So one of my students asked me George you record so many courses and I noticed that whenever you do a Q&A call or yeah And you can quickly bring on the student or bring on the other guest speaker quickly without you know Having to hunt around like who's this where the and I want to show Here on this video how I do that. So step one is probably a lot of you don't open up the participants Pop out quick enough. I do that right at the beginning of my call I go to you know at the bottom of the zoom I click more and I click participants There's probably a keyboard shortcut for that But I always open this right away and the other thing I open right away is I open chat But that's that's that's optional So I open up participants right away so that when I need to pin someone I I can simply just Find them here if there if there were a lot more people on the list If if it was like right now There's only a few a few of us here But there were a lot more people there would be a search bar at the top of the participants You could quickly type in someone's name and instantly Spotlight them not instantly spotlight, but instantly pull them up as the only person in the list of participants But right now not enough people there's no search bar up here But anyway, I find the person real quick for example Guillaume I click more and I click at spotlight and there we are That's two of us so so I'll give another example and if I want to remove Guillaume I just click on Guillaume's video and click remove spotlight and I Can spotlight Masha for example quickly there you go. Masha you're spotlighted. Yay And then I can I can click Masha and on spot remove spotlight So that's how I can quick do it quickly. Hopefully this is helpful If you have any other kind of zoom-ish questions, you can let me know and I'll think about making a video for this Well, thanks


so just to see what we did last time and compare it to this time let's go to the tab to the right right click on it duplicate it and we're going to go into our reports on the left hand side close up the hand buggy and then scroll on down let's say who owes you money who owes you everybody owes me everybody owes me stuff i'm in the customer balance detail let's do the customer balance detail and then scroll up a bit so last time you end we ended up with these negative amounts because we have a payment that's not applied to an invoice so from a financial statement reporting purpose that's not quite right because we should have a positive liability and not a negative asset account for eric music however when i create a liability account it doesn't tie from a bookkeeping standpoint as nicely to the sub ledger breaking out by customer the accounts receivable is the account that's tied to the customers that's why this works good logistically from a bookkeeping standpoint if not exactly perfect from a financial statement standpoint and we could do adjusting entries at the end of the period month or year in order to to fix this periodically like we do with other adjusting entries if we wanted to however we might say no maybe i i would like to record it in some way where this this doesn't happen i don't get this negative


Just over a year and a half ago, we covered some astonishing discoveries once made in Malta. It is a structure that was undoubtedly once created by people or indeed beings of an incredible intelligence. Among its many impressive features is its seemingly perfect control of sound. When one stands in a certain place known as the Oracle Room within the structure and merely speaks at a normal volume, their voice is not only heard throughout the structure, but it is also somehow ingeniously amplified. Additionally, and perhaps most intriguing regarding the discovery which was once buried under eons of sediment, were the remains that were found there, as if once invaded and all its inhabitants killed, containing thousands of often headless corpses. However, there were a number of these bodies which not only still possessed their heads, but were described to look exactly like that, which today would be recognized as greys. A supposed race of alien beings that have long been rumored to have visited Earth and, according to some alternative researchers and whistleblowers alike, possibly inhabit underground bases here upon our planet. These bodies, unfortunately, are predictably now missing. However, this amazing ancient structure is not the only one to be found within Malta. There are countless anomalous buildings throughout the country, all seemingly explained away, or brushed under the rug by modern academia. Tarxian temples making up a number of these so often overlooked sites. The Hal Tarxian temple, for example, is the location of the Great Earth Mother Statue, a monument with blocks weighing up to 50 tons each. Furthermore, there are many other lesser known, or indeed academically shared, ancient curiosities found throughout the temple complex, such as spirals and precise animal carvings, an extremely ancient form of concrete, hold stones, seemingly drilled out with the use of modern-day power tools, and much more. The Tarxian consists of three separate yet attached temple structures, the main entrance to which, being a modern reconstruction dating from 1956, when the whole site was excavated and restored due to the clearly exquisite nature of many of the decorated slabs discovered on site, they were salvaged and relocated for protection, now housed within the Museum of Archaeology in Valletta. Also of interest is that many believe Tarxian provides rare insight into how the megaliths were moved, apparent stone rollers were found left outside the south temple. However, this long-attested theory does not explain how such people moved these stones over rough terrain, or indeed masterfully placed them atop one another, how a group placed far back within Earth's history achieved such awe-inspiring details within the construction of Tarxian. Where did the rumored alien remains go? Who stole them? Why such secrecy surrounding these remains? Was the site perhaps built with the help of an outside intelligence? Perhaps these were the remains of the builders, with later human inhabitants buried with their perceived gods. We find such sites, their advanced nature, and indeed the attached conspiracies, to be highly compelling. There are many ancient sites which we have already covered here on our channel, that regardless of the unexplained features we continue to expose, are little researched or indeed revisited by mainstream academia. These sites are predictably given an illogical explanation for their origin and creation, dismissed and ignored, as if the book regarding their history is complete and thus closed from further study. However, there exist some sites that required such a long-time excavation that many researchers, some funded, others with independent interests, were able to reveal simply astonishing features, ancient feats of engineering before they were attributed to groups who were simply incapable of achieving them. The Hypogeum in Malta is one such place, a place we have covered before, that regardless of the academic denial of unexplained discoveries, continues to be well known for the 6,000 ancient burials found within the ruins with no less than six elongated unexplainable skulls, possibly attached to corpses discovered amongst them. These reported remains later vanished and are now utterly denied as having ever existed. Yet so many researchers became aware of these discoveries, later sharing this cover-up with the world, the official museum and curator tasked with the responsibility of caring for the site and the countless remains found within, is still, to this day, inundated year by year with requests and calls regarding these unexplainable remains. So many in fact, that the official body was compelled to put up an official statement regarding the lack of any such remains in their care, along with a denial of them ever having existed. However, there are many more anomalies, no less astonishing, still hidden within the Hypogeum. Anomalies which are no less difficult to explain, or indeed deny as existing. Known as the Oracle Room, there is a place within this complex construction, which if one stands upon a specifically made altar, their voice can mysteriously be heard throughout, even at speaking level, as if amplified and complimented by the structure's entire design. Yet the most interesting thing regarding this incredible feature is the resonance in which it converts one's voice to and the effect this can have on the human brain. Known as the Holy Frequency, the Hypogeum not only carries one's voice throughout, but does so at 111 Hertz. Paul Devereux, an archaeo-acoustician, a professor from Cambridge University in the UK, has also discovered that the burial mounds of cairns also resonated sounds at this mysterious 111 Hertz. Devereux investigated this intriguing relation of 111 Hertz and found out something quite interesting. He realized there were many ancient texts, describing beliefs which are based on a divine sound or divine frequency principle. According to Devereux, Pythagoras created his musical scale starting with the note A, which curiously resonates at the frequency of 111 Hertz. Additionally, further research, with MRI scans, has shown that the brain switches off the prefrontal cortex and also deactivates the language center that is responsible for holistic processing, creativity, intuition, and inducing an emotional plateau at exactly 111 Hertz. This reaction many field tests revealed resulted in an experience described as a divine level of meditation in a number of subjects. This trance, some now believe allows one to get connected with the universe, God, or a creator. The