Mutiny is a criminal conspiracy among a group of people to oppose, change, or overthrow a lawful authority to which they are subject. The term is used for a rebellion among members of the military against their superior officers, but it can occasionally refer to any type of rebellion against lawful authority or governances. During the Age of Discovery, mutiny meant open rebellion against a ship's captain; this occurred, for example, during Ferdinand Magellan's journeys around the world, resulting in the killing of one mutineer, the execution of another, the marooning of others. Those convicted of mutiny faced capital punishment; until 1689, mutiny was regulated in England by Articles of War instituted by the monarch and effective only in a period of war. In 1689, the first Mutiny Act was passed which passed the responsibility to enforce discipline within the military to Parliament; the Mutiny Act, altered in 1803, the Articles of War defined the nature and punishment of mutiny until the latter were replaced by the Army Discipline and Regulation Act in 1879.

This, in turn, was replaced by the Army Act in 1881. Today the Army Act 1955 defines mutiny as follows: Mutiny means a combination between two or more persons subject to service law, or between persons two at least of whom are subject to service law— to overthrow or resist lawful authority in Her Majesty's forces or any forces co-operating therewith or in any part of any of the said forces, to disobey such authority in such circumstances as to make the disobedience subversive of discipline, or with the object of avoiding any duty or service against, or in connection with operations against, the enemy, or to impede the performance of any duty or service in Her Majesty's forces or in any forces co-operating therewith or in any part of any of the said forces; the same definition applies in the Royal Royal Air Force. The military law of England in early times existed, like the forces to which it applied, in a period of war only. Troops were disbanded upon the cessation of hostilities; the crown, by prerogative, made laws known as Articles of War for the government and discipline of the troops while thus embodied and serving.

Except for the punishment of desertion, made a felony by statute in the reign of Henry VI, these ordinances or Articles of War remained the sole authority for the enforcement of discipline until 1689 when the first Mutiny Act was passed and the military forces of the crown were brought under the direct control of parliament. The Parliamentary forces in the time of Charles I and Oliver Cromwell were governed, not by an act of the legislature, but by articles of war similar to those issued by the king and authorized by an ordinance of the Lords and Commons exercising in that respect the sovereign prerogative; this power of law-making by prerogative was however held to be applicable during a state of actual war only, attempts to exercise it in time of peace were ineffectual. Subject to this limitation, it existed for more than a century after the passing of the first Mutiny Act. From 1689 to 1803, although in peacetime the Mutiny Act was suffered to expire, a statutory power was given to the crown to make Articles of War to operate in the colonies and elsewhere beyond the seas in the same manner as those made by prerogative operated in time of war.

In 1715, in consequence of the rebellion, this power was created in respect of the forces in the kingdom but apart from and in no respect affected the principle acknowledged all this time that the crown of its mere prerogative could make laws for the government of the army in foreign countries in time of war. The Mutiny Act of 1803 effected a great constitutional change in this respect: the power of the crown to make any Articles of War became altogether statutory, the prerogative merged in the act of parliament; the Mutiny Act 1873 was passed in this manner. Such matters remained until 1879 when the last Mutiny Act was passed and the last Articles of War were promulgated; the Mutiny Act legislated for offences in respect of which death or penal servitude could be awarded, the Articles of War, while repeating those provisions of the act, constituted the direct authority for dealing with offences for which imprisonment was the maximum punishment as well as with many matters relating to trial and procedure.

The act and the articles were found not to harmonize in all respects. Their general arrangement was faulty, their language sometimes obscure. In 1869, a royal commission recommended that both should be recast in a simple and intelligible shape. In 1878, a committee of the House of Commons endorsed this view and made recommendations as to how the task should be performed. In 1879, passed into law a measure consolidating in one act both the Mutiny Act and the Articles of War, amending their provisions in certain important respects; this measure was called the Army Discipline and Regulation Act 1879. After one or two years experience finding room for improvement, it was superseded by the Army Act 1881, which hence formed the foundation and the main portion of the military law of England, containing a proviso saving the right of the crown to make Articles of War, but in such a manner as to render the power in effect a nullity by enacting that no crime made punishable by the act shall be otherwise punishable by such articles.

