that have appeared since the split between wild and domestic populations.[5][6][7] Domestication traits are generally fixed within all domesticates, and were selected during the initial episode of domestication of that animal or plant, whereas improvement traits are present only in a proportion of domesticates, though they may be fixed in individual breeds or regional populations.[6][7][8]

Domestication should not be confused with taming. Taming is the conditioned behavioral modification of an animal to reduce its natural avoidance of humans, and to accept the presence of humans. Domestication is the permanent genetic modification of a bred lineage that leads to an inherited predisposition towards humans.[28][29][30] Certain animal species, and certain individuals within those species, make better candidates for domestication than others because they exhibit certain behavioral characteristics: (1) the size and organization of their social structure; (2) the availability and the degree of selectivity in their choice of mates; (3) the ease and speed with which the parents bond with their young, and the maturity and mobility of the young at birth; (4) the degree of flexibility in diet and habitat tolerance; and (5) responses to humans and new environments, including flight responses and reactivity to external stimuli.[18]:Fig 1[31][32][33]

The beginnings of animal domestication involved a protracted coevolutionary process with multiple stages along different pathways.[7] It is proposed that there were three major pathways that most animal domesticates followed into domestication: (1) commensals, adapted to a human niche (e.g., dogs, cats, fowl, possibly pigs); (2) prey animals sought for food (e.g., sheep, goats, cattle, water buffalo, yak, pig, reindeer, llama and alpaca); and (3) targeted animals for draft and nonfood resources (e.g., horse, donkey, camel).[7][12][18][34][35][36][37] The dog was the first domesticant,[10][11] and was established across Eurasia before the end of the Late Pleistocene era, well before cultivation and before the domestication of other animals.[10] Humans did not intend to domesticate animals from, or at least they did not envision a domesticated animal resulting from, either the commensal or prey pathways. In both of these cases, humans became entangled with these species as the relationship between them, and the human role in their survival and reproduction, intensified, leading eventually to a formalised animal husbandry.[7] Although the directed pathway proceeded from capture to taming, the other two pathways are not as goal-oriented and archaeological records suggest that they took place over much longer time frames.[13]

Unlike other domestic species which were primarily selected for production-related traits, dogs were initially selected for their behaviors.[38][39] The archaeological and genetic data suggest that long-term bidirectional gene flow between wild and domestic stocks – including donkeys, horses, New and Old World camelids, goats, sheep, and pigs – was common.[7][12] One study has concluded that human selection for domestic traits likely counteracted the homogenizing effect of gene flow from wild boars into pigs and created domestication islands in the genome. The same process may also apply to other domesticated animals.[40][41]

Domesticated birds principally mean poultry, raised for meat and eggs:[42] some Galliformes (chicken, turkey, guineafowl) and Anseriformes (waterfowl: duck, goose, swan). Also widely domesticated are cagebirds such as songbirds and parrots; these are kept both for pleasure and for use in research.[43] Domestic pigeon is known as a messenger, research suggests it was domesticated as early as 10,000 years ago.[44] Chickens were domesticated at least 7,000 years ago, with fossils in China from c. 5400 BC. The chicken's wild ancestor is Gallus gallus, the red junglefowl of Southeast Asia, and another species, probably the grey junglefowl of India. It appears to have been kept initially for cockfighting rather than for food.[45]

Two insects, the silkworm and the western honey bee, have been domesticated for over 5,000 years, often for commercial use. The silkworm is raised for the silk threads wound around its pupal cocoon; the western honey bee, for honey, and, lately, for pollination of crops.[46]

Several other invertebrates have been domesticated, both terrestrial and aquatic, including some such as Drosophila melanogaster fruit flies and the freshwater cnidarian Hydra for research into genetics and physiology. Few have a long history of domestication. Most are used for food or other products such as shellac and cochineal. The phyla involved are Cnidaria, Platyhelminthes (for biological control), Annelida, Mollusca, Arthropoda (marine crustaceans as well as insects and spiders), and Echinodermata. While many marine molluscs are used for food, only a few have been domesticated, including squid, cuttlefish and octopus, all used in research on behaviour and neurology. Terrestrial snails in the genera Helix and Murex are raised for food. Several parasitic or parasitoidal insects including the fly Eucelatoria, the beetle Chrysolina, and the wasp Aphytis are raised for biological control. Conscious or unconscious artificial selection has many effects on species under domestication; variability can readily be lost by inbreeding, selection against undesired traits, or genetic drift, while in Drosophila, variability in eclosion time (when adults emerge) has increased.[47]

The initial domestication of animals impacted most on the genes that controlled their behavior, but the initial domestication of plants impacted most on the genes that controlled their morphology (seed size, plant architecture, dispersal mechanisms) and their physiology (timing of germination or ripening).[18][23]

The domestication of wheat provides an example. Wild wheat shatters and falls to the ground to reseed itself when ripe, but domesticated wheat stays on the stem for easier harvesting. This change was possible because of a random mutation in the wild populations at the beginning of wheat's cultivation. Wheat with this mutation was harvested more frequently and became the seed for the next crop. Therefore, without realizing, early farmers selected for this mutation. The result is domesticated wheat, which relies on farmers for its reproduction and dissemination.[48]