question is, who knew such advanced knowledge so far back within antiquity? How were they able to create such stone structures which amplified one's voice to exactly this frequency? It seems preposterous to continue to attest that this amazing structure was somehow built by our lesser capable modern ancestors over 3500 years ago. With such amazing discoveries and cover-ups which have been made here, we feel that we have merely scratched the surface in modern times of the secrets this mysterious place must hold. It is a place which is undoubtedly highly compelling. Full over the earth, ancient structures can be found, megaliths made of quarried stones many tons in weight. They are often found to have been perched atop one another with no mortar and seemingly little effort. Stonehenge, for example, underwent a restoration effort shortly after the Second World War, a project which consisted of several cranes, diggers, trucks, and lorries. One has to wonder if one goes by currently accepted timelines, of course. Just how did such primitive people manage to build these amazing enormous structures? Structures such as the very ancient gateway in Tonka, still consisting of three 40-ton lumps of coral, the granite stones within the king's chamber at Kufu, weighing in at 80 tons, or the stone of the south at Baalbek in Lebanon, the largest officially recorded worked monolith on earth, weighing in at a staggering 1242 tons. There is, of course, other theories, and although to some, one in particular may not seem at all possible, it is far more of a viable option than currently attested archaeological views. Along with Stonehenge, another site we tend to unravel in the future, although a lot more modern, is Coral Castle, an oolite limestone structure that was built in Florida, and in particular, Edward Leedscallon, the man who built it. With the aid of a somewhat suspect black box, often spotted atop of his confusing array of multi-ton lifting wooden contraptions. This leads us on to our main topic of the video. It seems that Edward, like a few other known individuals throughout history, may have deciphered a piece of lost knowledge, information which allowed them to create rudimentary lifting devices with the ability of lifting stones many tons in weight effortlessly. In the small pockets of the world where advanced ancient cultures lived, prospered and vanished into history, places where their ancient ruins remain untouched by all but nature, testimonies were found describing these exact technologies, sites such as Puma-Punka, Stonehenge, and in particular, Easter Island, where not only does there still exist accounts of the huge Moai statues floated along the coast by way of strange chants, the places in which the priests hid within the caves also still exist, these rituals in apparent frequency. Could this be a form of lost knowledge, or technology, which was responsible for the building of the many unexplained sites found around the world? Vibrational technology, capable of making any inorganic object, regardless of size, weightless? This would have allowed craft, previously impossible of flight, to float across the heavens, vindicating many historical accounts of Viminas. Additionally, the levitation of physical objects by tapping into their atomic resonance is currently being redeveloped. The University of Bristol in England has created a handheld device with an array of speakers that can levitate light materials with sound alone. The more time that passes, and the more technologically advanced we become, the more we begin to understand these amazing ancient structures. And although, for some, the realizations that these technological epiphanies induce, for example, accepting the possibility of a past highly advanced ancient civilization, which ended with an equally as possible global cataclysm, could be seen as altering of a worldview to understand what's true is far from detrimental. Acoustics Something many are obsessed by, often splurging incredible amounts of money on technology in the pursuit of better and better sound. But acoustics is not merely limited to electric guitarists painting over which amp they should buy. It is also the studies of the properties of sound. A simple statement, yet it has far-reaching influences which reach not only deep into our psyche but also into an inconceivably huge part of our lives and decision making, almost nearly all parts of our species' lives is influenced by it. One looked at and used within the modern era as a main component within military weaponry. However, the term acoustic can also mean, and I quote, the properties or qualities of a room or building that determine how sound is transmitted in it. And this area is the one which we find tremendously interesting, as during our ongoing and in-depth research into many sites all over the world, coming to know a vast amount of interesting factors regarding a large swath of already studied or rather exposed sites within the modern mainstream. The hypogeum in Malta being one of them, an extraordinary site that has been explored in detail and discovered to possess incredible acoustic abilities. Abilities which have been found at the site in question within this video. Yet we feel the connections between these remarkable sites need to be looked at closer, and the possibility that are now lost yet highly advanced, seemingly acoustically obsessed ancient civilization, not only once existing, becomes ever more likely but that they succeeded in discovering incredible things, things we are yet to fully understand regarding acoustic resonance, so much so that it allowed them to be the original builders of these marvelous structures. It was first thought that seven circular structures, which are located around the Sacred Hill and on the neighboring hills, represented the Sun, Moon, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Venus, and Mercury. However, interestingly, it was later hypothesized that there may be a grave monument and a sacred area still preserved here. Interestingly, it seems although it is thought that pagans in Somatage climbed up the Sacred Hill within permitted history, the team have not attributed them with the achievement of creating the sites. This, to us, seems highly unusual, so much so we may actually be witnessing a change in attitudes within academic study. If so, this is an enormous victory on ours, and more importantly, truth's behalf. Additionally, they have seemingly, bravely, put forward a quote which we also find highly intriguing, for it is one we feel which would have once been dismissed yet another grain of inclination that strategies and most important attitudes within academic pursuit is altering. Quote, the Archeoacoustic Research Group, known as SB, ask us to take into consideration that it is possible to perceive a magnetic field by empirical observation, and in the same way to pursue a higher state of consciousness during meditation or rituals in the presence of strong infrasounds. They continued, if one were to extend this research to the ruins of the other six temples, it may provide further insight. End quote. We find these claims interesting, especially due to the popularization of the acoustic knowledge regarding the Hypogeum in Malta. Additionally, ours and others repeated reports of the mass burial found there. Nearly 7,000 separate remains discovered there, some claimed as seemingly having alien origins found buried at the Hypogeum, yet is, ironically, a story and discovery which has been long attempted to be buried itself. Yet these acoustic properties are undoubtedly incredibly intriguing, possibly groundbreakingly important, especially when one considers it is accompanied with a claim of undisturbed burial grounds, and when one considers what was claimed to have been found among the burial in Malta, a discovery we have previously covered. Somatash, within Turkey, is undoubtedly highly compelling.


Hello friends, I am Sanjay Gupta. In this video, I am going to demonstrate you how you can print this pattern in C programming. Before starting, you can note my information. You can follow or subscribe my YouTube channel that is sanjaygupta underscore tech school. You can download my Android app based on programming that is Techimace, which is available on Google Play. For implementation of this pattern, I have included a header file STDI.h Then inside main three variables are declared i, j and n. Then this print f will print enter how many rows you want to print, message on console. Then scanner will read a value inside n variable. Then first loop I have implemented, which is starting from one to n. This loop will repeat n times, which will display number of rows. Inside this loop, I have implemented another loop, which is starting from one and repeating till i. So this loop will print columns. So here column values will be displayed with the help of j. Now you can see in this pattern with each digit and asterisk symbol is printed. So for that purpose, you can place asterisk just after %d. So if you place asterisk just after %d, then with each digit, the asterisk sign will be displayed on console. So now I am going to execute this code. It is asking for number of rows. I am entering 5. You can see the output. Asterisk sign is displayed just after each digit, which is visible here. So this way you can print asterisk with each digit. Now if you want to place this asterisk before digits, then you can type asterisk sign before %d. Again, I am executing this code. I am entering 5 as number of rows. You can see the output. This time asterisk is displayed before the digits. So this way you can print above mentioned patterns in C programming. I hope you have understood the concept. Thank you for watching this video.