As the punishment of every conceivable offence was provided, any articles made under the act could be no more than an empty formality having no practical effect. Thus the h

Adad-nirari I

Adad-nārārī I, rendered in all but two inscriptions ideographically as mdadad-ZAB+DAḪ, meaning “Adad my helper,” was a king of Assyria during the Middle Assyrian Empire. He is the earliest Assyrian king. Adad-nārārī I achieved major military victories. In his inscriptions from Assur he calls himself son of Arik-den-ili, the same filiations being recorded in the Nassouhi kinglist, he is recorded as a son of lIlil-nerari in the Khorsabad kinglist and the SDAS kinglist in error. He boasted that he was the “defeater of the heroic armies of the Kassites, Qutu and Shubaru. Pacifier of all enemies above and below.” The defeat of Nazi-Maruttaš’ Kassite forces must have been sweet as his father “could not rectify the calamities inflicted by the king of the Kassite lands,” during his reign. It took place at the town of Kār Ištar in the province of Ugarsulu and victory was assured when Adad Nirari's army fell on the Kassite camp “like a devastating flood,” as described gloatingly by Tukulti-Ninurta I in his eponymous epic and carrying off his royal standard.

This triumph resulted in a border realignment with Assyria extending its territory south, into Pilasqu, the city of Arman in Ugarsallu and Lullumu. Nazi-Maruttaš’ successor, Kadašman-Turgu was sufficiently motivated to secure peace that he seems to have agreed to a humiliating treaty with Adad Nirari where “he pardoned his son of the crime,” twice; this allowed the Assyrians to turn their attention to the conquest of the Mitanni. Under Shattiwaza, Hanigalbat had become a vassal state of the Hittite empire, celebrated with a treaty, as a buffer to the ascendant Assyrians, but treaties were between individual kings during the late bronze age as nation states had yet to emerge and with the accession of Shattuara I in Hanigalbat and Urhi Teššup as Mursili III of the Hittites and a waning of Hittite engagement in international affairs, the former may have sought to adopt a more independent position. According to Adad-nārārī, conflict was triggered by Shattuara’s preemptive attack which resulted in the defeat and capture of the Mitanni king Shattuara, taken to Aššur and forced to swear fealty as a vassal of the Assyrians without the intervention of the Hittites, providing regular tribute for the remainder of his reign.

Bolstered by his military victories, Adad-nārārī pronounced himself šar kiššati, “king of the universe,” in imitation of his ancient predecessor Shamshi-Adad I, impertinently greeted his Hittite counterpart on equal terms as a fellow “great king.” He invited himself to visit Amman Mountain in his “brother’s” territory, drawing a scathing put down from Hittite king Urhi Teššup, So you’ve become a “Great King,” have you? But why do you still continue to speak about “brotherhood” and about coming to Mt. Ammana?... For what reason should I call you “brother”?…Do those who are not on familiar terms with each other call each other “brother”? Why should I call you “brother”? Were you and I born of the same mother? As my grandfather and my father did not call the King of Assyria “brother,” you should not keep writing to me “coming” and “Great King-ship.” It displeases me. By the time Hittite king Hattušili overthrew Urhi Teššup, the conquest was a fait accomplishment and a sheepish Hattušili was to request that Adad-nārārī intervene to curb the incursions of the people of Turira, a Hanigalbat frontier town, against those of Carchemish, still a loyal Hittite vassal, “If Turira is yours, smash it!...

