Road to Emmaus appearance
Event from the Gospel of Luke
According to the Gospel of Luke, the road to Emmaus appearance is one of the early post-resurrection appearances of Jesus after his crucifixion and the discovery of the empty tomb. Both the meeting on the road to Emmaus and the subsequent supper at Emmaus, depicting the meal that Jesus had with two disciples after the encounter on the road, have been popular subjects in art.
Biblical accounts.
N. T. Wright considers the detailed narration of the Emmaus journey in Luke 24:13–35 as one of the best sketches of a biblical scene in the Gospel of Luke. Jan Lambrecht, citing D. P. Moessner, writes: "the Emmaus story is one of Luke's 'most exquisite literary achievements'." It describes the encounter on the road to Emmaus and the supper at Emmaus, and states that a disciple named Cleopas was walking towards Emmaus with another disciple when they met Jesus. They did not recognize him, and discussed their sadness at recent events with him. They persuaded him to come and eat with them, and at the meal they recognized him.
Theme.
Although it may be said that its main subject is proving the resurrection by the appearance of Jesus, this narrative seems not to say anything about proving the event. R. W. L. Moberly suggests that "the story is best understood as an exposition of the hermeneutical issue of discernment, focusing specifically on the question, 'How does one discern the risen Christ?'" Alfred McBride says that the Emmaus narrative concerns "the evolution of the awareness of the two disciples, from despair over Christ's death to faith in his resurrection". Used to perceive Christian spiritual growth, this narrative is considered as a model for a Christians' own journey to a deeper faith and as an instrument to help others do the same journey.
Parallels.
The Gospel of Mark has a similar account that describes the appearance of Jesus to two disciples while they were walking in the country, at about the same time in the Gospel narrative, although it does not name the disciples or the destination as Emmaus:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />Afterward Jesus appeared in a different form to two of them while they were walking in the country. These returned and reported it to the rest; but they did not believe them either.
It has also been suggested that the Ethiopian eunuch story (Acts 8:26–40) is a "much discussed parallel" to the Emmaus narrative, since there are some recognizable similarities between the two. Lambrecht says, "Each event culminates with a ritual, the breaking and distributing of bread at Emmaus and the baptism of the Ethiopian along the road. [...] What remains as a common theme in both stories is the necessary hermeneutical connection between the Scriptures and the Jesus event. The Scriptures are to be interpreted in the light of 'the good news of Jesus' (Acts 8) and the Jesus events can only be understood in light of the Scriptures (Lk 24)."
Unnamed disciple.
Many names have been proposed for the disciple who accompanied Cleopas. Among those who have been suggested: Simon/Symeon, according to several documents and manuscripts; Ammaon/Amaon, which may be a spelling error for "Symeon", according to Saint Ambrose; Nathanael, according to Saint Epiphanius's "Panarion"; Nicodemus, according to the Arabic Apocryphal Gospel of John; Luke the Evangelist, according to the Book of the Bee; Philip the Deacon; James, brother of Jesus; and Mary, the wife (or possibly daughter) of Clopas, who is considered the same person as Cleopas.
John Gillman, in a to Jan Lambrecht, writes that "Luke's failure to identify Cleophas' companion by either name or gender may well be a strategy of inviting the reader to identify implicitly with that person, and thus to make the journey as Cleophas' companion."
The journey to Emmaus.
The two followers were walking along the road, heading to Emmaus, deep in solemn and serious discussion, when Jesus met them. They could not recognize Jesus and saw him as a stranger. In "Homilies on the Gospels" (Hom. 23), Gregory the Great says:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />They did not, in fact, have faith in him, yet they were talking about him. The Lord, therefore, appeared to them but did not show them a face they could recognize. In this way, the Lord enacted outwardly, before their physical eyes, what was going on in them inwardly, before the eyes of their hearts. For inwardly they simultaneously loved him and doubted him; therefore the Lord was outwardly present to them, and at the same time did not reveal his identity. Since they were speaking about him, he showed them his presence, but since they doubted him, he hid from them the appearance by which they could have recognized him.
Jesus let them tell about their anxieties and pains; he let them grieve and mourn by expressing the root causes. Jesus empathically listened to them, who poured out their crises and doubts, and used scriptures so that they could better understand "suffering and glory". During the journey to Emmaus, according to Alfred McBride, Jesus patiently guided the two disciples "from hopelessness to celebration" and also intended to nourish the two disciples' faith to such an extent that they can see "his real presence in the breaking of the bread".
From a pastoral perspective, John Mossi writes that meditating upon the "Emmaus Pilgrimage" may help one when experiencing one's own "dark nights". During such course of action, according to Mossi, one should realize that Jesus compassionately walks as a friend on one's own journey, empathetically listens one's sorrows and hesitations, and spends quality time accompanying one goes through the process of inner healing.
"Stay with us".
Luke 24:28–29 states that Jesus stayed and had supper with the two disciples after the encounter on the road:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />As they approached the village to which they were going, Jesus acted as if he were going farther. But they urged him strongly, "Stay with us, for it is nearly evening; the day is almost over." So he went in to stay with them.
The two disciples showed their openness and caring to the unknown stranger, who is Jesus, by inviting him to stay with them, to join in meal and companionship. Lambrecht argues that such attitudes made Jesus able to change them deeply: "By the offer of hospitality the Emmaus companions were able to transcend their self-concern, sadness, foolishness and slowness of heart, thus preparing them for the revelatory experience around the table where they were nourished."
Supper at Emmaus.
At first, Jesus appears to Cleopas and one other disciple, but "their eyes were holden" so that they could not recognize him. Later, "in the breaking of bread" (Luke 24:30), "their eyes were opened" and they recognized him (Luke 24:31). B. P. Robinson argues that this means that the recognition occurred in the course of the meal, while Raymond Blacketer notes that "many, perhaps even most, commentators, ancient and modern and in-between, have seen the revelation of Jesus' identity in the breaking of bread as having some kind of eucharistic referent or implication."
In his apostolic letter , John Paul II says that when the two disciples urged Jesus to stay with them, Jesus afterwards responded by giving them a way to stay in him, by entering into "a profound communion with Jesus" through the "Sacrament of the Eucharist" (cf. John 15:4). Soon after Jesus agreed to their request to stay, according to the Pope, "Jesus' face would disappear, yet the Master would 'stay' with them, hidden in the 'breaking of the bread' which had opened their eyes to recognize him. [...] When minds are enlightened and hearts are enkindled, signs begin to 'speak'."
Return to Jerusalem.
Luke 24:32 states that the two disciples' hearts were "burning" during their conversation with Jesus along the way to Emmaus, especially when he explained the Scriptures. They have gone through "a journey symbolizing their change of hearts from 'sad' to 'burning'", and they immediately returned to Jerusalem to share their experience with other fellows (Luke 24:33).
Alfred McBride says that "enthusiasm flooded their whole being" when the two disciples have "encounter[ed] the Risen Christ" in the supper at Emmaus. They sensed a must to share their happiness and the good news with another so that they were willing to go through a long walk back to Jerusalem. John Paul II argues that the two disciples realized "the duty to be a missionary" after "entering into communion with Christ" at the meal event, relates it with the dismissal at the end of the Eucharistic Celebration.
In art.
Both the encounter on the road and the ensuing supper have been depicted in art, but the supper has received more attention. Medieval art tends to show a moment before Jesus is recognized; Christ wears a large floppy hat to help explain the initial lack of recognition by the disciples. This is often a large pilgrim's hat with badges or, rarely, a Jewish hat. However, the depiction of the supper has been a more popular theme, at least since the Renaissance, showing Jesus eating with the disciples. Often the moment of recognition is shown.
Rembrandt's 1648 depiction of the supper builds on the etching that he did six years earlier, in which the disciple on the left had risen, hands clasped in prayer. In both depictions, the disciples are startled and in awe but not in fear. The servant is oblivious to the theophanic moment taking place during the supper.
Caravaggio's painting in London and his painting in Milan were six years apart, and both imitate natural color very well, but both were criticized for lack of decorum. Caravaggio depicted Jesus without a beard, and the London painting shows fruits on the table that are out of season. Moreover, the inn keeper is shown serving with a hat.
Some other artists who have portrayed the supper are Jacopo Bassano, Pontormo, Vittore Carpaccio, Philippe de Champaigne, Albrecht Dürer, Benedetto Gennari, Jacob Jordaens, Marco Marziale, Pedro Orrente, Tintoretto, Titian, Velázquez, and Paolo Veronese. The supper was also the subject of one of Han van Meegeren's most successful Vermeer forgeries.
In literary art, the Emmaus theme is treated as early as the 12th century by Durham poet Laurentius in a semidramatic Latin poem.
In music.
The gospel was the prescribed reading for Easter Monday in Lutheran Leipzig at Bach's time. He composed several church cantatas for the occasion, including the chorale cantata "Bleib bei uns, denn es will Abend werden", BWV 6, in 1725.
Josef Rheinberger composed in 1855 a motet "Abendlied" on a verse from the gospel narration, "Bleib bei uns" (Bide with us).
The American southern gospel music group The Emmaus Road Quartet takes their name from the Biblical account. They also recorded a song entitled "On The Road to Emmaus" in 2019, in which the lyrics espouse a desire to walk with a risen Jesus Christ and be taught the scriptures by him.
Jungian perspective.
Carl Jung regarded the road to Emmaus appearance as a mythological example of the common dream theme of the "magical traveling companion."
Contemporary use.
Emmaus, Pennsylvania, a borough in the Lehigh Valley region of the United States, draws its name from the Biblical references to Emmaus.