people love to bash the church. But we have to recognize that the church is the bride of Christ. So I want you to side with Christ.  Write it in the comment section right now. I love the church. That's not saying that the church is perfect. That's not to say that the church hasn't made its mistakes. That's not to say that there are some so-called churches misrepresenting what it means to be a church. That simply means that you love the true church, the true body, the collective of genuine believers who all love Jesus. Write it in the comment section. Don't be ashamed. Don't echo the voice of worldly culture. Instead, resist that. Come against that. Come against that lie right now publicly and write those simple words. I love the church. Now, we all know that as believers we should be planted in a local body of like-minded fellow Christians. But so many believers struggle to find that place to call their church home, whether from past hurts or maybe theological differences. There is a struggle sometimes. We have to acknowledge that when it comes to trying to find your church home. So what I want to do is I want to take a very balanced, very biblical, very grace-filled look at this particular topic. Signs that you may be in more of a cult than a church. I'm going to tell you some things that maybe open your eyes about the way the church operates. Remember this. Pastors are there for spiritual guidance, not for spiritual dictatorship. Your pastor is a covering, not a lid. So here are some signs that your church can be red flagged. Now, keep in mind that some churches may have some of these issues that they're working through. Maybe in the culture there are some unhealthy dynamics that they're trying to fix. So give some grace with these, but do be aware of them, okay? The first one I'll give you is that righteousness is equated with an extra biblical adherence to a specific set of rules and expectations. Colossians 2.16 says, don't let anyone condemn you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating certain holy days or new moon ceremonies or sabbots. Interesting. So be careful when they try to put extra biblical restrictions on you and then condemn you for not keeping what they say you need to do to be spiritual, but what the Bible doesn't. So in other words, oh, I didn't see you at Bible study on Friday. Are you a true disciple of Jesus? Well, who's to say that they're to set the schedule for your spiritual life? Again, this is not a complete red flag, but watch for this. Here's another red flag, right standing with God is connected to right standing with a certain man or woman of God. In other words, if you have a disagreement with the pastor, you have a disagreement with God. That's not the case. Be careful of language like that. Here's a major red flag. Leadership is constantly over-emphasizing ideas like submission to leadership. Now, submission to spiritual headship, that's biblical, but if there's an overemphasis on this, like every guest speaker is talking about it, every guest speaker is talking about how to honor your pastor, respect them, listen to them. It's probably because the pastor is telling the guest speaker to say that. And the pastor talking about it every sermon and he ties, he or she ties your spiritual well-being to your relationship with them. Very, very dangerous. Another red flag. Leadership is above healthy, respectful questioning. Now, I'm not talking about the Facebook theologians and the YouTube apostles and, you know, the keyboard warriors. I'm talking about people with genuine concerns and questions who are coming with these questions to leadership and you're being respectful about it.  If it was actually respectful and sincere and in love and grace and honor, they should actually address those questions. Here's another one. Members are kept tired, overworked, and unable to do much else besides church and ministry. You feel guilty for taking a family vacation. You feel guilty for taking a night out to take your wife to dinner. You feel guilty for going to see your children graduate.  You feel guilty for not keeping to the program 100 percent. Dangerous because cults like to keep people overworked because if they can keep you exhausted, they can keep you susceptible. If they can keep you exhausted, they can keep you compliant. So if they're constantly looking to fill your full schedule, red flag. And they condemn rest. That's big. They condemn rest. The next red flag here is members are afraid to make life decisions without the permission of leadership. Oh my goodness, this is major. So you want to marry someone. You want to pursue a degree. You want to get a job. Leadership is there to counsel you, not permit you. You're not a child. You didn't ask permission. You didn't tell me you were going after that degree.  You didn't tell me you started dating that person who's godly and who meets all the requirements of biblical standards, but you still didn't pass it by me. Dangerous because leadership is there to counsel and guide, not control. And if members are afraid to make life decisions without the permission, very different than counsel, you should get counsel from leadership. But if members are afraid to make life decisions without the permission of leadership, dangerous. Another red flag, members who leave no matter the surrounding circumstances are labeled as rebellious or outside of the will of God. So if your church just has a long line of people who are all labeled rebellious and if people are constantly leaving and not just anybody, look, every church has people who come who handle things inappropriately, who rebel against leadership in actual rebellious ways and leave. Every church has that. And then they try to trash talk the pastor. Every church, every ministry has that. But look at the track record. Look at the track record of the individual. Like for instance, people criticize a ministry. Look at their track record. Is that all they do is criticize ministries? Okay, you can probably dismiss what they're saying because they're just gossips, they're slanderers. But if that person has a track record, maybe they went to that church for 10 years, 15 years, 20 years. And this church has a track record of people who were there 5, 10, 15, 20 years constantly leaving and saying, I can't do it anymore. It's just an unhealthy environment. You better pay attention because if there's a long line of people who are all, although they were all rebellious, really the people who were most loyal to you for decades, leaving your church constantly, they're all rebellious. That constant revolving door of people leaving because of problems with controlling leadership, they're all rebellious. Think again. So members who leave no matter the surrounding circumstances are labeled as rebellious or outside the will of God. And by the way, if a man or woman ever tells you that you can't fulfill the call of God without their influence, that's control. That's witchcraft. That's manipulation. And that is a red flag, major red flag, major red flag. If they tell you that you can't fulfill God's call without their influence, major red flag. Another red flag, members are discouraged from fellow shipping with believers from other churches and ministries. I'll leave that one right there. I think that's clear enough. Members are afraid of missing any church function for any reason for fear of being rebuked, looked down upon, or otherwise ostracized. Next, members are seen as belonging to a man or woman of God. In other words, pastors fighting over people as if their property. Hey, you didn't tell me so-and-so was going to your church. That's my couple. That's my family. Those are my members. No, they're not. They're God's people. You know the difference between Moses and Pharaoh? Pharaoh thought the people belonged to him. Moses knew the people belonged to God. That's why one was a great leader and one was a dictator that God had to overthrow. Pharaoh didn't understand that the people didn't belong to him, they belong to God.  Now you're mine. And if you go anywhere else, that's rebellious. And that pastor better call me dangerous, dangerous, dangerous, major, major red flag. When pastors fight over people as if their property, that's a red flag. If you're afraid to assess or even consider these signs that I'm giving you, because you are afraid of being embarrassed, rejected, or rebuked, that's a red flag. You can't even consider what I'm saying. You can't even ponder these things I'm bringing to your attention. Dangerous. Thank you for watching Encounter TV. Don't forget to subscribe and click the notification bell. Also, help us spread the gospel of Jesus Christ in the power of the Holy Spirit. Make a one-time donation or become a monthly supporter by clicking on the donate link now.


in the middle is a mapping visualization showing some of the historic structures, including the studio building that are related to its patrons. And so what you see here on the left is the studio building at the very top, which I'll show you a larger image of in just a minute. A stable and then the house of the first owner of the studio building, a man named James Bormand Johnston, this is his house on the left. On the right is the mansion of his older brother John Taylor Johnston, who was a very important American art collector, and also the first president and one of the founders of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which was founded and meeting at his home around the quarter and a couple of blocks over from the 10th Street Studio Building, which was founded or begun about 13 years earlier so 1857 for the studio building and 1870 for the bat. One of the things that we've been working on is to define or maybe redefine the studio building so the most common definition, I would say in the art historical record and among the art historical community is that it's a home for artists. What you see in the image on the left, the building of the first building specifically designed to house artists has large windows, three stories of studio space that were ideal in their moment of creation. They were modern in a sense of artificial lighting, really large scale space with northern facing lights, a large front door through which, you know, grand works could circulate, and a two story gallery in the center where works of art could be exhibited. And for the first 50 years of its life or thereabouts, it was kind of a social club and creative space primarily housing important male artists and the image on the right, a stereoscope photograph is an example of that kind of community. So this is a photograph of Worthington what churches studio and some of the prominent male artists, many of them landscape painters who were living in this building and working in close proximity to each other. In talking to Diana Greenwald about this project she also works on American art during this era especially. She suggested thinking about this building in economic terms as a creative cluster. So thinking about the fact that artists are interacting with each other that this building, which I had already come to understand is an economic engine of a kind for developing the American art market and the American art community and a period where that's really a fledgling enterprise in the United States. And so we began to kind of think about that further. Some of the artists, the major artists really early on in this home for artists are people like Frederick Frederick Edwin Church, excuse me and his painting Heart of the Andes on the left, which was the first blockbuster exhibition of American art which took place about a year after the studio building opened for business. And on the right is a painting by William Merritt Chase, an American impressionist painter who took over the large two story gallery where Heart of the Andes had this blockbuster showing and turned it into the largest studio in this building, which was the kind of social hub and so on. If you walk into a room of 19th century American arts, this is a room at the Metropolitan Museums American Wing, you are going to encounter paintings by folks who lived at the 10th Street Studio building. And so it's very central to the canon of American