The Architectural Pediment and How to Use It

A pediment is a low-pitched triangular gable originally found on temples in ancient Greece and Rome. Pediments were reinvented during the Renaissance and later imitated in Greek Revival and Neoclassical house styles of the 19th and 20th centuries. Use of pediments has been freely adapted in many styles of architecture, yet remains most closely associated with Greek and Roman (i.e., Classical) derivatives. The word pediment is thought to have come from the word meaning pyramid, as the triangular pediment has a spatial dimension similar to the pyramid. Use of Pediments Originally the pediment had a structural function. As the  Jesuit priest Marc-Antoine Laugier explained in 1755, the pediment is one of only three essential elements of what Laugier called the basic primitive hut. For many Greek temples, first made of wood, the triangular geometry had a structural function. Fast forward 2,000 years from ancient Greece and Rome to the Baroque period of art and architecture, when the pediment became an ornamental detail to be extravagantly modified. Pediments are most often used today to create a solid, regal, stately look-and-feel to the architecture, such as is used for banks, museums, and government buildings. Often, the triangular space is filled with symbolic statuary when a message need be proclaimed. The space within a pediment is sometimes called the tympanum, although this word more commonly refers to the Medieval-era arch areas over a doorway decorated with Christian iconography. In residential architecture, pediments are commonly found above windows and doorways. Examples of Pediments The Pantheon in Rome proves just how far back in time pediments were used — at least 126 A.D. But pediments were around before that, as can be seen in ancient cities around the world, like the UNESCO World Heritage site of Petra, Jordan, the Nabataean caravan city influenced by Greek and Roman rulers. Whenever architects and designers turn to ancient Greece and Rome for ideas, the result will likely include the column and the pediment. The Renaissance in the 15th and 16th centuries was such a time -— a rebirth of Classical designs by the architects Palladio (1508-1580) and Vignola (1507-1573) leading the way. In the United States, American statesman Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) influenced the architecture of a new nation. Jeffersons home, Monticello, incorporates Classical design by using not only a pediment but also a dome — very much like the Pantheon in Rome. Jefferson also designed the Virginia State Capitol Building in Richmond, Virginia, which influenced the federal government buildings being planned for Washington, D.C. Irish-born architect James Hoban (1758-1831) brought Neoclassical ideas from Dublin to the new capital when he modeled the White House after the Leinster House in Ireland. In the 20th century, pediments can be seen throughout America, from the New York Stock Exchange in Lower Manhattan to the 1935 U.S. Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C. and then on to the 1939 mansion known as Graceland near Memphis, Tennessee. Definition pediment: the triangular gable defined by the crown molding at the edge of a gabled roof and the horizontal line between the eaves. —  John Milnes Baker, AIA Other Uses of the Word Pediment Antique dealers will often use the word pediment to describe an ornate flourish in Chippendale-era furniture. Because the word describes a shape, it is often used to describe man-made and natural shapes. In geology, a pediment is a sloping formation caused by erosion. Five Types of Pediments 1. Triangular Pediment: The most common pediment shape is the pointed pediment, a triangle framed by a cornice or ledge, with the apex at the top, two symmetrical straight lines  sloping to the ends of a horizontal cornice. The rake or angle of the slope can vary. 2. Broken Pediment: In a broken pediment, the triangular outline is non-continuous,  open at the top, and without a point or vertex. The broken space is usually at the top apex (eliminating the top angle), but sometimes at the bottom horizontal side. Broken pediments are often found on antique furniture. A swan-necked or rams head pediment is a type of broken pediment in a highly ornamented S-shape. Broken pediments are found in Baroque architecture, a period of experimentalism in detail, according to Professor Talbot Hamlin, FAIA. The pediment became an architectural detail with little or no structural function. Baroque detail thus became a matter of the increasingly free modification of forms originally classic, to made them sensitive to every possible nuance of emotional expression. Pediments were broken and their sides curved and scrolled, separated by cartouches, or urns; columns were twisted, moldings duplicated and reduplicated to give sharp emphasis, and broken suddenly out and in where a complexity of shadow was desired. — Hamlin, p. 427 3. Segmental Pediment: Also called round or curved pediments, segmental pediments contrast with triangular pediments in that they have a round cornice replacing two sides of the traditional triangular pediment. A segmental pediment might complement or even be called a curvilinear tympanum. 4. Open Pediment: In this type of pediment, the usual strong horizontal line of the pediment is absent or nearly absent. 5. Florentine Pediment:  Before Baroque, architects of the early Renaissance, when sculptors became architects, developed a decorative styling of pediments. Over the years, this architectural detail became known as Florentine pediments, after their use in Florence, Italy. It consists of a semicircular form placed above the entablature, and as wide as the enclosing columns or pilasters. Usually a simple ban of moldings runs around it, and the semicircular field below is often decorated with a shell, although sometimes molded panels and even figures are found. Little rosettes and leaf and flower forms are usually used to fill the corner between the ends of the semicircle and the cornice below, and also as a finial at the top. — Hamlin, p. 331 Pediments for the 21st Century Why do we use pediments? They give a sense of tradition to a home, in the Western Classical architecture sense. Also, the geometric design itself is innately pleasing to the human senses.  