Notes.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Crucifixion of Jesus
Jesus's death as described in the gospels
The crucifixion of Jesus was the death of Jesus by being nailed to a cross. It occurred in 1st-century Judaea, most likely in AD 30 or AD 33. It is described in the four canonical gospels, referred to in the New Testament epistles, and later attested to by other ancient sources. Scholars nearly universally accept the historicity of Jesus's crucifixion, although there is no consensus on the details. According to the canonical gospels, Jesus was arrested and tried by the Sanhedrin, and then sentenced by Pontius Pilate to be scourged, and finally crucified by the Romans. The Gospel of John portrays his death as a sacrifice for sin.
Jesus was stripped of his clothing and offered vinegar mixed with myrrh or gall (likely posca) to drink. At Golgotha, he was then hung between two convicted thieves and, according to the Gospel of Mark, was crucified at the third hour (9 a.m.), and died by the ninth hour of the day (at around 3:00 p.m.). During this time, the soldiers affixed a sign to the top of the cross stating "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" which, according to the Gospel of John, was written in three languages (Hebrew, Latin, and Greek). They then divided his garments among themselves and cast lots for his seamless robe, according to the Gospel of John. The Gospel of John also states that, after Jesus's death, one soldier (named in extra-Biblical tradition as Longinus) pierced his side with a spear to be certain that he had died, then blood and water gushed from the wound. The Bible describes seven statements that Jesus made while he was on the cross, as well as several supernatural events that occurred.
Collectively referred to as the Passion, Jesus's suffering and redemptive death by crucifixion are the central aspects of Christian theology concerning the doctrines of salvation and atonement.
New Testament narratives.
Paul is the earliest surviving source (outside of the gospels) to document Jesus's crucifixion. Scholars have used Paul's chronology as evidence for the date of the crucifixion. However, the earliest detailed accounts of the death of Jesus are contained in the four canonical gospels. In the Synoptic Gospels, Jesus predicts his death in three separate places. All four gospel accounts conclude with an extended narrative of Jesus's arrest, initial trial at the Sanhedrin and final trial at Pilate's court, where Jesus is flogged, condemned to death, is led to the place of crucifixion initially carrying his cross before Roman soldiers induce Simon of Cyrene to carry it, and then Jesus is crucified, entombed, and resurrected from the dead. In each gospel account these five events in the life of Jesus are treated with more intense detail than any other portion of that Gospel's narrative. Scholars note that the reader receives an almost hour-by-hour account of what is happening.
After arriving at Golgotha, Jesus was offered wine mixed with myrrh or gall to drink. Both the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Matthew record that he refused this. He was then crucified and hanged between two convicts. According to some translations of the original Greek, the convicts may have been bandits or Jewish rebels. According to the Gospel of Mark, he endured the torment of crucifixion from the third hour (between approximately 9 a.m. and noon), until his death at the ninth hour, corresponding to about 3 p.m. The soldiers affixed a sign above his head stating "Jesus of Nazareth, King of the Jews" which, according to the Gospel of John, was in three languages (Hebrew, Latin, and Greek), and then divided his garments and cast lots for his seamless robe. According to the Gospel of John, the Roman soldiers did not break Jesus's legs, as they did to the two crucified convicts (breaking the legs hastened the onset of death), as Jesus was dead already. Each gospel has its own account of Jesus's last words, seven statements altogether.
All four gospel accounts state that, following Jesus's death, Joseph of Arimathea requested Jesus's body and buried it in a rock-cut tomb. The Gospel of Matthew alone suggests that Joseph provided his own tomb for this purpose.
The three Synoptic Gospels describe Simon of Cyrene bearing the cross, a crowd of people mocking Jesus along with the other two crucified men, darkness from the sixth to the ninth hour, and the temple veil being torn from top to bottom. The Synoptic Gospels also mention several witnesses, including a centurion, and several women who watched from a distance, two of whom were present during the burial.
The Gospel of Luke is the only gospel to omit the detail of the sour wine mix that was offered to Jesus on a reed, while only Mark and John describe Joseph actually taking the body down off the cross.
There are several details that are only mentioned in a single gospel account. For instance, only Matthew mentions an earthquake, who went to the city, and that Roman soldiers were assigned to guard the tomb, while Mark is the only one to state the time of the crucifixion (the third hour, or 9 a.m. – although it was probably as late as noon) and the centurion's report of Jesus's death. Luke's unique contributions to the narrative include Jesus's words to the women who were mourning, one criminal's rebuke of the other, the reaction of the multitudes who left "beating their breasts", and the women preparing spices and ointments before resting on the Sabbath. John is also the only one to refer to the request that the legs be broken and the soldier's subsequent piercing of Jesus's side (as fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy), as well as that Nicodemus assisted Joseph with burial.
According to the First Epistle to the Corinthians, Jesus was raised from the dead ("on the third day" counting the day of crucifixion as the first) and, according to the canonical gospels, appeared to his disciples on different occasions before ascending to heaven. The account given in Acts of the Apostles says that Jesus remained with the apostles for 40 days, whereas the account in the Gospel of Luke makes no clear distinction between the events of Easter Sunday and the Ascension. Most biblical scholars agree that the author of Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles as a follow-up volume to the Gospel of Luke account, and the two works must be considered as a whole.
In Mark, Jesus is crucified along with two rebels, and the sun goes dark or is obscured for three hours. Jesus calls out to God, then gives a shout and dies. The curtain of the Temple is torn in two. Matthew follows Mark, but mentions an earthquake and the resurrection of saints. Luke also follows Mark, although he describes the rebels as common criminals, one of whom defends Jesus, who in turn promises that he (Jesus) and the criminal will be together in paradise. Luke portrays Jesus as impassive in the face of his crucifixion. John includes several of the same elements as those found in Mark, though they are treated differently.
Textual comparison.
The comparison below is based on the "New International Version".
Other accounts and references.
Mara Bar-Serapion.
An early non-Christian reference to the crucifixion of Jesus is likely to be Mara Bar-Serapion's letter to his son, written some time after AD 73 but before the 3rd century AD. The letter includes no Christian themes and the author is presumed to be neither Jewish nor Christian. The letter refers to the retributions that followed the unjust treatment of three wise men: Socrates, Pythagoras, and "the wise king" of the Jews. Some scholars see little doubt that the reference to the execution of the "king of the Jews" is about the crucifixion of Jesus, while others place less value in the letter, given the ambiguity in the reference.
Josephus.
In the "Antiquities of the Jews" (written about AD 93) Jewish historian Josephus stated () that Jesus was crucified by Pilate, writing that:
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, ... He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles ... And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross ...
Most modern scholars agree that while this Josephus passage (called the "Testimonium Flavianum") includes some later interpolations, it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus with a reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate. James Dunn states that there is "broad consensus" among scholars regarding the nature of an authentic reference to the crucifixion of Jesus in the "Testimonium".
Tacitus.
Early in the 2nd century another reference to the crucifixion of Jesus was made by Tacitus, generally considered one of the greatest Roman historians. Writing in "The Annals" (c. AD 116), Tacitus described the persecution of Christians by Nero and stated () that Pilate ordered the execution of Jesus:
Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.
Scholars generally consider the Tacitus reference to the execution of Jesus by Pilate to be genuine, and of historical value as an independent Roman source. Eddy and Boyd state that it is now "firmly established" that Tacitus provides a non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.
Talmud.
Another possible reference to the crucifixion ("hanging", cf. ; ) is found in the Babylonian Talmud:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.
Although the question of the equivalence of the identities of Yeshu and Jesus has at times been debated, many historians agree that the above 2nd-century passage is likely to be about Jesus, Peter Schäfer stating that there can be no doubt that this narrative of the execution in the Talmud refers to Jesus of Nazareth. Robert Van Voorst states that the Sanhedrin 43a reference to Jesus can be confirmed not only from the reference itself, but from the context that surrounds it. Sanhedrin 43a relates that Yeshu had been condemned to death by the royal government of Judaea – this lineage was stripped of all legal authority upon Herod the Great's ascension to the throne in 37 BC, meaning the execution had to have taken place close to 40 years before Jesus was even born.
Islam.
Muslims maintain that Jesus was not crucified and that those who thought they had killed him had mistakenly killed someone else in his place, whether Judas Iscariot, Simon of Cyrene, or someone else. They hold this belief based on various interpretations of Quran 4:157–158, which states: "they killed him not, nor crucified him, but so it was made to appear to them [or, it appeared so unto them], ... Nay, Allah raised him up unto Himself".
Gnosticism.
Some early Christian Gnostic sects, believing Jesus did not have a physical substance, denied that he was crucified. In response, Ignatius of Antioch insisted that Jesus was truly born and was truly crucified and wrote that those who held that Jesus only seemed to suffer only seemed to be Christians.
Historicity.
In scholarship on the historical Jesus, the baptism of Jesus and his crucifixion are considered to be the two most certain historical facts about Jesus. Various criteria are used to determine the historicity of the elements of the New Testamentical narratives, and help to establish the crucifixion of Jesus as a historical event. The criterion of embarrassment argues that Christians would not have invented the painful death of their leader. The criterion of multiple attestation is the confirmation by more than one source, including multiple non-Christian sources, and the criterion of coherence argues that it fits with other historical elements.