art, and it's interesting to study for that reason, not only to explore. It's very well known artists but as I've been doing and bringing in more peripheral figures and trying to think through what they mean in relationship to what we already know about this structure and social network. So here's a Google and Graham visualization of the 10th Street Studio building as a proper noun. So to look at its presence or frequency in English language publications and where it shows up relative to the two artists I just showed you works by Sir William Merritt Chase and Frederick Edwin Church, as well as its two first owners so James Borman Johnston and his older brother John Taylor Johnston. You can see that John Taylor Johnston has this kind of peak of recognizability during the period that he's the president of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which you see in an early photograph at the top here. If we look at a Google and Graham visualization of the 10th Street Studio building so zooming into that from the visualization I just showed you, you can see that it starts to appear in the art historical record when it's first established so in primary sources from the 1860s. And then during its sale and demolition period in the 1950s, and then as it becomes of interest to scholars particularly in the 1980s. And in the 1990s when Annette Blaugrand, who is the leading authority on this structure began to develop her dissertation and the exhibition catalog that came from that work. So she is the first person to think of the 10th Street Studio building as a data set, and to create a list or roster of tenants that she published and began to publish even before she completing her dissertation so in the early and mid 1980s. And she assembled a data set that listed all of the artists who she could identify who lived in the building, and that began to create an understanding of this community at a macro scale over the course of the first half of its life. This project, the mining at 10th Street project began with that kind of foundational data set so that class I was taking where we needed to find a data set begin experimenting with it. Her data set is pretty straightforward and limited in the sense of what she published. So it includes the first and last name of the artists their life dates their years of tenancy, and then their affiliation with the National Academy of Design, which was an organization with close affiliation to the studio building its patrons and many of its tenants. And I began by asking, you know, what could we add in terms of data, and how could we mine additional data that might give us further insights about this canonical community and building. So over the course of the last four and a half years, primarily using directories professional directories and city directories we've added substantially to Annette's data so her data is represented in green. She identified 159 studio building tenants, a majority of them fairly well known artists, and we've added another 260, probably more than that at this point, but in this snapshot of last year about 260 artists. A majority of them falling in the latter portion of the building's life, and I'll say something about the three eras of ownership. And the mass data project began very simply, which is just a kind of data validation process, which is to say, you know, trying to find where did she have where did she find her data and could I living in California far away from New York archives. To validate her work and sort of like a data scientist you know test what she came up with us her conclusions and so on and see what else I could find. Of course it's been since the 1980s that she conducted her research, there's a lot of digitized sources, you know it was exciting to see what what I could find. So very simply I Google searched for the address of the studio building and immediately city directories popped up and I began kind of searching for the building's address. And that led to also looking through periodicals and very quickly a much more complicated picture of the studio building emerged. There were some challenges with that immediately it was clear that freely accessible sources were very limited and many of them unavailable, and that led me to you know contacting the major resource for directory data for New York City, which is the New York public library. That institution has in their collection city directories for the city of New York, and they've digitized them and they're available to the public. However they're not available in searchable form. And so I contacted them to ask because you know going page by page and searching in a kind of analog way for a studio building address would be a gargantuan task that I don't think anyone has time for. So I contacted them and found out that they licensed their directories through ancestry.com and it's subsidiary fold three which is a database with military records and city directories and other kinds of works. Not all databases that's one of them are particularly user friendly so we had to come up with techniques for how to locate, you know how to search genealogical databases, for example for a building rather than a specific individual which poses, depending on the way that database works, a lot of challenges. And then we had initial findings so we discovered more artists and architects, many of them obscure non artists tenants, so adding professional diversity to the studio building which city directories especially provide, because they are less discerning than art world records for example. Women artists and women in general began to appear in much greater numbers particularly when we began to extend the data set into the 20th century, and that's work sort of stopped at 1895 or so. And then we found organizations and businesses that led us to think about connections to capitalism and the development of New York City, not only as an art center but as a center of finances or the financial world for New York City. And the role that the patrons of the studio building who were major business owners and business men with power in terms of economics and politics and the studio building as a phenomenon that's cultural and primarily thought of as this home for artists. We also discovered domestic staff. I think that's really interesting and important in thinking about the art world and the community of cultural production in general that there are people who, you know, support that work in case the studio building Margaret winter who provided lunches for example for the artists. Data assembly I'm sure many of you who work on this this isn't any sort of surprise, but we searched base for basic addresses and then had to come up with lots of variables for how they appear so part of the project is documenting all the ways that you can find the studio building in the data. And similarly for the proper noun version of it which varies as well from newspaper to newspaper and among different writers writing about it so 10 Street Studio Building the old studio building 10 Street Studios and so on. Some of the exciting findings for us were the organizations and businesses especially. So the studio building association was something that came up in the city directory and I don't think it's available or prominent in art world records. And that was an organization and a business that was founded by James Bormand Johnston, along with a number of other patrons, and including artists of the studio building who were members of the patron class. It's listed in the city directory is having capital worth $500,000, which I tried to translate into today's money in dollars and it's like 10 billion or something. I don't know exactly what the translation is but it's a lot of money for the 1860s. And that was really interesting in finding the corporate document related to that, seeing how the patrons of the studio building were really supporting the art market and doing all they can to promote the artists of the studio building but also New York City as a center for American art and hopefully creating a kind of Paris or Rome with this particular project in New York City. So coming back to that idea of the patrons. I hope I've complicated that a little bit that there's this money in connection to their appearance and presence in the historical record. And that becomes apparent to when we add the Metropolitan Museum, for example, to this, this visualization. So John Taylor Johnston that like high peak in this visualization is this much smaller mountain in comparison to the Metropolitan Museum of Art, which this family also built and that was has outpaced the studio building and that part is really important, because the studio building wasn't just a cultural center, it was a business, and it was treated as such whereas the Metropolitan Museum became a cultural institution the studio building business. In fact, it was a real estate asset and a real estate venture early on that the liberal proprietor as one of the newspaper says, without any anticipation of profit was now receiving 10% interest on the money invested in this is within a decade of founding a studio building. As time went on, after the first two owners so James Bormand Johnson and his brother John Taylor Johnson who were big patrons of contemporary art. As they, you know, left the world and left the studio building to John Taylor Johnson son, who had less interest in contemporary art, the studio building sort of reverted more to a real estate asset than a contemporary art center. Many of the famous artists began to leave. And as a result, there is a kind of shrinkage of its appearance in the art historical record art art critics were less interested in its tenants and there was a less what inviting or appealing reason to be in the building if you wanted to be at the center of American art. And eventually, the building was sold to its artist tenants, a cooperative was formed, and that cooperative eventually dissolved because shares were sold and eventually was sold to real estate developer and demolished. One of the pieces of advice that Diana Greenwald gave us was to consider in terms of telling the story of patronage of the building as a business of this like economic history of the art world and its relationship, meaning the studio buildings relationship to the American art was to track accessions of works of art by tenants of the studio building, and what you see in this visualization on the left are the three eras of ownership, and the number of accessions of works of art by tenants of the studio building split along gender lines so at the top you see the era, the first era of ownership of JB and JT Johnston and the number of accessions of works by men and women of the studio building. And the decrease of that over time, as well as the increase of the presence of women in the 20th century which is something that our data set has documented in the sense that more and more women come to occupy the space. It's time that the studio building becomes of less and less interest to art historians, art critics and so on. So, we track sort of this, you know the formation of the building as business, it's fall from grace in the, in the art world, and some of that maps against data losses as well. The data rich era of the studio building is that early period of time when it's connection to American capitalism and patronage is really strong. And increasingly there's less and less data available. And so the diversity of people that we've been able to find sort of shrinks a little bit. And that's one of the challenges that we're continuing to pursue is the 20th century data that is going to continue to hopefully emerge from more digitized directories and whatever else I can find on my next trip to New York which I hope will, will gather more data, more access to data as well. So, as press coverage dies down, there's less and less information from the art world, the retirement and death of the artists in the second era of ownership who were the most famous also kind of leads to data losses and then finally, the artists cooperative has the least amount of sort of presence in in art world data. And that reflects of course, what happens when patrons completely