For todays homeowners, creating a pediment is a rather simple, inexpensive way to add decoration — usually over a door or window. Have pediments gone sideways? Todays modern skyscraper architects use triangles for structural strength as well as beauty. David Childs design for One World Trade Center (2014) is a good example of aesthetically pleasing grandeur. Norman Fosters Hearst Tower (2006) is filled with triangulation; its beauty is up for discussion. Sources American House Styles: A Concise Guide by John Milnes Baker, AIA, Norton, 1994, p. 175Architecture through the Ages by Talbot Hamlin, Putnam, Revised 1953, pp. 444, 427, 331Furniture with broken pediment Agostini/A. Dagli Orti/Getty Images (cropped)Broken Pediment on Residential Portico Richard Leo Johnson/Getty Images (cropped)Contrasting pediments Julian Castle/ArcaidImages/Getty ImagesPediments over windows Brian Bumby/Getty Images

How to Prove Your Family Tree Connections

There is nothing more frustrating to a genealogist than locating details on an ancestor in a published book, Web page, or database, only to later find that the information is full of errors and inconsistencies. Grandparents are often linked as parents, women bear children at the tender age of 6, and often entire branches of a family tree are attached based on nothing more than a hunch or guess. Sometimes you may not even discover the problems until sometime later, leading you to spin your wheels struggling to confirm inaccurate facts, or researching ancestors who arent even yours. What can we as genealogists do to: Make sure that our family histories are as well-researched and accurate as possible.Educate others so that all of these inaccurate family trees dont continue to procreate and multiply? How can we prove our family tree connections and encourage others to do the same? This is where the Genealogical Proof Standard established by the Board for Certification of Genealogists comes in. Genealogical Proof Standard As outlined in Genealogy Standards by the Board for Certification of Genealogists, the Genealogical Proof Standard consists of five elements: A reasonably exhaustive search for all pertinent informationA complete and accurate citation to the source of each item usedAnalysis of the collected informations quality as evidenceResolution of any conflicting or contradictory evidenceArrive at a soundly reasoned, coherently written conclusion A genealogical conclusion that meets these standards can be considered proved. It may still not be 100% accurate, but it is as close to accurate as we can attain given the information and sources available to us. Sources, Information Evidence When collecting and analyzing the evidence to prove your case, it is important first to understand how genealogists use sources, information, and evidence. Conclusions which meet the five elements of the Genealogical Proof Standard will generally continue to hold as true, even if new evidence is uncovered. The terminology used by genealogists is also a little different than what you may have learned in history class. Instead of using the terms primary source and secondary source, genealogists quantify the difference between sources (original or derivative) and the information that is derived from them (primary or secondary).   Original vs. Derivative SourcesReferring to the provenance of the record, original sources are records that contribute written, oral, or visual information not derived—copied, abstracted, transcribed, or summarized—from another written or oral record. Derivative sources are, by their definition, records which have been derived—copied, abstracted, transcribed, or summarized—from previously existing sources. Original sources usually carry more weight than derivative sources.Primary vs. Secondary InformationReferring to the quality of the information contained within a particular record, primary information comes from records created at or near the time of an event with information contributed by a person who had reasonably close knowledge of the event. Secondary information, by contrast, is information found in records created a significant amount of time after an event occurred or contributed by a person who was not present at the event. Primary information usually carries more weight than secondary information.Direct vs. Indirect EvidenceEvidence only comes into play when we ask a question and then consider whether the information found in a particular record answers that question. Direct evidence is information that directly answers your question (e.g., When was Danny born?) without a need for other evidence to explain or interpret it. Indirect evidence, on the other hand, is circumstantial information that requires additional evidence or thought to convert it into a reliable conclusion. Direct evidence usually carries more weight than indirect evidence. These classes of sources, information, an original source, and evidence are rarely as clear-cut as they sound since information found in one particular source can be either primary or secondary. For example, a source containing primary information directly relating to the death may also provide secondary information regarding items such as the deceaseds date of birth, parents names, and even childrens names. If the information is secondary, it will have to be further assessed based on who provided that information (if known), whether or not the informant was present at the events in question, and how closely that information correlates with other sources.