Although scholars agree on the historicity of the crucifixion, they differ on the reason and context for it. For example, both E. P. Sanders and Paula Fredriksen support the historicity of the crucifixion, but contend that Jesus did not foretell his own crucifixion and that his prediction of the crucifixion is a "church creation". On the other hand, Michael Patrick Barber argues that the Historical Jesus predicted his violent death. Tucker Ferda argues that the Historical Jesus did believe he might die. Geza Vermes also views the crucifixion as a historical event, but provides his own explanation and background for it. Bart Ehrman states that Jesus portrayed himself as the header of the future Kingdom and that a number of criteria- the criterion of multiple attestation and criterion of dissimilarity - establishes the crucifixion of Jesus as an enemy of state.
Although almost all ancient sources relating to crucifixion are literary, in 1968, an archeological discovery just northeast of Jerusalem uncovered the body of a crucified man dated to the 1st century, which provided good confirmatory evidence that crucifixions occurred during the Roman period roughly according to the manner in which the crucifixion of Jesus is described in the gospels. The crucified man was identified as Yehohanan ben Hagkol and probably died about AD 70, around the time of the Jewish revolt against Rome. The analyses at the Hadassah Medical School estimated that he died in his late 20s. Another relevant archaeological find, which also dates to the 1st century AD, is an unidentified heel bone with a spike discovered in a Jerusalem gravesite, now held by the Israel Antiquities Authority and displayed in the Israel Museum.
Details.
Chronology.
There is no consensus regarding the exact date of the crucifixion of Jesus, although it is generally agreed by biblical scholars that it was on a Friday on or near Passover (Nisan 14), during the governorship of Pontius Pilate (who ruled AD 26–36). Various approaches have been used to estimate the year of the crucifixion, including the canonical Gospels, the chronology of the life of Paul, as well as different astronomical models. Scholars have provided estimates in the range AD 30–33, with Rainer Riesner stating that "the fourteenth of Nisan (7 April) of the year 30 AD is, apparently in the opinion of the majority of contemporary scholars as well, far and away the most likely date of the crucifixion of Jesus." Another preferred date among scholars is Friday, 3 April, AD 33.
The consensus of scholarship is that the New Testament accounts represent a crucifixion occurring on a Friday, but a Thursday or Wednesday crucifixion have also been proposed. Some scholars explain a Thursday crucifixion based on a "double sabbath" caused by an extra Passover sabbath falling on Thursday dusk to Friday afternoon, ahead of the normal weekly Sabbath. Some have argued that Jesus was crucified on Wednesday, not Friday, on the grounds of the mention of "three days and three nights" in before his resurrection, celebrated on Sunday. Others have countered by saying that this ignores the Jewish idiom by which a "day and night" may refer to any part of a 24-hour period, that the expression in Matthew is idiomatic, not a statement that Jesus was 72 hours in the tomb, and that the many references to a resurrection on the third day do not require three literal nights.
In crucifixion takes place at the third hour (9 a.m.) and Jesus's death at the ninth hour (3 p.m.). In Jesus is still before Pilate at the sixth hour. Scholars have presented a number of arguments to deal with the issue, some suggesting a reconciliation, e.g., based on the use of Roman timekeeping in John, since Roman timekeeping began at midnight and this would mean being before Pilate at the sixth hour was 6 a.m., yet others have rejected the arguments. Several scholars have argued that the modern precision of marking the time of day should not be read back into the gospel accounts, written at a time when no standardization of timepieces, or exact recording of hours and minutes was available, and time was often approximated to the closest three-hour period.
Path.
The three Synoptic Gospels refer to a man called Simon of Cyrene whom the Roman soldiers order to carry the cross after Jesus initially carries it but then collapses, while the Gospel of John just says that Jesus "bears" his own cross.
Luke's gospel also describes an interaction between Jesus and the women among the crowd of mourners following him, quoting Jesus as saying "Daughters of Jerusalem, do not weep for me, but weep for yourselves and for your children. For behold, the days are coming when they will say, 'Blessed are the barren and the wombs that never bore and the breasts that never nursed!' Then they will begin to say to the mountains, 'Fall on us,' and to the hills, 'Cover us.' For if they do these things when the wood is green, what will happen when it is dry?"
The Gospel of Luke has Jesus address these women as "daughters of Jerusalem", thus distinguishing them from the women whom the same gospel describes as "the women who had followed him from Galilee" and who were present at his crucifixion.
Traditionally, the path that Jesus took is called Via Dolorosa (Latin for "Way of Grief" or "Way of Suffering") and is a street in the Old City of Jerusalem. It is marked by nine of the fourteen Stations of the Cross. It passes the Ecce Homo Church and the last five stations are inside the Church of the Holy Sepulchre.
There is no reference to a woman named Veronica in the Gospels, but sources such as "Acta Sanctorum" describe her as a pious woman of Jerusalem who, moved with pity as Jesus carried his cross to Golgotha, gave him her veil that he might wipe his forehead.
Location.
The precise location of the crucifixion remains a matter of conjecture, but the biblical accounts indicate that it was outside the city walls of Jerusalem, accessible to passers-by and observable from some distance away. Eusebius identified its location only as being north of Mount Zion, which is consistent with the two most popularly suggested sites of modern times.
Calvary as an English name for the place is derived from the Latin word for skull (), which is used in the Vulgate translation of "place of a skull", the explanation given in all four Gospels of the Aramaic word "Gûlgaltâ" (transliterated into the Greek as (Golgotha)), which was the name of the place where Jesus was crucified. The text does not indicate why it was so designated, but several theories have been put forward. One is that as a place of public execution, Calvary may have been strewn with the skulls of abandoned victims (which would be contrary to Jewish burial traditions, but not Roman). Another is that Calvary is named after a nearby cemetery (which is consistent with both of the proposed modern sites). A third is that the name was derived from the physical contour, which would be more consistent with the singular use of the word, i.e., the place of "a skull". While often referred to as "Mount Calvary", it was more likely a small hill or rocky knoll.
The traditional site, inside what is now occupied by the Church of the Holy Sepulcher in the Christian Quarter of the Old City, has been attested since the 4th century. A second site (commonly referred to as Gordon's Calvary), located further north of the Old City near a place popularly called the Garden Tomb, has been promoted since the 19th century.
People present.
The Gospels describe various women at the crucifixion, some of whom are named. According to Mark, many women were present, among them Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James and Mary of Clopas, commonly known as "the Three Marys". The Gospel of Matthew also mentions several women being present, among them Mary Magdalene, Mary, mother of James and the mother of Zebedee's children. Although a group of women is mentioned in Luke, neither is named. The Gospel of John speaks of women present, among them the mother of Jesus, Mary Magdalene and Mary of Clopas.
Aside from these women, the three Synoptic Gospels speak of the presence of others: "the chief priests, with the scribes and elders", two crucified criminals, to Jesus's right and left, "the soldiers", "the centurion and those who were with him, keeping watch over Jesus", passers-by, "bystanders", "the crowds that had assembled for this spectacle", and "his acquaintances". The two criminals are described as "λῃσταί" (variously translated as robbers, rebels or thieves) and further discussed in the Gospel of Luke as the penitent thief and the impenitent thief.
The Gospel of John mentions the soldiers and "the disciple whom Jesus loved", who is with the women.
The Gospels also tell of the arrival, after the death of Jesus, of Joseph of Arimathea (in the four Gospels) and of Nicodemus (only in John).
Method and manner.
Most Christians believe the gibbet on which Jesus was executed was the traditional two-beamed cross, whereas the Jehovah's Witnesses hold the view that a single upright stake was used. The Greek and Latin words used in the earliest Christian writings are ambiguous. The Koine Greek terms used in the New Testament are () and (). The latter means wood (a live tree, timber or an object constructed of wood); in earlier forms of Greek, the former term meant an upright stake or pole, but in Koine Greek it was used also to mean a cross. The Latin word was also applied to objects other than a cross.
Early Christian writers who speak of the shape of the particular gibbet on which Jesus died invariably describe it as having a cross-beam. For instance, the Epistle of Barnabas, which was certainly earlier than 135, and may have been of the 1st century AD, the time when the gospel accounts of the death of Jesus were written, likened it to the letter T (the Greek letter tau, which had the numeric value of 300), and to the position assumed by Moses in . Justin Martyr (100–165) explicitly says the cross of Christ was of two-beam shape: "That lamb which was commanded to be wholly roasted was a symbol of the suffering of the cross which Christ would undergo. For the lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb." Irenaeus, who died around the end of the 2nd century, speaks of the cross as having "five extremities, two in length, two in breadth, and one in the middle, on which [last] the person rests who is fixed by the nails."
The assumption of the use of a two-beamed cross does not determine the number of nails used in the crucifixion and some theories suggest three nails while others suggest four nails. Throughout history, larger numbers of nails have been hypothesized, at times as high as 14 nails. These variations are also present in the artistic depictions of the crucifixion. In Western Christianity, before the Renaissance usually four nails would be depicted, with the feet side by side. After the Renaissance most depictions use three nails, with one foot placed on the other. Nails are almost always depicted in art, although Romans sometimes just tied the victims to the cross. The tradition also carries to Christian emblems, e.g. the Jesuits use three nails under the IHS monogram and a cross to symbolize the crucifixion.
The placing of the nails in the hands, or the wrists is also uncertain. Some theories suggest that the Greek word () for hand includes the wrist and that the Romans were generally trained to place nails through Destot's space (between the capitate and lunate bones) without fracturing any bones. Another theory suggests that the Greek word for hand also includes the forearm and that the nails were placed near the radius and ulna of the forearm. Ropes may have also been used to fasten the hands in addition to the use of nails.
