Gabii was an ancient city of Latium, located 18 km due east of Rome along the Via Praenestina, in early times known as the Via Gabina. It was on the south-eastern perimeter of an extinct volcanic crater lake circular in shape, named the Lacus Gabinus, during times called the Lago di Castiglione, "lake of the fortification", after Castiglione, a mediaeval tower erected on the site of the ancient acropolis, or arx, of Gabii. A necropolis is adjacent on that side of the lake. At present, the former lake is agricultural land; the ruins of the ancient city project from the fields next to the cliffs overlooking it, on both sides of the via. A municipium in Roman times, Gabii is located in the frazione of Osteria dell'Osa 10 km from the comune of Montecompatri, of which it is a part, in the Province of Rome, Region of Lazio; the site is under new seasonal archaeological excavation. To what degree the lake was sedimented in ancient times remains unknown; some of the earliest huts are down in the crater.

Two streams flowing north to south flanked the lake on the west: the Fosso del'Osa, the east: Fosso di San Giuliano. These originated in another body of water, believed to be Lacus Regillus, on the south side of the road; the streams were crossed by bridges. The isthmus was isolated by streams on either side; the quadrangle so formed contained its own water supply and straddled a major route on the east flank of Rome. It could not, as history demonstrated, be ignored by Rome; the two streams flow north to the Anio river, which flows west into the Tiber river on the north side of Rome. In 1846 Gell reported that the Osa came from "a large marshy plain, extending to the Via Labicana." Passing by Lake Gabino it was connected to the latter by "artificial canals", which were in the process of draining the lake:The water of the lake has been much lowered by this canal, more draining is yet in contemplation, although there are many square miles of uncultivated ground in the vicinity. The draining of the lake was a project of the Borghese family, which had purchased it in 1614 from the Colonna family.

Octavian Blewitt's handbook was able to report in 1850: The lake was drained a few years ago by prince Borghese, who has converted it from the state of a pestilential marsh into a district of great fertility. Near the river a small inn had been placed, the Osteria dell'Osa, north of, the main necropolis of Gabii; the habitation today has expanded into the center of a frazione. The marshy plain was the last trace of the quasi-legendary lake near which the Battle of Lake Regillus decided whether the Roman Republic would continue or the kings of Rome would be restored by the intervention of the Latin League, to which Gabii belonged; the site of the battle is still a matter of dispute, which, on the unwarranted assumption that the location of the battle reveals the location of the lake, has extended into a dispute over the location of the lake. To modern topographers the deep lake basin, now kept dry, the aqueducts that drew water, still draw water, from its sources leave no doubt that the lake was located in the basin.

Lake Regillus varied in size and depth over the centuries but was between the Via Labicana and the Via Praenestina east of Finocchio and north of Colonna, the last remnant at Pantana Borghese having been drained by the Borghese family in conjunction with the restitution of the first part of the Acqua Alexandrina as the Acqua Felice under Pope Sixtus V in the years 1585–1587. The two roads joined on the outskirts of Rome; the Pantana was the low point. During the thousand years of the post-classical period a much smaller Rome had lived on a reduced water supply due to the broken and unrepaired aqueducts. Gabii had kept its lake until the completion of the Acqua Alexandrina in 226 AD; the Romans captured. It led from springs over the Pantana through underground conduits on the south side of the Via Praenestina to the outskirts of Rome, where it was carried on arched conduits above ground into the city; the Acqua Felice had more altitude at this point. By 226 the lake must have receded enough to have left a corridor along the road, as the Romans would not have been able to sink a conduit under the swamp.

Having its source water drained away, the lake receded drastically. The aqueduct is still in use. In 1915 it shunted some 22,000 m3 per day into the city of Rome. If these sources were not diverted, Lake Regillus would soon return. Meanwhile, the basin marks the location of the former lake, it is now agricultural land, except that the community of Lago Regillo has been placed in it near Gabii. Osteria del Finocchio marks the western limit, as it is settled and is on higher ground. Lake Regillus therefore cannot have been in the vicinity of Frascati, regardless of where the battle was fought. Scattered surface pottery has been found from the Middle Bronze Age outside the necropolis located below Castiglione, from which nothing can be deduced concerning the settlement at Gabii; the Late Bronze Age is missing. The Final Bronze Age is represented by minimal Latial I material around the inside of the crater on the southern side, indicating low-density settlement at the water's edge there. Definitive settlement at Gabii is believed to have begun with Latial IIA when the cemeteries of Castiglio

Amit Sahai

Amit Sahai is an American computer scientist. He is a professor of computer science at UCLA and the director of the Center for Encrypted Functionalities. Amit Sahai was born in 1974 to parents who had immigrated from India, he received a B. A. in mathematics with a computer science minor from the University of California, summa cum laude, in 1996. At Berkeley, Sahai was named Computing Research Association Outstanding Undergraduate of the Year, North America, was a member of the three-person team that won first place in the 1996 ACM International Collegiate Programming Contest. Sahai received his Ph. D. in Computer Science from MIT in 2000, joined the computer science faculty at Princeton University. In 2004 he moved to UCLA, where he holds the position of Professor of Computer Science. Amit Sahai's research interests are in security and cryptography, theoretical computer science more broadly, he has published more than 100 original technical research papers. Notable contributions by Sahai include: Obfuscation.

