Threw Stones Research Articles

マハッラ・クブラー蜂起の諸相

Although recent studies of metropolitan popular movements in the Mamluk Kingdom have clarified the actual conditions of such protests, we still know little about popular movements and the political culture in medieval Egyptian provincial towns. This paper focuses on the uprising of 1450 in al-Mahalla al-Kubra, provincial capital of al-Gharbiyya, and examines the economic background, changing stages of the revolt, leadership by religious elites, and countermeasures taken by the Mamluk Sultan Jaqmaq.According to Tibr al-masbuk written by al-Sakhawi, this uprising was caused by the people's indignation about the tyranny of Ahmad (brother of the well-known ustadar [major-domo] Ibn al-Ashqar) and his unfair interference with the food supply. The crowd attacked Ahmad and killed him in the mosque. Al-Sakhawi portrays al-Mahalli, whose principle was “commanding right and forbidding wrong, ” as a leader of this movement. This passionate preacher was related by marriage to the charismatic popular saint of the city, al-Ghamri, whose Sufi order al-Ghamriyya appeared to be opposed to the regime of Jaqmaq. Suppressed by Ibn al-Ashqar, the rebels were jailed in Cairo. Many Cairenes feeling sympathy for them began immediately to throw stones and call down divine vengeance upon him. It was noteworthy that all the rebels were liberated through an intercession to the sultan made by al-Turayni, another saint living in al-Mahalla al-Kubra. This act illustrates the political function of the private relationship between ruler and Muslim saint, as well as the importance of local living saints in the structure of cultural hegemony in the kingdom. In conclusion, this furious uprising was in sharp contrast with contemporary Cairene popular movements triggered by high prices and characterized by dialogue between the ruler and the ruled.

“What Is the Law If Not the Expression of the Rights of Man and Reason?” The Champ de Mars Massacre and the Language of Law

On July 17, 1791, a crowd of Parisians gathered at the Champ de Mars, in the western part of the city, for the third time in as many days to make clear to the National Assembly their position on the question of the king's constitutional standing. They carried with them a petition that demanded, in unequivocal terms, the suspension of the king, pending his trial on charges of betraying the French nation and the Revolution. According to the testimony of several witnesses, the day began on a tumultuous note when two men were found hiding in some bushes. Members of the crowd attacked the two men and killed them. Condemned as spies by the crowd, they were defended as innocent bystanders by the National Assembly. As soon as the Assembly heard about the killings, they dispatched the National Guard, under the command of General Lafayette, to disperse the petitioners and restore order. When the troops arrived at the Champ de Mars, a number of those present threw stones at them. The tense troops reacted by firing on the crowd, and Bailly, the mayor of Paris, took the opportunity to declare martial law in an attempt to restore order in an increasingly volatile city.

Chapter 1 Previous Research

Excerpt Santorini has fascinated and stimulated explorers and scholars since ancient times. Jason and the Argonauts were apparently visitors to the islands and described a giant called Talos. Molten metal flowed from his feet and he threw stones at them. The island is perhaps best known for the paroxysmal eruption that took place in the Late Bronze Age at the height of the Minoan civilization that dominated Crete and the Aegean region. The legend of Atlantis, in which a whole city sank beneath the sea in a single day and night, is plausibly based on the effects of this eruption on the Minoan Civilization. The geographer Strabo described the eruption of 197 bc in the following way: ... for midway between Thera and Therasia fires broke forth from the sea and continued for four days, so that the whole sea boiled and blazed, and the fires cast up an island which was gradually elevated as though by levers and consisted of burning masses... This introduction gives a brief synopsis of research on the volcano since this dramatic chronicle was written. Research on Santorini has contributed substantial advances not only in the understanding of Santorini itself but to general principles in volcanology and petrology. three centres for lava eruptions on Therasia and northern Thera: the Peristeria, Simandiri and Skaros-Therasia Volcanoes. Other early works include those by Ktenas (1935 and several earlier papers), Neumann van Padang (1936) and Liatsikas (1942). However, apart from the paper by Reck (1936), most research up to the

Aimed throwing of stones by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella)

The purpose of this research was to examine aimed throwing of stones by tufted capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Three capuchins (two adults and one juvenile) threw stones at a stationary target located outside their home cages. The monkeys subsequently discriminated between stationary targets and threw stones at a moving target. Each subject exhibited a distinct manual and postural throwing preference. These results demonstrate that capuchins have throwing capabilities which are thought to have been associated with early hominid evolution.

