India’s daily positivity rate now stands at 21.47 per cent. (File)
Maharashtra, Karnataka and Delhi are among 10 states that account for 71.71 per cent of the 3,57,229 new COVID-19 cases in the country, the Union Health Ministry said on Tuesday.
India’s daily positivity rate now stands at 21.47 per cent.
The ministry said that Maharashtra has reported the highest daily new cases at 48,621. It is followed by Karnataka with 44,438 while Uttar Pradesh reported 29,052 new cases.
Kerala, Uttar Pradesh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Andhra Pradesh, Rajasthan and Chhattisgarh are among the other states in the list of 10.
India’s total active caseload has reached 34,47,133 and now comprises 17.00 per cent of the country’s total positive infections. A net increase of 33,491 cases has been recorded in the total active caseload in a span of 24 hours.
Maharashtra, Karnataka, Uttar Pradesh, Kerala, Rajasthan, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Bihar and Haryana cumulatively account for 81.41 per cent of India’s total active cases, the ministry said.
“The National Mortality Rate has been falling and currently stands at 1.10% which is continuously declining,” the ministry reiterated.
Besides, 3,449 deaths were reported in a span of 24 hours.
Ten states account for 73.15 per cent of the new deaths. Maharashtra saw the maximum casualties (567) followed by Delhi (448) and Uttar Pradesh with 285 daily deaths.
India’s cumulative recoveries have surged to 1,66,13,292 with 3,20,289 recoveries being reported in a span of 24 hours.
Ten states account for 73.14 per cent of the new recoveries, the ministry said.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by NDTV staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)
City hosted Thomas Tuchel’s side at the Etihad at 1630 GMT just three weeks before they meet again in European club football’s showpiece match, scheduled to be played in Istanbul on May 29. But a defeat in that match meant City had to wait for their celebrations.
City swept aside Paris Saint-Germain in the semi-finals of the Champions League to give Guardiola the opportunity to win the European crown for the third time as a manager after he won it twice with Barcelona in 2009 and 2011.
But he had insisted the Champions League final and the meeting in the Premier League on Saturday were not connected.
City moved to the brink of the title with victory over Crystal Palace last weekend. They could have been crowned champions on Sunday last week had second-placed Manchester United lost to Liverpool but that game was postponed after a protest by fans against United’s American owners.
Reaching the Champions League final for the first time is a huge moment in City’s history but their star manager had said retaining the Premier League after Liverpool interrupted his side’s title series last season was his prime focus.
“Always I’ve said the Premier League is the most important title,” he had said before the match against Chelsea.
“Financially for the club, qualification for the Champions League is the most important title, maybe, but there is no doubt what is the most important thing.
“Of course the Champions League is so special, it’s nice, but this one means consistency and many things.”
City beat Tottenham with an Aymeric Laporte header to lift the League Cup last month but Chelsea ended their hopes of an unprecedented quadruple by winning 1-0 in the FA Cup semi-final at Wembley.
This stone marked the boundary between Belgium and France. By moving it 2.29 metres, he expanded Belgium’s territory.
We must assume he had driven around it before – the stone was placed on this site in 1819, as part of the proceedings that established the Franco-Belgian border in 1820 after Napoleon’s defeat.
For the farmer, it stood in the way of his tractor. For the governments of France and Belgium, it was an active international border.
This story suggests a fragility to borders that contradicts their apparent solidity in an atlas or on Google Maps. Human history is, however, full of arguments about where the edges of property lie.
‘Beating the bounds’
Nations establish their borders through treaties. Rivers are sometimes relied on to set boundaries, but even here tensions rise when there are disputes about interpretation. Is the boundary on the river banks, the deepest part of the river, or the very centre of the flow?
The fact these measurements can even be calculated is remarkable. Expecting high levels of accuracy in a map is a recent development.
Later development saw the topographical charts used by bushwalkers and mountain climbers. But only with the arrival of digital mapping did it became normal to pin-point our location on a map in everyday situations.
The precise location of boundaries was usually part of local knowledge, kept and maintained by members of the community. For centuries a practice known as “beating the bounds” was followed in parts of Great Britain, Hungary, Germany and the United States.
Members of the parish or community would walk around the edge of their lands every few years, perhaps singing or performing specific actions to help the route stick in the participants’ minds. By including new generations each time, the knowledge was passed through the community and remained active.
Beating the bounds was a tradition of spatial knowledge that carried weight – it was accepted as evidence in cases of disputed boundaries. It was also part of a larger tradition, maintaining borders through physical symbolism, whether for good or bad.
Britain has a long history of using enclosure (the fencing or hedging of land) as a means to excluding the poor from accessing common resources. In contrast, in colonial Australia, the first fences were built to protect essential garden crops from scavenging livestock.
Sometimes the importance of the border was demonstrated with an elaborate marker. The Franco-Belgian stone was carved with a date and compass points, representing not only a boundary but also the end of Napoleon’s destructive wars.
Formality was not always required. At a local level in the Australian colonies, boundaries were often marked by painting, slashing or burning a mark into a tree. These were easy to ignore and frustrated landholders placed public notices in the newspapers cautioning against trespassing. People constantly took timber from private properties, or grazed their livestock without hesitation wherever was convenient to them.
Landholders included descriptions of their properties – detailing landmarks and neighbouring properties – in their notices, so there could be no doubt about which land was taken.
But these descriptions formed a circular argument: the potential trespasser needed to know who held each property in order to establish whose property they were about to enter. How effective they were at actually preventing trespass remains unclear.
Rivers were an obvious boundary marker, although European settlers quickly learned how to manipulate them to suit their own needs. By quietly blocking a section of river with trees and other rubbish, they could divert its route to suit their own wishes. By the time the surveyor came to verify or reassess boundaries, the landholder had been using their stolen acres for several years.
Throughout the 19th century, Australian survey departments devoted huge resources to undoing the confusion created by manipulation and incompetence in earlier years.
Markers of time
When the Belgian farmer this week got fed up with going around the stone and decided to move it, he was participating in a time-honoured tradition of manipulating impermanent boundary markers. But if he was able to move it, then who is to say it had not been moved before?
Historic boundary markers like this one have a habit of being in technically the wrong place, even if they are in precisely the right place to commemorate a moment in time.
Perhaps that is where their true significance sits.
Imogen Wegman is a Lecturer in Humanities at the University of Tasmania.
PM Modi extended his best wishes to Mr Tshering for his efforts in the fight against Covid (file)
Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a telephonic conversation with his Bhutanese counterpart Lotay Tshering on Tuesday as the two leaders noted that the coronavirus crisis has further highlighted the special friendship between the two countries.
The Bhutanese prime minister expressed solidarity with the government and the people of India in their efforts against the recent wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) said.
Mr. Modi conveyed his sincere thanks to the people and the government of Bhutan for their good wishes and support, it added.
“Discussed the pandemic situation with my friend Lyonchhen @PMBhutan, and conveyed appreciation for the solidarity and prayers expressed by the leaders and people of Bhutan. The India-Bhutan friendship is truly special, and we will continue to fight this crisis together,” the prime minister said in a tweet.
He also appreciated the leadership of Bhutan’s king Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck in managing the neighbouring country’s fight against the pandemic and extended his best wishes to Mr. Tshering for the continuing efforts.
The two leaders noted that the present crisis situation has served to further highlight the special friendship between India and Bhutan, anchored in mutual understanding and respect, shared cultural heritage and strong people-to-people links, the statement said.