Another issue of debate has been the use of a hypopodium as a standing platform to support the feet, given that the hands may not have been able to support the weight. In the 17th century Rasmus Bartholin considered a number of analytical scenarios of that topic. In the 20th century, forensic pathologist Frederick Zugibe performed a number of crucifixion experiments by using ropes to hang human subjects at various angles and hand positions. His experiments support an angled suspension, and a two-beamed cross, and perhaps some form of foot support, given that in an form of suspension from a straight stake (as used by the Nazis in the Dachau concentration camp during World War II), death comes rather quickly.
Words of Jesus spoken from the cross.
The Gospels describe various last words that Jesus said while on the cross, as follows:
Mark / Matthew.
The only words of Jesus on the cross mentioned in the Mark and Matthew accounts, this is a quotation of Psalm 22. Since other verses of the same Psalm are cited in the crucifixion accounts, some commentators consider it a literary and theological creation. Geza Vermes noted the verse is cited in Aramaic rather than the usual Hebrew, and that by the time of Jesus, this phrase had become a proverbial saying in common usage. Compared to the accounts in the other Gospels, which he describes as "theologically correct and reassuring", he considers this phrase "unexpected, disquieting and in consequence more probable". He describes it as bearing "all the appearances of a genuine cry". Raymond Brown likewise comments that he finds "no persuasive argument against attributing to the Jesus of Mark/Matt the literal sentiment of feeling forsaken expressed in the Psalm quote".
Luke.
The Gospel of Luke does not include the aforementioned exclamation of Jesus mentioned in the Matthew and Mark accounts.
John.
The words of Jesus on the cross, especially his last words, have been the subject of a wide range of Christian teachings and sermons, and a number of authors have written books specifically devoted to the last sayings of Christ.
Reported extraordinary occurrences.
The synoptics report various miraculous events during the crucifixion. Mark mentions a period of darkness in the daytime during Jesus's crucifixion, and the Temple veil being torn in two when Jesus dies. Luke follows Mark; as does Matthew, additionally mentioning an earthquake and the . No mention of any of these appears in John.
Darkness.
In the synoptic narrative, while Jesus is hanging on the cross, the sky over Judaea (or the whole world) is "darkened for three hours," from the sixth to the ninth hour (noon to mid-afternoon). There is no reference to darkness in the Gospel of John account, in which the crucifixion does not take place until after noon.
Some ancient Christian writers considered the possibility that pagan commentators may have mentioned this event and mistook it for a solar eclipse, pointing out that an eclipse could not occur during the Passover, which takes place during the full moon when the moon is opposite the sun rather than in front of it. Christian traveler and historian Sextus Julius Africanus and Christian theologian Origen refer to Greek historian Phlegon, who lived in the 2nd century AD, as having written "with regard to the eclipse in the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus appears to have been crucified, and the great earthquakes which then took place".
Sextus Julius Africanus further refers to the writings of historian Thallus: "This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun. For the Hebrews celebrate the Passover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the passion of our Saviour falls on the day before the Passover; but an eclipse of the sun takes place only when the moon comes under the sun." Christian apologist Tertullian believed the event was documented in the Roman archives.
Colin Humphreys and Graeme Waddington of Oxford University considered the possibility that a lunar, rather than solar, eclipse might have taken place. They concluded that such an eclipse was visible in Jerusalem on the date of April 3, AD 33, that its peak was at 5:15 pm Jerusalem time, but that it was visible after sundown (the beginning of the Sabbath and of Passover) for half an hour. Some of the oldest manuscripts of Luke say "the sun was eclipsed" (23:45) at the time of the crucifixion. The authors suggest that this may be due to a scribe changing the word "moon" to "sun" to explain the darkness, or else that the word "eclipsed" just meant darkened or hidden, as in a passage of the Sibylline Oracles. Historian David Henige dismisses this explanation as "indefensible". More objectively, astronomer Bradley Schaefer later found that the lunar eclipse would not have been visible at moonrise due to the brightness of the sky, and the umbra (the part that would be red) would not have been visible before it disappeared a few minutes later.
In an edition of the BBC Radio 4 programmed In Our Time entitled Eclipses, Frank Close, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Oxford, stated that certain historical sources say that on the night of the Crucifixion "the moon had risen blood red," which indicates a lunar eclipse. He went on to confirm that as Passover takes place on the full moon calculating back shows that a lunar eclipse did in fact take place on the night of Passover on Friday, 3 April 33 AD which would have been visible in the area of modern Israel, ancient Judaea, just after sunset.
Modern biblical scholarship treats the account in the synoptic gospels as a literary creation by the author of the Mark Gospel, amended in the Luke and Matthew accounts, intended to heighten the importance of what they saw as a theologically significant event, and not intended to be taken literally. This image of darkness over the land would have been understood by ancient readers, a typical element in the description of the death of kings and other major figures by writers such as Philo, Dio Cassius, Virgil, Plutarch and Josephus. Géza Vermes describes the darkness account as typical of "Jewish eschatological imagery of the day of the Lord", and says that those interpreting it as a datable eclipse are "barking up the wrong tree".
Temple veil, earthquake and resurrection of dead saints.
The synoptic gospels state that the veil of the temple was torn from top to bottom.
The Gospel of Matthew mentions an account of earthquakes, rocks splitting, and the opening of the graves of dead saints, and describes how these resurrected saints went into the holy city and appeared to many people.
In the Mark and Matthew accounts, the centurion in charge comments on the events: "Truly this man was the Son of God!" or "Truly this was the Son of God!". The Gospel of Luke quotes him as saying, "Certainly this man was innocent!"
The historian Sextus Julius Africanus in the early-3rd century wrote, describing the day of the crucifixion, "A most terrible darkness fell over all the world, the rocks were torn apart by an earthquake, and many places both in Judaea and the rest of the world were thrown down. In the third book of his Histories, Thallos dismisses this darkness as a solar eclipse. ..."
A widespread earthquake of magnitude at least 5.5 has been confirmed to have taken place in the region between AD 26 and 36. This earthquake was dated by counting varves (annual layers of sediment) between the disruptions in a core of sediment from En Gedi caused by it and by an earlier known quake in 31 BC. The authors concluded that either this was the earthquake in Matthew and it occurred more or less as reported, or else Matthew "borrowed" this earthquake which actually occurred at another time or simply inserted an "allegorical fiction".
Medical aspects.
A number of theories to explain the circumstances of the death of Jesus on the cross have been proposed by physicians and Biblical scholars. In 2006, Matthew W. Maslen and Piers D. Mitchell reviewed over 40 publications on the subject with theories ranging from cardiac rupture to pulmonary embolism.
In 1847, based on the reference in the Gospel of John () to blood and water coming out when Jesus's side was pierced with a spear, physician William Stroud proposed the ruptured heart theory of the cause of Christ's death which influenced a number of other people.
The cardiovascular collapse theory is a prevalent modern explanation and suggests that Jesus died of profound shock. According to this theory, the scourging, the beatings, and the fixing to the cross left Jesus dehydrated, weak, and critically ill and this led to cardiovascular collapse.
Writing in the "Journal of the American Medical Association", physician William Edwards and his colleagues supported the combined cardiovascular collapse (via hypovolemic shock) and exhaustion asphyxia theories, assuming that the flow of water from the side of Jesus described in the Gospel of John was pericardial fluid.
In his book "The Crucifixion of Jesus", physician and forensic pathologist Frederick Zugibe studied the likely circumstances of the death of Jesus in great detail. Zugibe carried out a number of experiments over several years to test his theories while he was a medical examiner. These studies included experiments in which volunteers with specific weights were hanging at specific angles and the amount of pull on each hand was measured, in cases where the feet were also secured or not. In these cases the amount of pull and the corresponding pain was found to be significant.
Pierre Barbet, a French physician, and the chief surgeon at Saint Joseph's Hospital in Paris, hypothesized that Jesus relaxed his muscles to obtain enough air to utter his last words, in the face of exhaustion asphyxia. Some of Barbet's theories, such as the location of nails, are disputed by Zugibe.
Orthopedic surgeon Keith Maxwell not only analyzed the medical aspects of the crucifixion, but also looked back at how Jesus could have carried the cross all the way along Via Dolorosa.
In 2003, historians F. P. Retief and L. Cilliers reviewed the history and pathology of crucifixion as performed by the Romans and suggested that the cause of death was often a combination of factors. They also state that Roman guards were prohibited from leaving the scene until death had occurred.
Theological significance.
Christians believe that Jesus's death was instrumental in restoring humankind to relationship with God. Christians believe that through Jesus's death and resurrection people are reunited with God and receive new joy and power in this life as well as eternal life. Thus the crucifixion of Jesus along with his resurrection restores access to a vibrant experience of God's presence, love and grace as well as the confidence of eternal life.
Christology.
The accounts of the crucifixion and subsequent resurrection of Jesus provide a rich background for Christological analysis, from the canonical Gospels to the Pauline epistles. Christians believe Jesus's suffering was foretold in the Old Testament, such as in Psalm 22, and Isaiah 53 prophecy of the suffering servant.
In Johannine "agent Christology" the submission of Jesus to crucifixion is a sacrifice made as an agent of God or servant of God, for the sake of eventual victory. This builds on the salvific theme of the Gospel of John which begins in with John the Baptist's proclamation: "The Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world".
A central element in the Christology presented in the Acts of the Apostles is the affirmation of the belief that the death of Jesus by crucifixion happened "with the foreknowledge of God, according to a definite plan". In this view, as in , the cross is not viewed as a scandal, for the crucifixion of Jesus "at the hands of the lawless" is viewed as the fulfillment of the plan of God.