disconnect, I think from a contemporary art center that now is no longer the center but a periphery of American art. It's interesting for us because New York City and Greenwich Village emerged as the center of the art world, internationally after the war, at least from the American perspective. And so the fact that the studio building is right at the heart of that, and yet also cultural periphery is allows for the exploration of tensions between center and periphery in a very close proximity geographically to, you know the things that we think about abstract for example, and its relationship to this 19th century structure. I wanted to show very quickly, I hope I'm okay on time, very quickly, some of the raw data and future directions for the project. So this is a visualization of data that it hasn't been cleaned about professions that city directories register. You can see the kind of diversity or range of types of individuals who were tenants. This is a little bit deceptive because a single individual can register multiple professions and so some of this variety is, you know, connected to one person or a few people as opposed to many. But this shows you some of the kind of general categories in which tenants fall so artists being one of the largest architects and sculptors not that surprising, but also merchants and lawyers and illustrators and businesses that give a much more complex and interesting view of the studio building and what we can think about and and explore within its history. We've also continued to pursue the story of its patrons and their social network which is going to be one of the areas of expansion for the project. The father of John Taylor Johnson and James Bormand Johnson was a prominent Scottish merchant, who, among other things imported linen from Scotland, which I think has a connection to providing materials to plantations in the south where cheap linen was used to clothe the enslaved, as well as railroad and steel and so larger histories of industries in the United States. I also have started visualizing some of the marginalized communities so this is a story map and I'll post the link in the chat rather than showing it to you of the women artists of the studio building who we've discovered and the kind of international and professional diversity and connections that they have to histories at the studio building. I will post in the chat, some of the publications that we've started to create in case you're interested. Thank you so much. Thank you, Mary. Thank you so much. I love that at the beginning of your talk, you shared that you came to this subject through an interest in landscape painters in California. I think those kind of research trajectories are really fascinating and it, it's really helpful to kind of know that that connection. It's a very marginalized genre in the United States. Yeah, exactly. Yeah, exactly. And I think, I think we should pick up on on that as a theme from these papers. Also encourage anyone listening to feed us questions for the Q&A space that we have now for about half an hour, at any point, if you would like to ask the panelists something. So coming back to this sort of very clear through line through all of your papers around canonicity and challenging those very rigid sort of inherited boundaries something I'm really curious about is how you think about the scope of your projects I think that came up in different ways. Obviously something about working canonically is that you inherit a sort of container for your work, whether it's the life of an artist or people who are considered to be part of a particular movement. So on to that in your research, how have you each dealt with questions of scope in a very practical sense maybe for your work and, and, you know, maybe in a kind of evolving way. And so I've already, you might have seen I've already briefly answered this in my chat in the chat and the, I should say the most captive PhD, which Martin and my other supervisor Richard Johns proposed, and I applied for it, but I got to define the scope. So it was, I was looking, I decided to focus on landscape art studios. I had to define London, which was not fun, so I used a map to really set myself a limit and 1780 to 1850, 1780 was the year that Royal Academy moved to Somerset House, and it really picked off the first, the age of exhibitions. 1780 to 1851 was the great exhibition at Crystal Palace in Hyde Park. So that, for me, marked the beginning of the second age of exhibitions, so 1780 to 1850. And I have, yeah, like I said earlier, huge appendices, like detailing how I defined a landscape painting, a landscape artist, like all stratified samples I used, because if I wasn't strict, I mean my data set was huge as it was. But I had far greater ambitions, and I've probably done about a tenth of what I originally proposed. So, yeah, you can keep going forever, but I was really interested in what I did spend a lot of my first few chapters on my thesis just to find the use of what is a studio, let alone what is a landscape art studio, especially in an era much earlier than Mary's research where the records are very thin on the ground, people mainly worked in their accommodation. How do we, how do I count for that? So I just say landscape artists addresses, you know, they aren't all necessarily studios, but that's the closest we're going to get unless more information comes to life. Thank you. Ming. Thanks, Bailey. So, our project is actually incredibly fluid and enormous and quite difficult to get a handle on, but there are different parts of it that have more robust definitions and boundaries, one of which is the Slade London Asia portion of it, which, as you know, actually emerged out of a fellowship that I got at the Palm Ellen Centre, and like Rhian, I applied for this fellowship to work on London Asia within the context of pedagogies, and so that's when I started working on Slade and, you know, found this incredible data set, which, you know, had to be extracted very, very laboriously, you know, just by looking at each of the registrar's records and recording names. But then, you know, I think that in thinking about the question of scope, it's really useful to have the multi-scaler approach that Rhian was talking about earlier, where, you know, there are different levels of engagement with the data in the project, and I think that, you know, some aspects of the project are really just to provide this larger context. And then other aspects of the project allow us to tell sort of more precise stories through a kind of, I mean, for me, what I think is really important is this concept of global micro-history, that you find a very small site that allows us to tell stories about transnational global engagements from a critical perspective. So you have that kind of precision, while also engaging with larger questions about global. So I guess that's sort of an answer that sort of tries to have the best of both worlds. But I think that, you know, this question of the multi-scaler is really important. Thank you. I think something that came up in those answers as well has to do with the idea of sort of data ontologies and how we're kind of managing data sets and what is reflected in data and what isn't. The question of definitions for terms, what you incorporate into your set and what you don't. I was wondering if you could share maybe some of your kind of tactics from your projects for dealing with what might be some of the inherited biases and how we might normally structure our historical data. I think for me, I think for me, including, you know, folks like domestic staff and Lord and trying to sort out what are they doing in this building. You know, merchants, for example, or an undertaker. I think, and then figuring out how to code, which we're still trying to sort out these various professions and how do you quantify and explore the data that way. I think also, you know, in some cases, names change slightly so also how you identify individuals and working with the large data set you can have all kinds of errors that pop in. Which is part of the fun, I think of sorting that out. But it makes, I think there's all kinds of decisions that that you can make and how to tell the story and I think I'm still trying to sort out and so it's just mentioned, you know, where the limits should be because the data set can expand in so many directions. We're thinking about education. I didn't show you a slide, but home addresses, for example, pop up in the directories and home addresses in New York City between 1857 and 1956 and the maps we have today are like wildly different. So, you know, trying to figure out how you geolocate them, which I think would be really fascinating. I hope that answers that question a little bit. It does and it also picks up on an interesting thread through the day, I think, which has been the value of errors and anomalies and how things that stand out or that don't fit in your data can actually point to things that really need attention. Paul, I saw you raised your hand. No, it's actually related. Sorry, but I think Rheon and Ming want to respond. So I'll wait for them. I'll defer to them. Okay, I'll come back to you. Rheon. And yeah, my biggest challenge was, and this partly the motivation I understand for the Rhe Chronicles 250, was that so much of the exhibition Street of London is based on the out on graves dictionaries. And they were my go to resource. I quickly realized that I could not go to all the exhibition catalogs individually. And this, by the way, I was doing my take a collection six months ahead of the PMC digitising theirs. So if I've done my PhD two years later, it would be so much easier. I have to do that. I like a lot of go through all the grace dictionaries deciding is that Alaska part is by my definition or not. And, but graves has his own errors and biases. And so I really wanted to make sure from institutional perspective that I was cross referencing from other institutions. And that's why I was so heavy on tracking all of my processes so my database includes it down to the page number. It finds a contradiction in the future brilliant flag it because I'm sure my own, you know manual process has meant that actually I've probably made errors in the data in applying my own data. And but what I really was concerned about but I've had to just leave it as kind of a foot move aside project in the future is that as much as I've raised the issue of gender throughout my database. It doesn't address race and class and the colonial structures which actually are already within the initial cataloging of the artworks, and the titles they use, and the purposes of their works, the motivations of sending the text. So they're proposed another 10 PhD is just of all the different directions. I get the sense that is a part of work like this that you have to, you know you're identifying horizons around you all the time and there's a kind of sense of selection as you go maybe as well. I've had to accept that I just can't answer everything. So, if you create sending cut projects that other people can answer an invitation. Well I'd like to just use this opportunity to maybe open up a couple of things and then point to other members of our team that might want to take on the answer. I think that for us, there are two places in which you know we're really thinking about how to address these questions of inherited biases. One of them is through the data itself and you know as you just pointed out, Mary, there were just so many places in which we were making assumptions and, you know, also what you were saying earlier around, just in terms of like, how do we identify who the foreign students are, you know for certain periods of time in the records, the slag kept very good records of who was coming from where, but otherwise, sometimes we really just had to rely on names that did not sound anglophone which meant that we were making giant assumptions about who was or was not a foreign student and we missed out on a lot of students who had anglophone names because of those colonial histories. So, you know, over time, we had to find other ways of tracking and finding those students, but then also in terms of the visualizations