Sahai is a co-inventor of the first candidate general-purpose indistinguishability obfuscation schemes, with security based on a mathematical conjecture. This development generated much interest in the cryptography community and was called "a watershed moment for cryptography." Earlier, Sahai co-authored a seminal paper formalizing the notion of cryptographic obfuscation and showing that strong forms of this notion are impossible to realize. Functional Encryption. Sahai co-authored papers which introduced attribute-based functional encryption. Results on Zero-Knowledge Proofs. Sahai co-authored several important results on zero-knowledge proofs, in particular introducing the concept of concurrent zero-knowledge proofs. Sahai co-authored the paper that introduced the MPC-in-the-head technique for using secure multi-party computation protocols for efficient zero-knowledge proofs. Results on Secure Multi-Party Computation. Sahai is a co-author on many important results on MPC, including the first universally composably secure MPC protocol, the first such protocol that avoided the need for trusted set-ups and the IPS compiler for building efficient MPC protocols.

He is a co-editor of a book on the topic. Sahai has given a number of invited talks including the 2004 Distinguished Cryptographer Lecture Series at NTT Labs, Japan, he was named an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Research Fellow in 2002, received an Okawa Research Grant Award in 2007, a Xerox Foundation Faculty Award in 2010, a Google Faculty Research Award in 2010, his research has been covered by several news agencies including the BBC World Service. Sahai was elected as an ACM Fellow in 2018 for "contributions to cryptography and to the development of indistinguishability obfuscation". In 2019, he was named a Fellow of the International Association for Cryptologic Research for "fundamental contributions, including to secure computation, zero knowledge, functional encryption, for service to the IACR."

Clayton Compromise

The Clayton Compromise was a plan drawn up in 1848 by a bipartisan United States Senate committee headed by John M. Clayton for organizing the Oregon Territory and the Southwest. Clayton first attempted to form a special committee of eight members divided by region and party, two northern and two Southern men from each of the two great parties, with Clayton of Delaware himself acting as chairman, to consider the questions relating to the extension of slavery, it recognized the validity of Oregon's existing antislavery laws, prohibited the territorial legislatures of New Mexico and California from acting on slavery, provided for appeal of all slavery cases from the territorial courts to the Supreme Court of the United States. It passed the Senate July 27, 1848, but it was tabled in the United States House of Representatives by a coalition of Southern Whigs led by future Confederate Vice President Alexander H. Stephens. Stephens believed that the compromise would surrender Constitutional rights in the territories, as he was certain that the Supreme Court would rule against slavery in the territories.

A problem arose in the United States. The question of whether slavery should exist in the new territories became a problem for Congress. Congress wanted a compromise; the Clayton Compromise was drafted in 1848 by John M. Clayton. John M. Clayton was a Whig from Delaware, chairman of group of Whigs and Democrats; this bill excluded slavery from Oregon. It prohibited the territorial legislatures of New Mexico and California from acting on slavery. However, the compromise provided for the appeal of all slavery cases from the territorial courts to the Supreme Court, it was tabled in the House of Representatives. After twenty-one hours of debate, the Senate passed the bill. Though the compromise was popular throughout the South, Alexander Hamilton Stephens spiked the Clayton Compromise in the House. Stephens claimed that Congress could not prohibit slavery in any U. S. territory. Robert Toombs accepted the compromise before it died. Sources NeededThe Clayton Compromise validated the provisional laws of Oregon-which excluded slavery-so far as not incompatible with the constitution of the US or with the bill itself, subject to the action of its territorial legislature.

Thomas Ewing stated that the compromise bill was defeated by the treason of Alexander Hamilton Stephens and seven other calculating demagogues from six different Southern states, representing the strong whig districts. Sources NeededTo put it the compromise stated that the congress should organize territorial governments for the country acquired from Mexico, neither admitting nor excluding the introduction of slavery into any portion of it, it would leave slavery to spread itself all over again. Whether these laws did or did not abolish it, or if they did, whether they were still in force were questions under the Clayton Compromise left to the decision of the Supreme Court. Sources Needed In the 19th century, manifest destiny was a held belief in the United States that its settlers were destined to expand westward across North America. Mexican–American War was fought between United States of America and United Mexican States from 1846 to 1848. In the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, Mexico ceded parts of the modern day Southwest United States to the U.

S. Mexican cession led to debate over slavery. Wilmot Proviso in 1848 was a result of the Mexican–American War that banned slavery in Mexican Cession, another choice other than the Clayton Compromise. After the settlement of the Oregon boundary dispute in 1846, U. S. gained territory south of the 49th parallel line. Acquisition of Oregon territory in 1848 led to debate over slavery as well; when established, the territory encompassed an area that included the current states of Oregon and Idaho, as well as parts of Wyoming and Montana. Clayton compromise was a bill the committee reported on July 18, 1848, it created a territorial government for Oregon, which allowed the unofficial provisional government's antislavery ban to continue in effect until the new territorial legislature ruled for or against slavery. But the Compromise explicitly banned the territorial government for New Mexico and California from taking any action either establishing or prohibiting slavery; the decision was left to the federal judiciary.

The Clayton Compromise passed the senate but failed in the House, which refused to recede from the Wilmot Proviso. Southern Democrats and Whigs supported the compromise, Northers from both parties and whigs opposed the compromise. Charles G. Atherton and Samuel S. Phelps were the only New England Democratic and Whig Senators to vote in favor of the Clayton Compromise bill. If Georgia’s Alexander H. Stephens and seven other southern whigs voted like other Southerners, the Clayton Compromise would have survived and passed; the 1848 Compromise failed which led to the Compromise of 1850. Compromise of 1850 added California as a free state and allowed popular sovereignty in Mexican Cession. There was a more strict fugitive slave laws and slave trade was abolished in Washington D. C. 7. The American nation, a history: from original sources by associated scholars - 1904