If Turira is not yours, write to me so that I may smash it. The possessions of your troops who are dwelling in the city shall not be claimed.” Hattušili's main complaint, was the breach in protocol caused when Adad-nārārī snubbed his inauguration: “It is the custom that when kings assume kingship, the kings, his equals in rank, send him appropriate. Clothing befitting kingship, fine for his anointing, but you did not do this today.” Hattušili was at great pains to placate his Assyrian counterpart following the “sad experiences” encountered by his envoys in their dealings with his predecessor and call on Adad-nārārī to confirm with his own envoy, Bel-qarrad, that he had been treated well by Hattušili. Although still in the Bronze Age, iron was not unknown and Hattušili goes on to discuss Adad-nārārī's request for the metal: In regard to the good iron about which you wrote to me – good iron is not available in my armory in the city of Kizzuwatna. I have written, they will make good iron. When they finish it, I will send it to you.

For the moment, I have sent you a dagger blade of iron. Conflict with Hanigalbat resumed when Shattuara's son, Wasashatta and engaged with the Hittites for support. Adad-nārārī was to gloat that the Hittites took his gifts but gave nothing in return when he counterattacked and plundering the cities of Amasaku, Shuru, Hurra, Irridu and Washshukanu, places as yet unidentified, destroying the city of Taida and sowing kudimmus over it; the denouement took place at Irridu where Wasashatta was captured and, along with his extended family and court, deported in fetters to Aššur where he vanished from history. Adad-nārārī annexed the kingdom of Hanigalbat, enslaved its people, appointed a governor drawn from the Assyrian aristocracy. While the name of this individual i

William Tate (academic)

William Tate served as the dean of men at the University of Georgia in Athens, from 1946 until 1971. Tate was born in 1903 in Georgia, his father, Philip May Tate, was a member of the Tate family that had developed the Georgia Marble Company in Pickens County, but Mr. Tate himself was a banker and farmer, having established the Calhoun National Bank. Upon his death in 1911 his widow, Mrs. Edna F. Tate, became president of the bank and managed the farm. William attended Fairmount High School and the Georgia Military Academy, from which he graduated in 1920, he entered the University of Georgia, securing his A. B. degree in 1924 and his M. A. in 1927. He did graduate work at Harvard University and the University of Chicago; as an undergraduate, Tate was a member of the track team and a distance runner, holding the A. A. U. Cross Country Championship, he was a holder of its speaking key. He was a member of the Phi Beta Kappa, Phi Kappa Phi, Delta Tau Delta fraternity, Omicron Delta Kappa. From 1924 to 1929 he was debate coach at the University of Georgia.

From 1929 to 1936 he was head of the English Department and track coach at The McCallie School in Chattanooga, Tennessee. In 1932 Tate married Susan Frances Barrow, a granddaughter of university chancellor David Barrow, they had two sons and Jeff. In 1936 he returned to the University of Georgia as dean of freshmen and assistant professor of English, he was dean of students, assistant to the president, in 1946 became dean of men, a position he held for two decades. Tate was described as one of the university's ablest and most popular staff members since he served as the communication bridge between the university administration and the students. During his tenure as dean of men, Tate had nearly unlimited authority over student conduct, he devoted much of his time to personal conferences with students, individually and in groups. A favorite quotation of Dean Tate, in reference to his work with young men at the university, was: "Working with a sorry boy who won't try... is like going bird hunting and having to'tote the dogs!".

Tate was instrumental in the peaceful integration of the campus in 1961 by maintaining close supervision of student protesters. The university's first two African-American students were Hamilton Holmes. Upon his retirement in 1971, Tate joined the university's alumni office and embarked on an intensive public speaking career, his goal, in addition to raising money for the university, was to enhance citizens' understanding of the profound social changes that were occurring throughout the state and on the university campus in particular. Dean Tate brought his deep understanding of human nature to his narrations, he was a gifted storyteller drawing upon a rich memory of events. In 1975 he published the volume Strolls Around Athens; the Tate Student Center on the UGA campus was named in honor of Tate, as well the Tate Academic Building at the McCallie School. In 1990, the Dean William Tate Honor Society was formed as a lasting legacy to Tate and his impact on students at the University of Georgia.

It annually inducts the top twelve freshmen men and top twelve freshmen women at the university, determined through a comprehensive application and interview process. UGA Tate Society history William Tate Archives in the UGA Archives, Hargrett Rare Book and Manuscript Library, University of Georgia