themselves so I think pansy probably has something to say about errors in her visualization at same with Yannicka, and then Mary Bell probably has something to say about this question of data ontologies. Yeah, thank you, Ming. I think that's definitely something I can speak to. I mean, for me it was less so about defining or like circumscribing the outside bounds of the data set and more about working with the data set to think differently about the sort of like to think kind of against the out of the box solutions that I think tend to be quite hard and sharp and non-horus and linear in a way that I think tends to produce like a flattening of the information that is being presented like via a visual model that implies a sense of certainty that I think is sometimes not necessarily there, you know, and that's a way that the stories that the data tells can get I think flattened out and lose some of the nuance that I think is so vital to taking this kind of decolonial approach. And so for me it was really about working with the data set we've had to try to re-inscribe what I think was a really core part of it which was this sense of you know that we are trying to find poetic, geopolitical, social, historical links that are, that have the, there is a potentiality of them being there that is pulled by the data that we don't necessarily know. And so all the different, like I was saying in the presentation, all the different variables associated with the mind's visual qualities can be encoded with quantitative or qualitative data. And that can be a way of, you know, like it's, this is I think what contributes to the sense of kind of materiality of the visualisation, this kind of like charcoal drawing look is because of this way of trying to acknowledge it and in fact put it at the forefront, the kind of the margin of error, so to speak, in the data set. But that requires really using like not out of the box solutions, I mean like, you know, like I was using Blender, which is incredibly robust, but it's quite hands on in some ways. And so to me that's like a pretty core part of like countering one of the biases of like visual presentations of data that can quite I think is always reductive. Am I allowed to jump off of what pansy was saying. Absolutely. Okay. Yeah, I also resonate with the thought of using out of the box. Visualisation platforms. A lot of people on this call were using Tableau to visualise their data. I did that too, with the network visualisations but I kind of had to use a few different platforms, like Jeffy to generate coordinates for the network visualisation before putting it into Tableau. So even combining different systems to get an end result that you want to have is there's some extra steps that need to be taken along the way and the major frustration that I had when I was making this network visualisation was making sure that we had the time element as a part of it because the networks like everything in one view doesn't tell you much if you don't have the time element to it to tell you which artists knew each other at which time. So we needed that extra level of information, but I had to be very reductive with how I used the times in the network visualisation. I mentioned some artists we had very specific like day month year for when they were at an exhibition other artists we just had a single year. And I had, or there was like a lot of uncertainty about dates for example in our history you see a lot of circa this year, or a range of years that an artwork was produced over. So to deal with these types of dates, it's difficult when you try to make a visualisation in a platform like Tableau because they just want a strict date. I don't know who I'm saying when I say day but the platform just wants a strict date to be put into the system, otherwise it just doesn't work you get a lot of null values and the data just doesn't look like it. It works in the end so what I had to do is I had to reduce all of the dates in our data set to just a year, which I felt really bad about like I was sitting behind my computer playing my hair being like oh should I really do this it like gets rid of all of the information that we that we have in our data but it was necessary to create the network visualisation and something that I've been doing in a recent project is I added an extra category called datedness to my data. And this was a set where I had a lot of data that had circa 1960 for example so what I did was I took apart the circa and the 1960 part I kept in 1960s and the strict years and all the data that I represented and then in the tooltip or the box that you can get when you hover over a data set. Over a data source, you could see the what I was calling the datedness of the data and let's see like it was circa 1960 or it was part of this range of dates so you have to try to be kind of unconventional of the way that you present your information. I love that idea of introducing a new dimension in the data to indicate degrees of certainty right or degrees of possibility and working with that instead Maribel would you like to jump into. Yes, and also I see that there is a related question on the Q&A about specificity basically the ontologies and how we are dealing with that. I mean, I will speak more about what we are doing in world in public cultures, which is an approach that we are going to adopt probably in these projects because we basically we decided to adopt the CDOC CRM model, which is like very, you know, well established recognise also we have a member in the project who belongs to the, to the, to the sake of the CDOC CRM. And I mean it's, it's quite problematic it doesn't, you know, it doesn't accommodate all, all types of data. It's, you know, it's a reductive is it basically represents a meaning it's a representation of a certain view about cultural heritage and and and arts and everything so we started with basically with trying to expose and critique the biases that are in the CDOC CRM and in the classes and properties that we are using. Our plan, we also like did this very collective in a very, very kind of collaboratively collaboratively collaborative way. So, so basically we have like sessions in which we were like looking at the different classes and properties and and with our, you know, from all different backgrounds because a word in public cultures project has many scholars coming from, you know, from many different parts of the globe and also specialising in many disciplines and areas so so we've been trying to highlight basically the gaps omissions and problems that exist in the CDOC CRM and our plan is at the moment is just like to highlight in our database once it gets developed like visually have warning signs pop ups that when you are like checking the database you can see that the problems behind the schema and I mean that if you if we really want to decolonise the CDOC CRM will you will probably shoot basically communicate what the problems are with the CDOC CRM and ask for for more like kind of, I mean like like a stronger intervention and changes and because I mean it's of course like we need to to use it because of because this is the way we can share data with other researchers or their institutions, but at the same time there are so many limitations and problems with it so the first step of course is like highlighting what the problems are on the biases, but we need to take a step forward and make like more drastic changes in the CDOC CRM. Thank you so much. That's so yeah that's really interesting to hear about and maybe that that before inventing an entirely new system is a process of like critical annotation maybe within the systems that are being used currently and that that is a level of research and analysis as well within the project. Paul, would you like to to jump in. Mary did you have something else you wanted to say or on that line. It's just going to quickly add I forgot to say that that one of the findings that that one of the things that the data doesn't show maybe from for my data set. And that's difficult to find is ethnicity, but I think generalising from what we have been able to see one of the interesting things about the studio building project isn't seems to be a kind of case study in whiteness and and therefore the issue of exclusion in the that's one area of expansion that I think will be interesting given how closely related the studio building is to, especially in the 19th century to the canon of American art. So I just wanted to respond that that's that's a very that's a challenging and I think also really worthwhile aspect of these kinds of data sets to person. Thank you. Thank you, Mary. Now we'll jump in if I may. Is that that's really it's really interesting discussion and it makes me think particularly of someone like Jessica Johnson wonderful article on markup bodies which is a kind of critique of the transatlantic slave trade critique and a complement of this very difficult and very interesting history. But I want to I want to pick up on on mings kind of challenge of decolonizing this and level of kind of raise a question about the resolution of our data in the sense that what we've all done and this is very much a critique of our work to is we've kept the resolution of the biographical. We've kept it at the level of the individual artist at the individual patron. I'm wondering if that's part of the problem right if you're working with the Benin bronzes you're never going to know the artist you're just not or the you know and whether it's one artist or several artists. If you're working on other kinds of periods. So so some points to you know the the biographical says the man working with the dictionary of art historians the biographical really limits us. In terms of decolonizing and so I guess it's really is an honest question of can we imagine a different resolution. Is it the group is the community are there other ways in which we can confront, which is clearly a real bias in the very nature of our history itself. Brian, would you like to answer that. Oh, it's good to just respond and say I suppose that then takes us on to what is art and how do we value it and then what culture culture perspective are we coming from. And Brian Westman on the entire value is on the artist well predominantly on the artist themselves isn't it. And then you get the myth of the artist and so yeah I don't have to go for that. Yeah. No go please go ahead. I'm trying to find something for us. There was a database that I heard a presentation about that actually was focused on the objects on a group of our objects and and allowing those objects to sort of animate communities. But let me just. I'm just going to pull myself out for a bit and I'm going to look for it. That sounds good. Mary. I was going to say you know for some of the 20th century data for the studio building a lot of the people we identify or the individuals we identify are obscure so while we have their names we don't know much about them their relationship to the art worlds, or the studio building. And I think through them, and just thinking about all of the other people who circulated within the space so students for example for somebody like William Merritt Chase. There is that kind of, I don't know haunting of the cannon and haunting of the what we know or don't know. You know the other thing about directories which is where kind of we've started and we haven't expanded like Annette did into artists diaries and letters and whatever you just get an annual snapshot.  