Paul's Christology has a specific focus on the death and resurrection of Jesus. For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus is directly related to his resurrection and the term "the cross of Christ" used in may be viewed as his abbreviation of the message of the gospels. For Paul, the crucifixion of Jesus was not an isolated event in history, but a cosmic event with significant eschatological consequences, as in . In the Pauline view, Jesus, obedient to the point of death () died "at the right time" () based on the plan of God. For Paul the "power of the cross" is not separable from the resurrection of Jesus. Furthermore, Paul highlighted the idea that Jesus on the cross defeated the spiritual forces of evil "Kosmokrator", literally 'the rulers of this world' (used in plural in ), thus highlighting the idea of victory of light over darkness, or good over evil, through Christ.
Belief in the redemptive nature of Jesus's death predates the Pauline letters, to the earliest days of Christianity and the Church of Jerusalem. The Nicene Creed's statement that "for our sake he was crucified" is a reflection of this core belief's formalization in the fourth century.
John Calvin supported the "agent of God" Christology and argued that in his trial in Pilate's Court Jesus could have successfully argued for his innocence, but instead submitted to crucifixion in obedience to the Father. This Christological theme continued into the 20th century, both in the Eastern and Western Christianity. In Eastern Christianity, Sergei Bulgakov argued, the crucifixion of Jesus was "pre-eternally" determined by the Father before the creation of the world, to redeem humanity from the disgrace caused by the fall of Adam. In Western Christianity, Karl Rahner elaborated on the analogy that the blood of the Lamb of God (and the water from the side of Jesus) shed at the crucifixion had a cleansing nature, similar to baptismal water.
Atonement.
Jesus's death and resurrection underpin a variety of theological interpretations as to how salvation is granted to humanity. These interpretations vary widely in how much emphasis they place on the death and resurrection as compared to Jesus's words. According to the substitutionary atonement view, Jesus's death is of central importance, and Jesus willingly sacrificed himself after his resurrection as an act of perfect obedience as a sacrifice of love which pleased God. By contrast, the moral influence theory of atonement focuses much more on the moral content of Jesus's teaching, and sees Jesus's death as a martyrdom. Since the Middle Ages there has been conflict between these two views within Western Christianity. Evangelical Protestants typically hold a substitutionary view and in particular hold to the theory of penal substitution. Liberal Protestants typically reject substitutionary atonement and hold to the moral influence theory of atonement. Both views are popular within the Roman Catholic Church, with the satisfaction doctrine incorporated into the idea of penance.
In the Roman Catholic tradition this view of atonement is balanced by the duty of Roman Catholics to perform the Acts of Reparation to Jesus Christ which in the encyclical "Miserentissimus Redemptor" of Pope Pius XI were defined as "some sort of compensation to be rendered for the injury" with respect to the sufferings of Jesus. Pope John Paul II referred to these acts of reparation as the "unceasing effort to stand beside the endless crosses on which the Son of God continues to be crucified."
Among Eastern Orthodox Christians, another common view is Christus Victor. This holds that Jesus was sent by God to defeat death and Satan. Because of his perfection, voluntary death, and resurrection, Jesus defeated Satan and death, and arose victorious. Therefore, humanity was no longer bound in sin, but was free to rejoin God through the repentance of sin and faith in Jesus.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches that the crucifixion of Jesus was part of the atonement and a "redeeming ransom" both for the effect of the fall of Adam upon all humankind and "for the personal sins of all who repent, from Adam to the end of the world."
Deicide.
The Catholic Church denounces the idea of Jewish deicide, believing that all sinners are the authors and ministers of Jesus's crucifixion, and admonishes Christians that their own guilt is greater when they sin with knowledge of Jesus, than when others sin without it.
Denial.
Docetism.
In Christianity, Docetism is the doctrine that the phenomenon of Jesus, his historical and bodily existence, and above all the human form of Jesus, was mere semblance without any true reality. Docetists denied that Jesus could have truly suffered and died, as his physical body was illusory, and instead saw the crucifixion as something that only appeared to happen.
Nag Hammadi manuscripts.
According to the First Revelation of James in the Nag Hammadi library, Jesus appeared to James after apparently being crucified and stated that another person had been inflicted in his place:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />"The master appeared to him. He stopped praying, embraced him, and kissed him, saying, “Rabbi, I’ve found you. I heard of the sufferings you endured, and I was greatly troubled. You know my compassion. Because of this I wished, as I reflected upon it, that I would never see these people again. They must be judged for what they have done, for what they have done is not right.”
The master said, “James, do not be concerned for me or these people. I am the one who was within me. Never did I suffer at all, and I was not distressed. These people did not harm me. Rather, all this was inflicted upon a figure of the rulers, and it was fitting that this figure should be [destroyed] by them."
Islam.
Most Islamic traditions categorically deny that Jesus physically died, either on a cross or another manner. This denial is asserted in the Quran, which states:
<templatestyles src="Template:Blockquote/styles.css" />And [for] their saying, "Indeed, we have killed the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, the messenger of Allah." And they did not kill him, nor did they crucify him; but rather, it was made to appear to them so. And indeed, those who differ over it are in doubt about it. They have no knowledge of it except the following of assumption. And they did not kill him, for certain. (157) Rather, Allah raised him to Himself. And ever is Allah Exalted in Might and Wise. (158)
Islamic traditions teach that Jesus ascended to Heaven without being put on the cross, but that God transformed another person to appear exactly like him and to be then crucified instead of him. An ancient antecedent of this view is attested in an account by Irenaeus of the doctrine of the 2nd-century Alexandrian Gnostic Basilides, in which Irenaeus refutes what he believes to be a heresy denying the death.
Gnosticism.
Some scriptures identified as Gnostic reject the atonement of Jesus's death by distinguishing the earthly body of Jesus and his divine and immaterial essence. According to the Second Treatise of the Great Seth, Yaldabaoth (the Creator of the material universe) and his Archons tried to kill Jesus by crucifixion, but only killed "their own man" (that is the body). While Jesus ascended from his body, Yaldabaoth and his followers thought Jesus to be dead. In Apocalypse of Peter, Peter talks with the savior whom the "priests and people" believed to have killed.
Manichaeism, which was influenced by Gnostic ideas, adhered to the idea that not Jesus, but somebody else was crucified instead. Jesus suffering on the cross is depicted as the state of "light particles" (spirit) within matter instead.
According to Bogomilism, the crucifixion was an attempt by Lucifer to destroy Jesus, while the earthly Jesus was regarded as a prophet, Jesus himself was an immaterial being that can not be killed. Accordingly, Lucifer failed and Jesus's sufferings on the cross were only an illusion.
Others.
According to some Christian sects in Japan, Jesus Christ did not die on the cross at Golgotha. Instead his younger brother, Isukiri, took his place on the cross, while Jesus fled across Siberia to Mutsu Province, in northern Japan. Once in Japan, he became a rice farmer, married, and raised a family with three daughters near what is now Shingō. While in Japan, it is asserted that he traveled, learned, and eventually died at the age of 106. His body was exposed on a hilltop for four years. According to the customs of the time, Jesus's bones were collected, bundled, and buried in a mound. There is also a museum in Japan which claims to have evidence of these claims.
In Yazidism, Jesus is thought of as a "figure of light" who could not be crucified. This interpretation could be either taken from the Quran or Gnostics.
In art, symbolism and devotions.
Since the crucifixion of Jesus, the cross has become a key element of Christian symbolism, and the crucifixion scene has been a key element of Christian art, giving rise to specific artistic themes such as Christ Carrying the Cross, raising of the Cross, Stabat Mater, Descent from the Cross and Lamentation of Christ.
The symbolism of the cross which is today one of the most widely recognized Christian symbols was used from the earliest Christian times. Justin Martyr, who died in 165, describes it in a way that already implies its use as a symbol, although the crucifix appeared later.
Devotions based on the process of crucifixion, and the sufferings of Jesus are followed by various Christians. The Stations of the Cross follows a number of stages based on the stages involved in the crucifixion of Jesus, while the Rosary of the Holy Wounds is used to meditate on the wounds of Jesus as part of the crucifixion.
Masters such as Giotto, Fra Angelico, Masaccio, Raphael, Botticelli, van Dyck, Titian, Caravaggio, El Greco, Zurbarán, Velázquez, Rubens and Rembrandt have all depicted the in their works. The "Crucifixion, seen from the Cross" by Tissot presented a novel approach at the end of the 19th century, in which the crucifixion scene was portrayed from the perspective of Jesus.
The presence of the Virgin Mary under the cross, mentioned in the Gospel of John, has in itself been the subject of Marian art, and well known Catholic symbolism such as the Miraculous Medal and Pope John Paul II's Coat of Arms bearing a Marian Cross. And a number of Marian devotions also involve the presence of the Virgin Mary in Calvary, e.g., Pope John Paul II stated that "Mary was united to Jesus on the Cross". Well known works of Christian art by masters such as Raphael (the "Mond Crucifixion"), and Caravaggio ("The Entombment of Christ") depict the Virgin Mary as part of the crucifixion scene.
Notes.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />
Sources.
<templatestyles src="Refbegin/styles.css" />


Chiang Hsiao-wen
Eldest son of Chiang Ching-Kuo (1935–1989)
Chiang Hsiao-wen (; also known as Alan Chiang; 14 December 1935 – 14 April 1989) was the eldest son of Chiang Ching-kuo, the President of the Republic of China in Taiwan from 1978 to 1988. His mother is Faina Ipatyevna Vakhreva, also known as Chiang Fang-liang. He had one younger sister, Hsiao-chang, and two younger brothers, Hsiao-wu and Hsiao-yung. He had two half-brothers, Winston Chang and John Chiang, with whom he shared the same father.