Lucent Technologies Free Essays

Case analysis on Lucent Technologies: Global Supply Chain Management By, ROOPANVI DANDU Lucent Technologies: Global Supply Chain Management Lucent technologies are a manufacturing company that was a part of American Telephone and Telegraph Corporation (ATamp;T) until 1996. Lucent’s main product was the 5ESS switch. The switch was worlds most reliable and widely used switching system. We will write a custom essay sample on Lucent Technologies or any similar topic only for you Order Now Prior to 1996 the Asian supply chain has not been a high priority. The demand for Asian joint ventures was easily met by the manufacturing unit in United States. The high volume of production in Oklahoma City led to low production costs. Also ATamp;T’s large cash flow from the phone bills had insulated its manufacturing wing from the consequences of inefficient assent management and long time delivery times. Lucent’s independence made them loose the deep pockets of ATamp;T. At the same time many other factors like the booming Asian marketplace, significant price erosion for telecommunications equipment, original part resourcing and manufacturing capabilities forced then to redesign the Asian supply chain. After the redesign the results were dramatic. 82 percent of parts were sourced with Asia, which led the factory to be three times as productive, inventory days of sales fell by more than half, time difference and long distance that had inhibited responsiveness were eliminated. Also due to its intimate knowledge of product cost, the factory was able to steer many bids towards configurations in which the switch had great cost advantage leading to competitive advantage needed to win the bid. They were many factors that led to revisit the Asia supply chain strategy. Due to unprecedented growth in cellular and Internet sectors, components demand outstripped supply, and huge material shortage developed. Leading edge procurement arrangements were sorely tested and in some cases broke down. The main five problematic areas were sole –sourced component lead times more than doubled, inventories increased by about 25 percent as assemblies could not be completed, the Taiwan factory had to commit to early parts delivery to ensure availability, product shipment to costumers were jeopardized and orders were at risk due to an inability to ship on time, premium prices were required in order to obtain expedited shipments of missing parts. Also the contract manufacturers were starting to get more involved in sophisticated telecommunication electronics. The switch was reaching the mature part of its life cycle. All these external and internal factors forced to rethink about the strategy. I would recommend reevaluation of supply chain to reduce the competition. To reduce material shortage I would suggest to design new technology that uses general products, forecast the demand, use contract manufacturers where their own manufacturing assets are not so profitable, order the parts beforehand so that premium prices can be avoided for missing parts. The main lesson learned form this case study would be to reevaluate your supply chain strategy every few years to be successful and ahead of the competitors. In order to effectively balance risk and opportunity, manufacturers, distributors, and retailers need to periodically rethink their strategies. . To improve the Supply Chain network Enhanced Collaboration should be implemented. It would dramatically minimize the delays and also reduces the costs. Work with suppliers to create contingency plans. Also to make supply chain more flexible increase product component standardization. How to cite Lucent Technologies, Papers

Indigenous Recognition in the Commonwealth Constitution

Question: Discuss about the Indigenous Recognition in the Commonwealth Constitution. Answer: Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous People in the Australian Commonwealth and Victoria: Historical and Developmental Background The general expectation is that the place of indigenous inhabitants in the polity of a nation is one of foundational significance and worthy of national Constitution address. In the case of Australia, though, that is yet to be done.[1] Originally, references to the Aborigines were merely exclusionary, which were removed during the referendum of 1967.[2] The result of the referendum was that the Aborigines were no longer excluded under section s 51(xxvi) regarding the powers of the Commonwealth Parliament to promulgate particular legislations for any racial grouping it deemed necessary.[3] The further referendum of 1998 made major proposals and among them was recognition of Torres Strait Islanders and Aborigines through the Preamble to the Constitution. However, the proposals were unsuccessful.[4] Prior to state Constitutions recognizing indigenous Australians, there was an occasional arising of such recognition in the State legislation Preambles with respect to the Aboriginal people.[5] The Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) is an example of such state legislation, which in its preamble, contains provisions acknowledging that the Aborigines were the traditional inhabitants of the State of NSW. It is more recently that the Victorian Constitutional amendments have seen the provisions that recognise indigenous people of Australia.