And the mess of the art world on a day to day basis. So I think that's where data losses are really interesting of how much do you not know and is there a way to measure that and sort of evaluate what the data losses indicate about our assumptions as art historians of what's important and what isn't. And maybe the limits of what we can know about the history of art. I think that's really fascinating. And I haven't gotten to the point of, of who created what kinds of objects and what could we, you know, what I'm just, I'm still at the level of names. So that I think will be really interesting as well. Thank you. Yeah, and it is. It was really resonant for all of these parts to think about reading into the meaning of gaps and to giving those just as much as much importance as what is represented. I'm mindful of time. This is such a fascinating discussion. I see three hands raised and maybe so we can hear from Martin and then Paul and then Ming and then have to wrap up. Martin, do you want to go ahead. Yeah, I'll try to be quick because I've sort of addressed this elsewhere in writing, but something which I'm observing during today and thinking about a little bit is how, and this is really kind of the point which is the question that was being raised there. If we stop short of actually formulating a biography and accept that our identifications of, you know, the people that we're dealing with as artists or as art historians are always contingent and always qualified. If we don't kind of try and trace a life, but we actually stop short of that and say, well, we're going to deal with the residents of, you know, 10th Street or we're going to deal with the people who are at the Royal Academy, or we're going to deal with the people who identify as landscape painters and commercial directories. Then you then you do have a kind of data set, which is more reliable because you're not creating it, you're not creating it. There are kind of givens out there. Of course you can start mapping those givens on to one another and come up with certain suppositions or claims, but I think maybe that's an issue that we do kind of mobilise a set of expectations about consistency or coherence around which come with kind of biographical data. If we stop short of that, almost going to just work with the raw data rather than trying to form it into biographies, it might end up with something rather interesting. Thank you. Paul. Oh, you're still muted Paul. Very briefly I've been thinking about some of these issues and the idea of dealing with gaps by looking at contemporary data and learning from that and then projecting backwards with some of those lessons in mind. Because there's so much more data available more recently, it's like looking under a streetlight instead of out in the darkness. So there seems an interesting possibility to develop some strategies that way and also explore some different perspectives beyond the biography. Thank you. Ming, would you like to? Sure. I think that, so I did find it, I will put the website, the URLs in the chat right now, it's a website called Mapping Philippine Material Culture by Christina Juan and what's really interesting about it and the question that it asks for me is, who are these databases for? Who are we serving with these, the use of this technology? And what she has done is really interesting in that she has mapped Filipino objects of material culture in overseas collections, which then allows people in the Philippines to know where those objects are, to access what they look like, because in many cases, every example of those heritage objects exists outside of the Philippines. And so for craftspeople who are engaging in the process of cultural recovery, it's critical for them to be able to figure out where these objects are and what they look like. And many of them are not going to be able to travel to those collections, but she's able to share for those photographs with them, and also by speaking with the cultural producers on site, she's also creating a dialogue which provides greater knowledge about those objects. So I think it's really not just a question of what is the data that we're tracking, but how are we using it and who is it for? Yeah, thank you so much. That feels like a really great question to kind of end on in a way. The question of who is using these databases, projects, what audiences they are serving and for what purposes. And this has been such an interesting discussion. I'm really grateful that we have another space for discussion in the day so we can come back to some of these questions. And I think especially also around questions of artist biography and maybe alternative modes, whether it's looking at objects or thinking about where data around communities lives and what that looks like would be really fascinating. So just a huge thank you to all of our speakers on this panel. And really to everyone also for contributing to the discussion. It's been so interesting. And we all have a break now until 4pm. So we'll see you back then when we will hear from hands on this. Thank you so much everyone. Well welcome back everyone I can see panellist cameras going on so I hope those of you on screen as well as those of you who are joining us for this conference have had a very good quick short break filled with caffeine and other stimulating substances as needed to power us through to the, but the final part of what has been a really, really stimulating set of conversations and for this final section of the conference workshop whatever we want to call it. We've invited someone who we know is going to think with us through with a historical lens. And we've invited Dr Hans Honiz, who's a lecturer in art history at Aberdeen University to give a paper slash response slash thought piece that we thought would sort of not wrap things up but kind of presents us with some ideas and strands for further discussion. Let me just tell you a little bit more about Hans. In 21 to 22 he held the Paul Mellon Center's research collection fellowship, which centered on a project on British art historiography, particularly the collection of the papers of Paul Opay that we have at the moment. But Hans has also worked extensively on the history of art history and art theory since the 18th century, and has written and edited numerous books including those on Heinrich Wulflin and 18th century antiquarianism, and as well as projects on Abibarburg and his new monograph, which is a biography of Abibarburg, is forthcoming as well. And through our conversations with Hans, both around the research collections fellowship and other publications and other papers he's given for us at the Paul Mellon Center, we've really sort of opened up thinking about data gathering in different forms and mass data methodologies and their historiographies. And we've had really interesting conversations about data and disciplinary formation within the context of the Paul Mellon Center that's been thinking about the context of the formation of British art studies and the historiography of art history in Britain. And so those questions and those strands of thinking really made us think that Hans would be a wonderful person to speak at the end of today and give some historical or historiographical perspective to some of these questions about mass data methodologies. So Hans, thank you so much for being here and responding to our invitation and I'll hand over to you now. Thank you so much, Sarah, my greatest pleasure and I'm very much enjoying the day so far. Even though it is Sarah has already indicated quite a bit of a different cup of tea to what I'm normally doing. I hope you can see my screen in the meantime, if I don't hear anything to the contrary, I assume. Thank you. Sarah has already indicated that this is going to be more of a historical paper and I am certainly not somebody who can claim any active experience in working with digital methods in art history. And so I hope you will excuse the slightly left field of contribution here. And I hope you will also excuse that I think I have taken the topic a bit too literal maybe because what I am going to do is focus very much on the question of mass and the role of thinking about masses in art historiography. And what I want to do is looking back into mainly a 20th century German art historiography to think about the relation between an interest in data and an interest in masses as in larger populations. And I feel, I feel, I feel and fear that the relation between the two might not be quite as smooth as maybe maybe the title of the conference today does suggest. Right, this is enough of an introduction. I am going back to the foundations of art history as indicated. I mean, I am at liberty to do so because as all of you might know, this is a very prominent motif in digital approaches to art history as well as all of you will be very aware. A lot of writing about digital art history is indeed precisely drawing on the great names of the field in order to forge something like a genealogy, I guess, for current concerns and approaches. I am quoting him because he's also here today, Paul Jaskit, for example, in 2020 explicitly highlights that we should return to both lean to an art historian looking at vast numbers of examples of early modern European art, and that this makes us hopefully rethink what the very core substance of our field is. I see this importance of data in our writing of the early 20th century, and it's kind of epistemological status, if you want, is what I want to query in the following. I assume everybody knows, but essentially a principle, the point is that he wants to write an art history without names, so an art history that is not focused on the individual artist, but does a kind of distant looking exercise, essentially, where an analysis of artistic styles allows us to cluster artworks according to different art works. So, for example, clustering linear artworks versus painterly artworks, Renaissance art versus Baroque, German art versus Italian art, essentially what Paul's got here in the quote, just to reiterate that a little bit. I find it really interesting that Paul is in that quote, sorry Paul, again for dwelling on your work here quite extensively, I think you're absolutely right by the way in what you're writing here, so this is not meant to kind of start into a critique of anything, just using it as a handy quote. I find it quite interesting though that highlighted in the quote, are the opposition pairs of Renaissance and Baroque and Italian and German. One could say that these mainly mark two categories or two kind of clusters that are quite far away from the constellations that interest us primarily in this workshop. Ysbrydlen Edith has very little interest in categories of population statistics. He's not interested in things like artistic skills. He's not interested in workshops, and indeed he also very early on abandoned interest in connoisseurship and kind of clustering works around a single artistic name. Anything that has to do with people, in other words, seems to have not immediately a place in this art history with our names. And I think this is telling. Early attempts towards a big data art history, if we want to name it that, sorry. If we want to name it a big data art history, I argue precisely not interested in data about masses, about groups and movements as the workshop abstract phrases it. On the other hand, something like the mass was anathema to a man like wealthy. I'm giving you here a few quotes about from his early book Renaissance and Baroque published in 1888, where he speaks about the masses in Baroque art in a strikingly negative form. The masses of unformed blocks of stones instead of cornices, the cornice, everything burst out into the seams and chaos rains over the space. So where when Mars comes in as a category, it seems to be primarily associated with chaos. Baroque art, which is characterised by by massive tide, so by a massive nurse, if you want. Baroque art takes recourse he writes to a great just need strong modes of expressions that are caused by a general darling of the nerves. So those artists that have an affinity to Mars seem to be of actually quite a dubious mental makeup, if you want. This is a common characteristic in a lot of both things right. Mass is considered as exclusively negative. And that also spills over from the full description of what mass is into an analysis of social spheres. The chaos of the Baroque masses in both things is regularly compared to the aristocratic composure and order of the Renaissance. The Renaissance being an elite culture where a sect few are reining in complete order and distinct kind of separation from each other instead of the clustering that's associated with the term of Mars. So those things are history without names is anonymous is maybe big data. But I feel it is distinctly not mass data, not something that is interested in unified groups