The earliest human attempts at plant domestication occurred in the Middle East. There is early evidence for conscious cultivation and trait selection of plants by pre-Neolithic groups in Syria: grains of rye with domestic traits have been recovered from Epi-Palaeolithic (c. 11,050 BCE) contexts at Abu Hureyra in Syria,[49] but this appears to be a localised phenomenon resulting from cultivation of stands of wild rye, rather than a definitive step towards domestication.[49]

By 10,000 BCE the bottle gourd (Lagenaria siceraria) plant, used as a container before the advent of ceramic technology, appears to have been domesticated. The domesticated bottle gourd reached the Americas from Asia by 8000 BCE, most likely due to the migration of peoples from Asia to America.[50]

Continued domestication was gradual, a process of intermittent trial and error. Over time perennials and small trees including the apple and the olive were domesticated. Some plants, such as the macadamia nut and the pecan, were not domesticated until recently.

In other parts of the world very different species were domesticated. In the Americas squash, maize, beans, and perhaps manioc (also known as cassava) formed the core of the diet. In East Asia millet, rice, and soy were the most important crops. Some areas of the world such as Southern Africa, Australia, California and southern South America never saw local species domesticated.

Domesticated plants may differ from their wild relatives in many ways, including

edible part larger, and easier separated from non-edible part (e.g. freestone fruit).

There are many challenges facing modern farmers, including climate change, pests, soil salinity, drought, and periods with limited sunlight.[52]

Drought is one of the most serious challenges facing farmers today. With shifting climates comes shifting weather patterns, meaning that regions that could traditionally rely on a substantial amount of precipitation were, quite literally, left out to dry. In light of these conditions, drought resistance in major crop plants has become a clear priority.[53] One method is to identify the genetic basis of drought resistance in naturally drought resistant plants, i.e. the Bambara groundnut. Next, transferring these advantages to otherwise vulnerable crop plants. Rice, which is one of the most vulnerable crops in terms of drought, has been successfully improved by the addition of the Barley hva1 gene into the genome using transgenetics. Drought resistance can also be improved through changes in a plant's root system architecture,[54] such as a root orientation that maximizes water retention and nutrient uptake. There must be a continued focus on the efficient usage of available water on a planet that is expected to have a population in excess of nine-billion people by 2050.

Another specific area of genetic improvement for domesticated crops is the crop plant's uptake and utilization of soil potassium, an essential element for crop plants yield and overall quality. A plant's ability to effectively uptake potassium and utilize it efficiently is known as its potassium utilization efficiency.[55] It has been suggested that first optimizing plant root architecture and then root potassium uptake activity may effectively improve plant potassium utilization efficiency.

Cereals, rice, wheat, corn, and barley, make up a huge amount of the global diet across all demographic and social scales. These cereal crop plants are all autogamous, i.e. self- fertilizing, which limits overall diversity in allelic combinations, and therefore adaptability to novel environments.[56] To combat this issue the researchers suggest an "Island Model of Genomic Selection". By breaking a single large population of cereal crop plants into several smaller sub-populations which can receive "migrants" from the other subpopulations, new genetic combinations can be generated.

The Bambara groundnut is a durable crop plant that, like many underutilized crops, has received little attention in an agricultural sense. The Bambara Groundnut is drought resistant and is known to be able to grow in almost any soil conditions, no matter how impoverished an area may be. New genomic and transcriptomic approaches are allowing researchers to improve this relatively small-scale crop, as well as other large-scale crop plants.[57] The reduction in cost, and wide availability of both microarray technology and Next Generation Sequencing have made it possible to analyze underutilized crops, like the groundnut, at genome-wide level. Not overlooking particular crops that don't appear to hold any value outside of the developing world will be key to not only overall crop improvement, but also to reducing the global dependency on only a few crop plants, which holds many intrinsic dangers to the global population's food supply.[57]

The semi-arid tropics, ranging from parts of North and South Africa,Asia especially in the South Pacific, all the way to Australia are notorious for being both economically destitute and agriculturally difficult to cultivate and farm effectively. Barriers include everything from lack of rainfall and diseases, to economic isolation and environmental irresponsibility.[58] There is a large interest in the continued efforts, of the International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics (ICRSAT) to improve staple foods. some mandated crops of ICRISAT include the groundnut, pigeonpea, chickpea, sorghum and pearl millet, which are the main staple foods for nearly one billion people in the semi-arid tropics.[59] As part of the ICRISAT efforts, some wild plant breeds are being used to transfer genes to cultivated crops by interspecific hybridization involving modern methods of embryo rescue and tissue culture.[60] One example of early success has been work to combat the very detrimental peanut clump virus. Transgenetic plants containing the coat protein gene for resistance against peanut clump virus have already been produced successfully.[59] Another region threatened by food security are the Pacific Island Countries, which are disproportionally faced with the negative effects of climate change. The Pacific Islands are largely made up of a chain of small bodies of land, which obviously limits the amount of geographical area in which to farm. This leaves the region with only two viable options 1.) increase agricultural production or 2.) increase food importation. The latter of course runs into the issues of availability and economic feasibility, leaving only the first option as a viable means to solve the region's food crisis. It is much easier to misuse the limited resources remaining, as compared with solving the problem at its' core.[61]