[6] However, such recognition was not always there. In the Constitution Act 1975 of Victoria, there was in existence a Preamble that provided for the history of Constitutional enactment. However, it did not make reference to the Aborigines.[7] While the Preamble was not altered, the reformers in 2004, inserted section 1A. The import of the said section into the Constitution Act was acknowledging that the events set out in the Preamble occurred withou t proper consultation, recognition or involvement of the Aboriginal people of Victoria.[8] Importantly, there is a purported entrenchment of the above provision, such that amending or repealing the same can only be effected by a 3/5 special majority of the two Houses of Parliament.[9] Summarily, Australia has a long history of proposals for establishment of provisions that constitutionally recognise indigenous people in the Constitution.[10] Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Communities in Canada and New Zealand: Comparative Survey Claims of the Maori people of New Zealand against the Crown in New Zealand are premised upon the Common Law doctrine of Aboriginal title.[11] According to that doctrine, the Treaty of Waitangi[12] is declaratory in nature but not the source of the property rights of the Maori people.[13] Chapman, J. presented the locus classicus of the preceding in the case of R. v. Symonds where he stated that by securing the pre-emptive right of the Queen and guaranteeing the title of the natives, the Treaty, either in practice or in doctrine, does not assert any new thing.[14] Paul McHugh reaches the conclusion that the Crown is becoming acutely vulnerable to the claims of the Maori people. One of the salient aspirations of the Maori people of New Zealand is greater recognition of their rights, culture and values within the legal system.[15] Under this aspiration, the natives long for the change in substantive law and in the expression of Maori rights in the New Zealand legal order.[16] Accordingly, the import of the preceding is to accord the Maori rights a constitutionally entrenched status forming a kind of supreme law that ordinary legislation cannot set aside. By the 1900, the customary laws of the Maori were virtually erased from the NZ legal regime. This has occurred through the failure to recognize the Treaty of Waitangi as a source of law that is enforceable.[17] Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington was the authoritative deciding, for instance, where the Honourable Chief Justice described the Maori people as savage barbarians with no organization in their government systems and no customs that were settled.[18] Furthermore, the introduction of Common Law statutory regimes that are overarching and that extend to all citizens presents a failure to recognize the distinctiveness of the Maori people.[19] Despite some favourable decisions by the Privy Council during the 1900, that recognized Maori customary interests, all of them were reversed by legislation in New Zealand.[20] The preceding, notwithstanding, the customary values of the Maori remain vibrant alongside (or outside) of the legal regime and are continually adhered to in controlled environments.[21] Summarily, constitutional reform in New Zealand in the context of Native peoples recognition is marred with great difficulty.[22] Canada shares notable similarities with New Zealand with respect to constitutional heritage and cultures. However, the divergence in constitutional development between the two nations over the past two decades with regard to protection of indigenous people offers an excellent opportunity for comparative survey.[23] The Canadian system of indigenous rights protection is governed by a judicialized constitution.[24] The Supreme Court of Canada asserted the fundamental nature of principles of the constitution, which do not directly derive from a single source.[25] Beverley McLachlin, a Chief Justice of Canada, explained that constitutional principles are unwritten norms, which are crucial to a countrys legal system, values, identity and history.[26] The Canadian adoption of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Constitution Act 1982 saw the judicial protection of indigenous rights. The Constitution Act for instance affirms and acknowledges the treaty and Aboriginal privileges of the Canadian Aboriginal inhabitants.[27] On account of section 52 of the Constitution Act, section 35 is supreme law. This means that the courts, including the Supreme Court, have the powers of striking down laws that are not consistent with that section.[28] It is noteworthy that, comparatively, the Canadian and Australian jurisdictions have the most developed modern approaches to indigenous recognition and co-management.[29] Case for the Australian Commonwealth Constitution: Should Indigenous Rights be Recognized and to what Extent? The concept of recognising the Torres Strait Islander and Aboriginal people in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia has been advocated for many years.