of populations. There's nothing in the theme of the socialist pathos of the masses, which is coming out at around the same time that he is writing. I'm showing you here just the color of one of the famous, most famous expressionists plays of the period. And Stona's piece of mass human mass a manj, where he kind of is one of these great pieces of literature that restages in a way to Greek chorus and brings that back into modern literature. And where the mass of the workers is one of the key features right that they appear as a unified home and speak with one voice in the chorus. And if if somebody has to be singing out and has to be speak on their own, then this person is called dynamic laws, the anonymous. So, and the idea here is that masses sing in unison. And that precisely is what somebody like Verflin clearly couldn't stand right. Verflin's approach and both is anonymous data driven idea of art history precludes precisely any such clustering according to population characteristics. Many respects, it literally voids the individual, and does not want to, you know, even give the individuality of a name to the protagonist of his art history. At the same time, however, Verflin was very much interested in biographical approaches, perhaps paradoxically so. He wrote famous books about Albrech Dürer, for example, who is time and again appearing as a special individual in Verflin's work. Yet the interesting thing about it is that he characterizes Dürer, not necessarily in a in a kind of affirmative positive way so with positive attributes that mainly in a negative way as a negative way of description. In fact, Dürer is not great because of what he did, but because of, as it's here in the quote, because of what he has overcome. The etching here, mryt y tawd yn taweth, it might be a bit stiff, but Verflin concludes it is this restraint, even for us today, that is the root of the moral power of this man. One is almost tempted to speak of a morality of vision in Dürer. What here is a description of Dürer, the artist, who is described as somebody who, well, quite similarly like an artist who without names, voids itself from himself from certain characteristics. His moral power is restrained, that takes back, pairs back the individuality that is often in biographical art history, seen as the driving force behind artistic development. And I find that fascinating because what I see here coming together is on the one hand side a data driven methodology that is interested in anonymity in an art history without names. And on the other hand side, a personal ethic that is also interested in well maybe not anonymity, but a pairing back of individuality. So the restraint to not come forward as an individual is here deemed as something that is evidence of a specific morality in an artist like Dürer. The decision to pursue data driven art history, in other words, I heard content, is in part motivated by a personal ethic that is driving Verflin personally. The ethos of an artist who have names is a form of denial that potentially can as a Dürer lead to a reformation of self. I hope what I mean here becomes a little bit clearer when I switch to another example, incidentally another man that I wrote a book about so I wonder always how you find your examples. But the man I'm talking about is Avi Warwick. I'm choosing him, of course, also because he too, like Verflin, is often seen as one of these kind of father figures of digital approaches to art history or more big data approaches to art history. I'm sure all of you know that better than me, that works like his Atlas Nemocino, where he kind of traces certain pictorial motifs across different periods and geographies that this often was seen as a kind of early stage of linking and networking pictures, to the social historical context, but because of something like, like, you know, what computer vision it does, right, recognizing motifs and then kind of following them across different periods. It could say a lot about what I think about this particular interpretation of Warwick's work. I shall only say here at this point that I think that it is important to highlight that Warwick was, while he was doing these experimental arrangements also a staunch defender of historical positivism. And that is the very reason why he was also very interested in data as a resource. He advocated throughout his life the accumulation of facts as a matter of personal academic ethos. Truffle Pig Services is what he once called that in his diary in 1907. The Truffle Pig, of course, is somebody who digs out facts, but then lets them go, right, and somebody else collects the truffle and eats them. He is not the one who exploits them. But this is precisely what Warwick earns the highest praise, because it is, as he once called it, a self-renunciatory labour that kind of does something purely for the service of a higher good. True science, Warwick wrote, is marked by calm and sovereign approaches and is free from all the grand, envious, grand delinquents. Again, for Warwick, working with big amounts of data is also a form of self-denial. As soon as you get into the role of staunch historical positivist who sifts through the archive and piles up materials, you are also the one who takes back your individual desire to shine if you want. Here in the quote on the top left in a letter to his friend André Iones, I think that comes through very, very clearly, where he says, I too was born in Plutonia, so the platonic realm of ideas, but such soaring movements are not for me. I have to look backwards to cast my eyes with a philological gaze down to the soil. So what is happening here is that a data-driven approach is very much contrasted with an interpretive one. Well, at the same time, the data-driven collection impulse is seen as the ethically superior one. Warwick himself indeed contended that the good God is in the detail, as he famously once noted, which is something that, not without coincidence, draws upon God and the language of theology in the expression here. By the way, there's many similar authors at around the same time to say things like that. Edward Sprengar famously said it's a task of the historian to study in the tangible singular things, the intangible divine home. What we've got here in general is, I think, a very strong ethical streak that is aligned with the demands of Protestant ethics that were propagated by leading theologians of the time. It's this idea, I went into that, that couture Protestantism, so Protestantism as a cultural force more than a religious one. Adolf von Hanag, for example, the most important theologian of his time, argued that self-denial is what Jesus demands, self-denial to the degree of self-renunciation. And I think what Warwick and Warwick both are advocating by taking themselves out of the equation, but by recoursing to the language of data, is to perform an act of self-renunciation, as here demanded in these Protestant ethics. So I think this is an important point. A tense data driven art history were frequently driven by a desire to abstain from more interpretive, authorial ways of writing art history. Statistics as a means of self-denial, if you want. An art history without names tried to transcend the merely social sphere and enter into a more abstract aesthetic realm. Again, I think this is just important briefly to highlight, not entirely, not restricted to German debates. The same impetus of the selflessness of data mining can equally be traced in British historiography. John Bagnott Burry, for example, the famous Cambridge historian of the early 20th century, or art historians such as Basil Tainor, the founding director of the Paul Mellon Foundation for British Arts, is also a precursor of today's institution who also argued for the importance of statistical research in art history and very much saw that, saw statistical research as an attempt to steer clear from projects and enterprises, which are really too ambitious for the present stage of knowledge. So, again, there's this idea that, you know, focus on data needs to quell over the ambitious freewheeling interpretation, and I argue that at least in the German debates, this is characterized by a self-denial and a Protestant ethos of renunciation. So data, in that sense, very much seems to me opposed to the idea of mass, opposed to the idea of an association of people who belong to a kind of amorphous social group. And I think this is corroborated when we look at some of the authors that quite soon after Welfin turned to this very category of mass, turned to categories of populations that are bigger than one, or at least not entirely anonymous. So, are we talking about mass versus data? I think we do. And in order to give more meat to the brain here, I would like to look at two of Welfin's successes on his chair in Munich. Welfin was a professor at Munich until in 1924. He took quite suddenly early retirement and left this very important chair vacant, and then he had a succession of successes. I will focus on the first two here today, and those are Max Houtman and Bill Heddon. And what I want to show you here is how their interest in masses in bigger amounts of populations, where on the one hand side an attempt to kind of push back against Welfin, to push back against this very renunciatory idea of anonymous art history without names, but also on the other hand side the attempt to still kind of do justice to Welfin's legacy of an quasi scientific history of art. I'm starting with Houtman, who's certainly not the very well-known character, also because he committed suicide actually after only, I think, two years after being in post in Munich, it was never quite clear why he got appointed in the first place, to be perfectly honest. He was mainly a historian of the very church architecture, and that is also the subject of his most ambitious work, the history of church architecture in the modern period, essentially. Published in 21, so six years after Welfin's principles. The interesting thing is that the preference on the one hand side makes very clear that this is a work that is committed to follow Welfin's principles and the kind of developmental ideas that he's presenting here. But on the other hand side, it is also a work that is not based on data in the strict sense of the word. It is not a catalogue style text based on archival work, etc. Instead, he wants to flesh out the great lines, the historical structures of development. For our purposes, I'm particularly interested here in the first chapter, which is dealing with architects and patrons for the very church architecture. Here, Houtman draws on an empirical statistical way to map artists. This is just one of the many charts that illustrate this book. What he is doing here is to map essentially the structure of organization in church architecture. So he maps, for example, the profession of individuals, he maps in which time they flourished and work, and he maps whether they are indigenous German artists or whether they are foreigners who came from somewhere else. So essentially a big table of what was going on in the very church architecture. He has a second of these diagrams that he is drawing, where he is mapping the indigenous German architects who increasingly become more important against the foreigners who are here to dotted line that remains a bit more unimportant. So, on the one hand side, this seems to be a very empirical approach, if you want, but I think it is anything but merely statistical. The aim of Houtmans is rather to filter out two trends. First, the gradual prevalence of trained architects and builders. And second, the rise of German artists who slowly sideline the foreigners that dominated Renaissance and early Baroque art. So once we come to the 18th century, the Germans, the indigenous people are much more important. There is no doubt about the contemporary thrust of the argument that is happening. In fact, much of what he wants to show us here is an aporia of the effects of war, for example. He writes about the 30 year war and how that essentially cleans the entire German population and puts an end to the unrootedness and hybrids who don't know where they belong. The war, he writes, leads all relationships.