He married Xu Nai Jin (Nancy) () in 1960 and had a daughter, Yomei, in 1961. He suffered brain damage in 1970 while being treated for diabetes. He died of throat cancer on April 14, 1989.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Chiang Hsiao-wu
Taiwanese diplomat (1945–1991)
Chiang Hsiao-wu (; also known as Alex Chiang; April 25, 1945 – July 1, 1991) was the second son of Chiang Ching-kuo, the President of the Republic of China in Taiwan from 1978 to 1988. His mother is Faina Ipatyevna Vakhreva, also known as Chiang Fang-liang. He had one older brother, Hsiao-wen, one older sister, Hsiao-chang, and one younger brother, Hsiao-yung. He also had two half-brothers, Winston Chang and John Chiang, with whom he shared the same father.
He was president of the state-run Broadcasting Corporation of China from 1980 to 1986, and later headed the Republic of China mission to Singapore for two years, starting in April 1986 as the deputy trade representative before being transferred to the mission to Japan in 1990. In a December 1985 speech, Hsiao-wu's father Chiang Ching-kuo declared "If someone asks me whether anyone in my family would run for the next presidential term, my reply is, 'It can't be and it won't be.'" Prior to the speech, Chiang Hsiao-wu was the only one of Chiang Ching-kuo's sons mentioned as a potential successor.
He died at the age of 46, on July 1, 1991, at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital in Taiwan as a result of congestive heart failure brought on by chronic inflammation of the pancreas. He was survived by his wife and two children.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Chiang Hsiao-chang
Daughter of Chiang Ching-kuo
Chiang Hsiao-chang (; born 1938) is the only daughter of Chiang Ching-kuo, the President of the Republic of China in Taiwan from 1978 to 1988. Her mother was Chiang Fang-liang. She had one older brother, Hsiao-wen, and two younger brothers, Hsiao-wu and Hsiao-yung. She is the only living member of Chiang Ching-kuo's legitimate children, and was the only one among the siblings who could converse in Russian with their mother.
She also has twin half-brothers, Winston Chang and John Chiang, with whom she shares the same father. She attended Mills College and was featured in LIFE during her college years. She was married to Yu Yang-ho () until his death in 2010; he was the son of former Taiwan defense minister Yu Ta-wei (). She and Yu have one son, Theodore Yu Tsu-sheng ().
Personal life.
Chiang Hsiao-chang's husband, Yu Yang-ho, is the eldest son of Yu Ta-wei, the Minister of National Defense of the Republic of China, and his German-Italian wife. Chiang and Yu met and married while studying in the United States. In the spring of 1961, they had a son. The newborn's maternal grandfather, Chiang Ching-kuo, named his first grandson Yu Tsu-sheng using the ancient poem "克紹祖裘，聲望遠播" ("Inherit the ancestors' robes, and let their fame be widely spread").
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Chiang Fang-liang
First Lady of the Republic of China, wife of Chiang Ching-kuo (1916–2004)
Faina Chiang Fang-liang (; born Faina Ipatyevna Vakhreva; ; ; 15 May 1916 – 15 December 2004) was the First Lady of the Republic of China on Taiwan from 1978 to 1988 as the wife of President Chiang Ching-kuo.
Early life.
On 15 May 1916, Faina was born near Orsha, then part of the Russian Empire (now in Belarus). Faina was orphaned at a young age and raised by her older sister Anna.
Career.
At age 16, as a member of the Soviet Union's Communist Youth League, Faina worked at the Ural Heavy Machinery Plant in Sverdlovsk, Russian SFSR, where she met Chiang Ching-kuo, her supervisor. On 15 March 1935, aged 18, Faina married him.
Move to Taiwan.
In December 1936, Joseph Stalin granted Chiang's return to China. After the couple was received by Chiang Kai-shek and his wife Soong Mei-ling in Hangzhou, they traveled to the Chiang home in Xikou, Zhejiang, where they held a second marriage ceremony. Fang-liang stayed behind to live with Chiang Ching-kuo's mother, Mao Fumei. She was assigned a tutor to learn Mandarin Chinese, but she learned the local Ningbo dialect of Wu Chinese instead. She reportedly got along well with Mao Fumei and did her own housework.
As First lady.
When Chiang Ching-kuo became President, Fang-liang rarely performed the traditional roles of First Lady, partly due to her lack of formal education; her husband also encouraged her not to get into politics. She occasionally taught Russian to Kuomintang cadets. She largely stayed out of the public spotlight, and little was ever known of her in an anti-communist atmosphere in the government. She never returned to Russia, and traveled abroad only three times in the last 50 years of her life, all to visit her children and their families. In 1992, she received a visit from a Belarusian delegation.
Children.
On 14 December 1935, their first son Chiang Hsiao-wen was born in the Soviet Union. Each of her three younger children were born in different parts of China, reflecting turbulent years as an official of the country. Faina had four children:
All her children were sent to study in foreign universities - Hsiao-wu to West Germany and the remaining children to the United States. All three sons died shortly after Ching-kuo's death in 1988: Hsiao-wen in 1989, Hsiao-wu in 1991, and Hsiao-yung in 1996. Fang-liang then lived in the suburbs of Taipei. She received occasional visitors, such as some prominent politicians who went to pay their respects every few years. In the Taiwanese media, if she ever received coverage, she was depicted as a virtuous wife who never complained and endured her loneliness with dignity.
Death and funeral.
Chiang died of respiratory and cardiac failure stemming from lung cancer at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital on 15 December 2004, at the age of 88 (or 89 according to East Asian age reckoning).
Chiang's funeral was held on 27 December 2004, with President Chen Shui-bian and Vice President Annette Lu in attendance. Kuomintang politicians Wang Jin-pyng, Lin Cheng-chih, P. K. Chiang, and Ma Ying-jeou draped her casket with the Kuomintang party flag, and Kuomintang party elders Lee Huan, Hau Pei-tsun, Chiu Chuang-huan, and Shih Chi-yang draped her casket with the ROC national flag.
Chiang was cremated and her ashes taken to her husband's temporary mausoleum in Touliao, Taoyuan County (now Taoyuan City). They were buried together in the Wuchih Mountain Military Cemetery.
References.
Citations.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

The Unforgettable Character
The Unforgettable Character () is a 1975 Taiwanese romantic drama film directed by Chang Mei-chun and written by Chiung Yao.
Plot.
After the death of her parents, Hsiao-shuang begins to live with the Chu family in Taipei, who treat her like their own child. The Chu's oldest child Shih-yao deeply loves her, but being crippled he's hesitant to confess his love. Hsiao-shuang quickly falls in love with the eloquent and charismatic wannabe writer Yu-wen, but their marriage is far from blissful. Yu-wen, an irresponsible dreamer and impractical perfectionist, fails to write anything and frequently vents his frustration on Hsiao-shuang. Hsiao-shuang tries her hardest to support him and the family even during her pregnancy. Shih-yao helps Hsiao-shuang sell her songs, but that further angers Yu-wen, now addicted to gambling. After Yu-wen forcefully grabs a cherished jade from her to gamble away, Hsiao-shuang has a miscarriage and files for divorce. Hoping to encourage him, she still promises him that she will get back with him if he comes back with a finished work. Years later, when news of Yu-wen's terminal illness reaches Hsiao-shuang, she immediately arrives at his place in southern Taiwan only to find him dying with his book already completed. After his death, Shih-yao presents Hsiao-shuang a gift, which turns out to be the jade Yu-wen lost 4 years ago. Hsiao-shuang realizes Shih-yao still loves her after all these years.
Music.
Zai shui yifang () is a 1975 Mandarin album, released by Kolin Records (歌林). The songs on A-side are sung by Chiang Lei () and those on B-side by Frankie Kao ().
"Zai shui yifang", sometimes translated "On the Other Side of the Water", and "Ni zenme shuo" () were later covered by other singers, including Teresa Teng in her 1980 album of a similar name. "Ni zenme shuo" was first sung in 1973 by Zi Yin ().
Lyrics were written by Chiung Yao, and music was composed by Lin Chia-ching (), unless otherwise. Only songs that are listed as theme songs and instrumental are heard in the film.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

One Side of the Water
One Side of the Water is a 1988 Taiwanese television drama series produced by Ping Hsin-tao, based on the 1975 film "The Unforgettable Character" and its associated 1976 novel, both written by his wife Chiung Yao. The series stars Chiung Yao regulars Chin Han (who portrayed a different character in the 1975 film) and Leanne Liu in the leading roles.
Plot.
The story is set in the 1980s, instead of the 1970s as in "The Unforgettable Character". When Chu Chih-keng brings orphaned girl Tu Hsiao-shuang to his family, everyone welcomes her with open arms—except Chu Chih-keng's wife Lee Hsin-pei, since only she knows that Chu Chih-keng has loved Tu Hsiao-shuang's late mother Kao Hsu-pai. Chu Chih-keng's son Chu Shih-yao takes an immediate interest in the hard-working, forbearing and considerate Tu Hsiao-shuang, and Tu Hsiao-shuang also develops feelings for him. The problem is Chu Shih-yao is too hesitant to break up with the sweet Tso Chiao-jou who is crazy about him. In fact Chu Shih-yao has never loved Tso Chiao-jou romantically, rather he treats her like a younger sister, because the Chus and Tsos have been close for several decades. He and Tso Chiao-jou are involved in an accident: he becomes crippled for life while she suffers a major head injury. Meanwhile, Lee Hsin-pei blames everything on Tu Hsiao-shuang and drives her out.