[30] Arguments Among the most significant reasons for recognising the Aboriginal people in the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australian is that the people themselves have sought for it for decades. The Constitution, and generally the legal structures, has a profound effect upon the livelihood of the Aboriginal people. The Constitution establishes societal lines of power, legitimacy and relationships of people and provision and recognition of national principles.[31] On all the above accounts, the Constitution of Australia has failed the Aboriginal people. This, the Constitution has done through discrimination and failure to mention the natives or their history. Accordingly, the Aborigines rightly argue that a nations story is not complete without the history of the inhabitants of the land long before the white settlers.[32] Research recognises a broader range of challenges attending to and contributors to failure of recognition. Surveys on the social causes of health indicate how discrimination, exclusion and disadvantage can have huge adverse effects on physical and mental health.[33] The problems of being portrayed as an outsider in ones own land cannot be overstated. One of the major arguments fostered against recognising indigenous peoples in the Australian Constitution is that such recognition raises one race above or at the expense of the rest. This school of thought argues that this enhances discrimination. However, this argument does not warrant discourse. Opinion From the foregoing discourse, the writer opines that provision of the constitutional recognition and entrenchment of indigenous people and culture is of foundational importance. This is essentially because constitutional jurisprudence informs that constitutional documents should not merely be static texts but should necessarily draw from the historical, cultural and spiritual experiences of the people. Accordingly, the Commonwealth Constitutional provision should not follow the Victorian example. This is because the preamble declares that proper consultations with the natives were not done. Hence, the preamble should not only recognize the distinctiveness of the Aboriginal people and culture, but should also make it a supreme law like in Canada. This means that the draw-back clauses that limit and derogate the rights of the indigenous people should be removed and replaced with supremacy clauses that buttress the recognition provisions. Therefore, the Commonwealth Constitution should recognize the indigenous peoples by positively mentioning them and their values in the novel Preamble to the Constitution. Secondly, it is important to delete sections 25 and 51 (26) and lastly, by inserting new provisions that allow for the formation of legally binding agreements between the Crown and Indigenous people. The said provisions should also outlaw provisions that are discriminative along racial lines. Conclusion The importance of the above-discussed recognition cannot be overstated and the legal world is waiting to draw lessons from the process. Therefore, there should be amendments to the Australian Commonwealth Constitution to provide for recognition of its original people. However provision in the preamble is not sufficient to deal with the substantive and practical challenges. Further amendment is needed to remove the racially discriminatory vestiges. Bibliography Statutes Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983 (NSW) Charter of Human Rights and Responsibilities Act 2006 (Victoria), Preamble Constitution Act of Canada, 1982 Constitution Act of Victoria, 1975 Constitution Alteration (Preamble) 1999 (Cth) Native Land Act 1909, New Zealand The Treaty of Waitangi, opened for signature 6 February 1840, (entered into force May 1840). Cases Hoani Te Heuheu Tukino v Aotea District Maori Land Board [1941] AC 308 Kartinyeri v Commonwealth (1998) 195 CLR 33 v. Symonds (1847), [1980-1932] N.Z.P.C.C. 387, 390 (S.C.) Wi Parata v Bishop of Wellington (1877) 3 NZ Jur NS (SC) 72 Other Beverley McLachlin, Unwritten Constitutional Principles: What is Going On? (2006) 4 N.Z.J Craig Donna, Recognising Indigenous Rights Through Co-Management Regimes: Canadian and Australian Experiences(2002) 6 NZJ Envtl. L.199 Davis Megan and Zrinka Lemezina, Indigenous Australians and the preamble: Towards a more inclusive constitution or entrenching marginalization?(2010) 33(2) UNSWLJ239 Dawson John, The Resistance of the New Zealand Legal System to Recognition of Maori Customary Law Journal of South Pacific Law (2008) 12(1), 56 Morris Shireen, Lesson from New Zealand: Towards a Better Working Relationship between Indigenous Peoples and the State(2014) 18 AILR67 Nettheim Garth, Indigenous Australian Constitutions(2001) 24(3) UNSWLJ 840 Palmer Matthew, Constitutional Realism About Constitutional Protection: Indigenous Rights Under a Judicialized and a Politicized Constitution(2006) 29 Dalhousie LJ1, 4 Paul McHugh, The legal basis for Maori claims against the Crown (1988) 18 Victoria U. Wellington L. Rev. 1 Twomey Anne, Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians in a Preamble (2011) 12 Twomey Anne, The Constitution of New South Wales (Federation Press, 2004), Chapter 5 WA Law Reform Commission, Aboriginal Customary Laws, Report No 94, 2006, pp 73-4 Williams George, Should Aboriginal Peoples Be Recognized in the Australian Constitution (2013) 17 UW Sydney L. Rev13