Work has also has been focusing on improving domestic crops through the use of crop wild relatives.[59] The amount and depth of genetic material available in crop wild relatives is larger than originally believed, and the range of plants involved, both wild and domestic, is ever expanding.[62] Through the use of new biotechnological tools such as genome editing, cisgenesis/intragenesis, the transfer of genes between crossable donor species including hybrids, and other omic approaches.[62]

Wild plants can be hybridized with crop plants to form perennial crops from annuals, increase yield, growth rate, and resistance to outside pressures like disease and drought.[63] It is important to remember that these changes take significant lengths of time to achieve, sometimes even decades. However, the outcome can be extremly successful as is the case with a hybrid grass variant known as Kernza.[63] Over the course of nearly three decades, work was done on an attempted hybridization between an already domesticated grass strain, and several of its wild relatives. The domesticated strain as was more uniform in its orientation, but the wild strains were larger and propagated faster. The resulting Kernza crop has traits from both progenitors: uniform orientation and a linearly vertical root system from the domesticated crop, along with increased size and rate of propagation from the wild relatives.[63]

Several species of fungi have been domesticated for use directly as food, or in fermentation to produce foods and drugs. The white button mushroom Agaricus bisporus is widely grown for food.[64] The yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been used for thousands of years to ferment beer and wine, and to leaven bread.[65] Mould fungi including Penicillium are used to mature cheeses and other dairy products, as well as to make drugs such as antibiotics.[66]

Selection of animals for visible "desirable" traits may have undesired consequences. Captive and domesticated animals often have smaller size, piebald color, shorter faces with smaller and fewer teeth, diminished horns, weak muscle ridges, and less genetic variability. Poor joint definition, late fusion of the limb bone epiphyses with the diaphyses, hair changes, greater fat accumulation, smaller brains, simplified behavior patterns, extended immaturity, and more pathology are among the defects of domestic animals. All of these changes have been documented by archaeological evidence, and confirmed by animal breeders in the 20th century.[67] In 2014, a study proposed the theory that under selection, docility in mammals and birds results partly from a slowed pace of neural crest development, that would in turn cause a reduced fearâ€“startle response due to mild neurocristopathy that causes domestication syndrome. The theory was unable to explain curly tails nor domestication syndrome exhibited by plants.[20]

A side effect of domestication has been zoonotic diseases. For example, cattle have given humanity various viral poxes, measles, and tuberculosis; pigs and ducks have given influenza; and horses have given the rhinoviruses. Many parasites have their origins in domestic animals.[3][pageÂ needed] The advent of domestication resulted in denser human populations which provided ripe conditions for pathogens to reproduce, mutate, spread, and eventually find a new host in humans.[citation needed]

Paul Shepard writes "Man substitutes controlled breeding for natural selection; animals are selected for special traits like milk production or passivity, at the expense of overall fitness and nature-wide relationships...Though domestication broadens the diversity of forms – that is, increases visible polymorphism – it undermines the crisp demarcations that separate wild species and cripples our recognition of the species as a group. Knowing only domestic animals dulls our understanding of the way in which unity and discontinuity occur as patterns in nature, and substitutes an attention to individuals and breeds. The wide variety of size, color, shape, and form of domestic horses, for example, blurs the distinction among different species of Equus that once were constant and meaningful."[68]

Jared Diamond in his book Guns, Germs, and Steel describes the universal tendency for populations that have acquired agriculture and domestic animals to develop a large population and to expand into new territories. He recounts migrations of people armed with domestic crops overtaking, displacing or killing indigenous hunter-gatherers,[3]:p112 whose lifestyle is coming to an end.[3]:p86

Some anarcho-primitivist authors describe domestication as the process by which previously nomadic human populations shifted towards a sedentary or settled existence through agriculture and animal husbandry. They claim that this kind of domestication demands a totalitarian relationship with both the land and the plants and animals being domesticated. They say that whereas, in a state of wildness, all life shares and competes for resources, domestication destroys this balance. Domesticated landscape (e.g. pastoral lands/agricultural fields and, to a lesser degree, horticulture and gardening) ends the open sharing of resources; where "this was everyone's", it is now "mine". Anarcho-primitivists state that this notion of ownership laid the foundation for social hierarchy as property and power emerged. It also involved the destruction, enslavement, or assimilation of other groups of early people who did not make such a transition.[69]

In 2016, a study found that humans have had a major impact on global genetic diversity as well as extinction rates, including a contribution to megafaunal extinctions. Pristine landscapes no longer exist and have not existed for millennia, and humans have concentrated the planet's biomass into human-favored plants and animals. Domesticated ecosystems provide food, reduce predator and natural dangers, and promote commerce, but have also resulted in habitat loss and extinctions commencing in the Late Pleistocene. Ecologists and other researchers are advised to make better use of the archaeological and paleoecological data available for gaining an understanding the history of human impacts before proposing solutions.[70]