Given Tso Chiao-jou's severe injury, Tu Hsiao-shuang and Chu Shih-yao both realize their romance is forbidden, so Tu Hsiao-shuang marries the aspiring writer Lu Yu-wen while Chu Shih-yao marries the aphasic Tso Chiao-jou. Despite their bet efforts, their marriages prove much more difficult than they have ever imagined. Chu Shih-yao's marriage falls apart when Tso Chiao-jou realizes that he still loves Tu Hsiao-shuang, while Lu Yu-wen's immaturity, tantrums, and gambling habits also destroy his union with Tu Hsiao-shuang.
Soundtrack.
Lee Pi-hua actually appears as herself in episodes 19–21 singing Track 3, which was the theme song of "The Unforgettable Character" (in the film it was sung by Chiang Lei and Frankie Kao respectively).
Reception.
The drama's ratings were not as good as expected, in part because of Chiang Ching-kuo's sudden death in January 1988.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Former Residence of Chiang Ching-kuo (Hangzhou)
Villa on the north shore of the West Lake in Hangzhou, China
The Former Residence of Chiang Ching-kuo is a wood and brick western-style villa on the north shore of the West Lake in Hangzhou, China. After the World War 2, the villa was once made the home of Chiang Ching-kuo, who later became the president of Republic of China in Taiwan, and his wife Chiang Fang-liang before they fled to Taiwan in 1949. The villa, echoing the Chenglu villa of his father Chiang Kai-shek and stepmother Soong Mei-ling on the south shore of the Inner West Lake, has also served as home to several important figures in the Chinese history, including Li Shiqun, Huang Yuan, Chen Jiangong, Feng Baiju. Currently, the residence is protected as a provincial historic site, though a McDonald's and a Starbucks operate within the villa since 2015 which has led to controversy.
History.
The villa was first constructed by a Shanghai tobacconist named Wang Xiangehng, who bought the land in the late 1920s. At a price of 8,000 to 10,000 Chinese silver yuan, the land was reported to be the most expensive in the local history of Hangzhou at the time of Wang's purchase. When the villa was built in 1931, it was numbered 1 and 2 Inner West Lake. Later it became the home to Li Shiqun, the head of the secret police of the Japanese puppet government in China, as the building was close to the Japanese consulate in Hangzhou located in 1 Shihan Road. After the World War 2, the villa was confiscated according to the law penalising Hanjian or traitors to the Chinese people.
In 1947, Chiang Ching-kuo was appointed to rid Shanghai of corruption and began to live in the 2 Yicun villa in Shanghai. Meanwhile, his family, including his wife Chiang Fang-liang, his son Chiang Hsiao-wen and his daughter Chiang Hsiao-chang moved into the residence provided by then Hangzhou mayor Zhou Xiangxian. During the time, Hsiao-wen studied at Huilan Middle School, and Hsiao-chang studied at Hongdao Girl's High School. After Chiang Ching-kuo quitted his job in Shanghai in November 1948, he first moved to the residence and then moved to Xikou two days later.
After 1949, the residence was numbered 24 and 25 Beishan Road, and then re-numbered as 7 Shihan Road that we see today. It is owned by the Zhejiang Provincial Government Offices Administration. The villa was made home to writer Huang Yuan, mathematician Chen Jiangong, Communist fighters Feng Baiju. In 1955, it was the place where the Publicity Department of the Zhejiang Provincial Committee of the Chinese Communist Party adapted the Kunqu "Fifteen Guan". From 1988 to 2004, the communist secret agent Wang Lifu lived in the villa. In 2003, the villa became protected as a city historic site of Hangzhou.
Since 2015, the main building of the villa transformed into a McDonald's restaurant, while a Starbucks began to operate in the side building, which led to controversy. Demos Chiang, the grandson of Chiang Ching-kuo said that he couldn't accept that a McDonald's operates in the building and requested his agreement to display his grandfather's photos, thus withdrawing from the commercialisation project. In 2017, the villa became protected as a provincial historic site of Zhejiang.
Architecture.
The villa is a two storey building made of wood and brick, oriented towards the Inner West Lake at the foot of Baoshi Hill, covering a land of 1333.3 square metres. The main building is western-styled and has 14 rooms, with a total room size 344 square metres. The side building is Chinese styled and has 7 rooms, with a total room size 204 square metres, which is connected to the main building with a corridor, yet the corridor is currently blocked.
The fence wall is made of red or brown bricks, while the exterior wall of the building is made of a kind of Chinese green bricks produced by the Shanghai Ni Zengmao Brick Kiln. The corridors in the building are paved with teakwood flooring. The interior wall bricks are pointed with imported cements. The windows and doors are made of American red pine wood. The floor plates are made of granolithic concrete aggregates with copper wires.
Commercialisation and controversy.
On 14 January 2015, the Hangzhou Gardens & Cultural Relics Bureau published a notice that the McDonald's would open up a restaurant at 8 Beishan Road. Though the notice was viewed by over 100, but most people criticised the plan. On 26 January, the plan published its environmental impact assessment, after which the local newspaper Qianjiang Evening News used a full page to cover the plan, which then led to controversy among the public, as many locals believed this to be Western cultural desecration, though local officials confirmed that this doesn't violate the law. On 19 April, Zhejiang News revealed that Demos Chiang was involved in the plan, which was later denied by hin while responding to the United Daily News. Demos Chiang criticised the commercialisation plan, doubting the law regarding local historical reservation.
In November 2015, a Starbucks and a McDonald's were set up and started to operate within the building. McDonald's responded to CNBC that it would respect and preserve the history of the site.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

Chiang Hsiao-yung
Taiwanese politician (1948–1996)
Chiang Hsiao-yung (; also known as Eddie Chiang; October, 1948 – December 22, 1996) was a politician of the Republic of China.
Biography.
Chiang was born in Shanghai, Republic of China in 1948. He was the third son of Chiang Ching-kuo, the President of the Republic of China in Taiwan from 1978 to 1988. His mother was Faina Ipatyevna Vakhreva, also known as Chiang Fang-liang. He had two older brothers, Hsiao-wen and Hsiao-wu, and one older sister, Hsiao-chang. He also had two half-brothers, Winston Chang and John Chiang, with whom he shared the same father.
After a brief political career in the Kuomintang in 1988, he emigrated to Canada with his family. In 1996, he died in Taiwan at the Taipei Veterans General Hospital as a result of esophageal cancer, aged 48. He was survived by his wife Chiang Fang Chi-yi and three sons.
As of  2013[ [update]], Chiang Fang Chi-yi is a member of the Kuomintang Central Committee while his eldest son Demos Chiang is a successful designer and businessman. Andrew Chiang, his youngest son, was charged with making threatening comments against the faculty of the Taipei American School through email and Facebook in 2013. He was convicted in 2015, and fined NT$183,000.
References.
<templatestyles src="Reflist/styles.css" />

A City of Sadness
1989 Taiwanese film by Hou Hsiao-hsien
A City of Sadness () is a 1989 Taiwanese historical drama directed by Hou Hsiao-hsien. It tells the story of a family embroiled in the "White Terror" that was wrought on the Taiwanese people by the Kuomintang government (KMT) after their arrival from mainland China in the late 1940s, during which thousands of Taiwanese and recent emigres from the Mainland were rounded up, shot, and/or sent to prison. The film was the first to deal openly with the KMT's authoritarian misdeeds after its 1945 takeover of Taiwan, which had been relinquished following Japan's defeat in World War II, and the first to depict the February 28 Incident of 1947, in which thousands of people were massacred by the KMT.
"A City of Sadness" was the first (of three) Taiwanese films to win the Golden Lion award at the Venice Film Festival, and is often considered Hou's masterpiece. The film was selected as the Taiwanese entry for the Best Foreign Language Film at the 62nd Academy Awards, but was not accepted as a nominee.
This film is regarded as the second installment in the Wu Nien-jen trilogy as well as the first installment in a loose trilogy of Hsiao-Hsien's films that deal with Taiwanese history, which also includes "The Puppetmaster" (1993) and "Good Men, Good Women" (1995). These films are collectively called the "Taiwan Trilogy" by academics and critics.
Plot.
The film follows the Lin family in a coastal town near Taipei, Taiwan from 1945 to 1949, the period after the end of 50 years of Japanese colonial rule and before the establishment of a government-in-exile in Taiwan by Chiang Kai-shek's Nationalist Kuomintang forces once the Communist army captured mainland China.
The film starts on August 15, 1945, with the voice of Emperor Hirohito announcing Japan's unconditional surrender. When Taiwan regained its sovereignty, people were full of joy. A large number of people from the mainland went to Taiwan such as Kuomintang troops, gangsters and people with socialist ideas. Meanwhile, Lin Wen-hsiung, who runs a bar called "Little Shanghai" and is the eldest of the Lin's four sons, awaits the birth of his child. The second son served as a military doctor but disappeared in the Philippines during the war. The fourth and youngest son, Wen-ching, is a photographer with leftist leanings who became deaf following a childhood accident; he is close friends with Hiroe and Hiroe's sister, Hiromi.
The third son, Lin Wen-liang, had been recruited by the Japanese to Shanghai as an interpreter. After the defeat of Japan, he was arrested by the Kuomintang government on charges of treason. As a result, his mental condition was stimulated and he had been in hospital since he returned to Taiwan. When he recovered, he met his old acquaintance. He began to engage in illegal activities, including the theft of Japanese currency notes and a smuggling operation run by Shanghainese gangsters. Wen-hsiung eventually learns of this and stops Wen-liang. However, this leads the Shanghainese mob to arrange for Wen-liang's imprisonment on false charges of collaboration with the Japanese. While in prison, Wen-liang is tortured and suffers brain damage as a result.
The February 28 Incident of 1947 occurs, in which thousands of Taiwanese people are massacred by Kuomintang troops. The Lin family follows announcements related to the event via radio, in which Chen Yi, the chief executive of Taiwan, declares martial law to suppress dissenters. The wounded pour into the neighborhood clinic, and Wen-ching is arrested but eventually released. Hiroe heads for the mountains to join the leftist guerillas. Wen-ching expresses his desire to join Hiroe, but Hiroe convinces Wen-ching to return and marry Hiromi, who loves him.
When Lin Wen-hsiung is gambling at a casino one day, a fight breaks out with one of the Shanghainese who previously framed Wen-liang. This results in Wen-hsiung being shot and killed by a Shanghainese mafia member. Following Wen-hsiung's funeral, Wen-ching and Hiromi marry at home, and Hiromi later bears a child. The couple supports Hiroe's resistance group, but the guerilla forces are defeated and executed. They manage to inform Wen-ching of the fact and encourage him to escape, but Hiromi later recounts that they did not have anywhere to go. As a result, Wen-ching is soon arrested by the Kuomintang for his involvement with the guerillas, and there are only Hiromi and her son left at home.
Historical background.
During the Japanese colonial period (1895–1945), Taiwan had limited contact with mainland China. Thus, when control of Taiwan was transferred to the Republic of China (ROC), led by the Kuomintang (KMT) government at the end of the Second World War, the people of Taiwan faced major political, social, cultural, and economic adjustments. Cultural and social tensions built up between the Taiwanese and mainlanders during these years. Political distrust also intensified between Taiwanese elites and the Provincial Administration headed by Governor Chen Yi.
Meanwhile, in the late 1940s, the Nationalist government was engaged in a civil war against the Communists on the mainland. The Chinese economy deteriorated rapidly, and the post-war economic situation in Taiwan worsened daily. An increasing number of illegal activities took place across the Taiwan Strait, and social disturbances—resulting from unemployment, food shortages, poverty, and housing issues—became imminent.
The February 28th Incident.
One of the restrictions implemented at the time was the ban of cigarette trading. The immediate story begins in the front of a tea house in Taipei the day before, on February 27, 1947, when agents from the Tobacco Monopoly Bureau confiscated a Taiwanese female cigarette vendor's illegal cigarettes as well as her money, and then beat her over the head with a pistol while attempting to arrest her. An angry crowd swarmed the agents, prompting one official to open fire on the crowd, killing a bystander. The news triggered mass protests the following morning on February 28; more people were killed by the police and it quickly turned into a large-scale riot.
While many local Taiwanese took this as an opportunity to seek revenge on mainlanders, Governor Chen Yi issued martial law and requested Nationalist troops to be sent over from mainland to suppress the incident. For the following 38 years, Taiwan was placed under martial law in a period that is now known as the "White Terror" period. Consequently, a generation of Taiwanese local elites were arrested and killed. It was estimated that between 10,000 and 20,000 people died as a result of the 2/28 incident, with more and more people dying or going missing during the White Terror. The trauma of 2/28 haunted Taiwan's politics and society and soured the relationship between the Taiwanese and mainlanders for several decades.
Music.
Sourced from Xiami Music.
Production.
<mapframe latitude="25.109791" longitude="121.844881" zoom="14" width="200" height="100" align="right" />"A City of Sadness" was filmed on location in Jiufen, a former Japanese and declined gold mining town that continued to operate in the postwar period until the 1960s. Jiufen is located in the northeast of Taiwan, an area isolated from the rest of Taipei County and Yilan County. There are only rough county roads and a local commuter railway line connecting Jiufen to the outside world, which designated a low priority for urban revitalization and land development. Jiufen's hillside communities were constructed before the modern zoning codes were put in place, and therefore provided a small Taiwanese town feeling and atmosphere that symbolizes the historical period that is presented in the plot of "A City of Sadness".
Hou remembers Jiufen fondly as he traveled to Jiufen through a tourist gaze when he was young. The shooting of the scenes of train travel to Jiufen particularly evoked his nostalgic rhetoric and joyful memories of a high school trip to Jiufen with his school friends. Hou noted that the train in Taiwan is a very important mode of transportation and he would ride the train a lot. It is very hard for him to forget the connection between him and the trains, so the train tracks appear multiple times in the film.
Background.
By the 1980s, the New Taiwanese Cinema movement was moving towards not just creating films for the people of Taiwan, but also for a larger, international audience. Directors Hou Hsiao-hsien and Edward Yang noted that they wanted to emulate the popularity of Hong Kong cinema, which revolved around high quality productions with strong star power to back it up. In "A City of Sadness", Hou relied primarily on foreign investment, particularly from Japan. Japanese technology, techniques, and facilities were used in the post-production and resulted in what critic and producer Zhan Hongzhi described as an aspect of "high-quality" that could draw in international viewership. Another aspect of this plan was star power, reflected in one of the principal characters, Wen-ching, being played by then rising Hong Kong film star Tony Leung. The intention behind this was to increase Hong Kong and Overseas Chinese viewership. The film also used an array of different languages, chiefly Taiwanese Hokkien, Cantonese, Japanese, and Shanghainese as a way to promote the cultural diversity of the cast and reflectively, of Taiwan to a global audience, which stands in contrast to many earlier films being only in Mandarin Chinese, due to the governments promotion of Mandarin as the national language.
Conceptualization.
Hou Hsiao-hsien was interested in creating a film that could tell a story about a family, specifically during the 228 Incident and the White Terror by a few reasons. He cited how the death of Chiang Ching-kuo in 1988 and the lifting of martial law the year prior made it an appropriate time to address the 228 Incident, which Hou felt had been covered up by the government. He noted how books were not available on the subject and he wanted to provide a vantage point about the story through the lens of a family.
Hou Hsiao-hsien wrote:"Everybody knew about the 228 Incident. Nobody would say anything, at least in public, but behind closed doors everyone was talking about it, especially in the Tangwai Movement [..] The 228 Incident was already known, so I was more interested in filming a time of transition, and the changes in a family during a change in regime. This was the main thing I wanted to capture…
There's been too much political intervention. We should go back to history itself for a comprehensive reflection, but politicians like to use this tragedy as an ATM, making a withdrawal from it whenever they want. It's awful. So no matter what point of view I took with the film, people would still criticize it. I was filming events that were still taboo, I had a point of view, and no matter what, I was filming from the point of view of people and a family… Of course it's limited by the filmmaker's vision and attitude. I can only present a part of the atmosphere of the time."According to scriptwriter Chu Tien-Wen's book, the original premise of the film was the reunion of an ex-gangster (which Hou Hsiao-Hsien intended to cast Chow Yun-fat for the role) and his former lover (supposedly played by Yang Li-Hua, the top Taiwanese Opera actress in real-life) in 1970s. Hou and Chu then extended the story to involve substantial flashbacks of the calamity of the woman's family in late 1940s (where the woman was the teenage daughter of Chen Song-Yong's character). They then abandoned the former premise and instead focused on the 1940s' story.
Film techniques.
The movie includes many Chinese dialects, such as Southern Min, Cantonese and Shanghainese, which make this film pellucid for different groups of people. Ming-Yeh T. Rawnsley explains that "by representing the political reality of the late 1940s indirectly, "A City of Sadness" deals with the past, but is not trapped by the past, and is able to achieve a sense of objectiveness and authenticity." The use of dialects and historical facts can make audiences have a connection to characters within the film, and ensure the objectiveness and authenticity. The film also functions as a form of resistance as those with less power are able to diminish claims by other classes.
Wen-ching's deafness and muteness began as an expedient way to disguise Tony Leung's inability to speak Taiwanese (or Japanese—the language taught in Taiwan's schools during the 51-year Japanese rule), but wound up being an effective means to demonstrate the brutal insensitivity of Chen Yi's ROC administration. As he communicated through other means (photographs, pen and paper) he is often playing the role of an observer. His inability to speak could mirror Taiwan being silenced by its oppressors.
Sound plays an important role in the film as the opening scene is shot in darkness, with the only sound being Emperor Hirohito on the radio broadcast. Throughout the film, the use of Japanese language is cultural, as it represents the experiences of the Taiwanese and their cultural identity. Most of the characters would not be able to understand much Japanese as they would not have lived through 51 years of Japanese rule. This is why the native characters speak Taiwanese with some Japanese words mixed into their speech.
Reception and impact.
Critical reception.
"A City of Sadness" was a major commercial success in Taiwan, but critics were largely ambivalent toward the work. Having been advertised as a film about the February 28 Incident but never explicitly depicting the event, the film was consequently criticized as politically ambiguous, as well as overly difficult to follow. It was also criticized for not depicting the events of February 28 well, instead presenting the events in a subtle and elliptical manner. It is now widely considered a masterpiece, and has been described as "probably the most significant film to have emerged out of Taiwan's New Cinema."
Richard Brody of "The New Yorker" argued, "Hou's extraordinarily controlled and well-constructed long takes blend revelation and opacity; his favorite trope is to shoot through doorways, as if straining to capture the action over impassable spans of time." In "Time Out", Tony Rayns wrote, "Loaded with detail and elliptically structured to let viewers make their own connections, [...] Hou turns in a masterpiece of small gestures and massive resonance; once you surrender to its spell, the obscurities vanish." Jonathan Rosenbaum lauded Hou as "