Ensuring Two Bird Deaths With One Throw

Crossing a plain, I come to what looks like a gigantic mirror. But pushing a hand against it, I feel flesh and not glass. The universe must be symmetric, flesh that of my double-left-right reversed but otherwise a perfect replica. The universe must also be fully deterministic, for how else could my double have moved exactly as I did? But never having seen freedom and determinism as incompatible, I find this untroubling. In fact I rejoice. My decision-making ability, I tell myself, is not limited by any admixture of quantum randomness such as would make me in part a puppet pulled by strings of Chance. Do I not actually have twice power I earlier seemed to have? Besides governing my own hands and legs, do I not govern others too? Cannot I make my double kick, wave, clap, whenever I want? Cannot I throw two stones instead of one?-the stone I hurl to kill a bird, and second stone which my double hurls simultaneously? If ever I controlled what my image did in a mirror, why deny that I control what my double does? Well, grounds for denying it are easy to find. Yes, universe-halves interact. I can smash against my double painfully, and while unable to enter his half of universe (he keeps getting in way!) I have no problem in seeing him since light waves pass through each other instead of colliding and bouncing back. Yet he and I are in crucial respects independent. Seeing a snake sneaking up on him, it is not of that particular snake that I feel afraid but of other which I thereby know to be sneaking up on me. It is my fear which makes me run, my double's fear which makes him do likewise. I do not genuinely cause him to run by myself running. Maybe my double moves as he does because I move as I do. It might even be said that heaviness of rock in my hand causally explains why he drops his rock when I drop mine. Rather similar senses of because and causally explain are recognized by Frank Jackson and Philip Pettit (1988, esp. pp. 392-3). The sameness of force on two electrons causally explains why they accelerate at same rate, they write. And why was price of lamb identical at two auctions? Because, they say (and it is surely a because of Ordinary English), the relationship between supply and demand was same. Yet fact remains that stone killing bird in other half of universe is accelerated by my double's hand, not mine. I do not throw two stones. Still, by choosing to run I can ensure that my double runs. While I cannot strictly speaking make him throw stones, I can make it certain that he will. I have only to decide firmly to throw stones myself.

The Folklore of the Stranger: A Consideration of a Disguised Wandering Saint

THE folklore of Japan is full of references to the mysterious figure of a Stranger, who wanders into a village from an unknown 'outside' world. The word for a Stranger in Japanese, ijin or 'different person' has a wide connotation. An ijin can be a traveller, for example, whose way of life is wandering, in contrast to the static agricultural life of the village. He may be a wandering woodcarver or tinker, a travelling priest or strolling player. An ijin can also be a foreigner from another country 'outside' Japan, a Dutchman, Portuguese, Chinese or Englishman. And he can also be an avowedly supernatural being, outside the human race. The Wardens of certain pools, for example, who are believed to be snakes, and to be ready to lend lacquer cups and bowls to those who wish to borrow them for a party, are referred to as ijin. So are the uncanny yamabito or 'mountain people', said to be seven or eight feet tall, to be covered with hair or leaves, to have supernaturally glittering eyes, and to live deep in the mountains beyond human habitation. The word is thus used in a variety of ways to signify people who come into 'our' world from an alien space outside a certain invisible barrier. Whether the barrier surrounds the village, the country, or the human race itself, the space beyond resolves into what Edward Said called imaginative geography; a world devoid of myth, meaning and recognisable cohesion, and on which we are therefore free to project whatever images or fantasies our culture may suggest. The person coming amongst us from this outside world, from which the known distinctions of life are obliterated, can never be of us. He is excluded from the network of relationships and hierarchies which comprise our community; he must therefore refract round it, either above or below. Our instant reaction is to see him as a threat, bringing perilous pollutions from his alien land, and to expel him from our midst. But a moment later we perceive that at the same time he possesses strange occult knowledge, magic or medicine, beyond our experience. We therefore refrain from expelling him, with curses and stones, and instead disarm him with hospitality; we treat him with all the ritual of a guest, which will elicit from him blessings rather than harmful enchantments. The Stranger is therefore an ambivalent figure. He is at the same time a saviour and a threat; at the same time superior to us, noble, highborn and possessed of helpful magic power, and below us, base, polluted, magically weakening, to be driven out.' In Japanese folklore this ambiguity is often expressed by the symbolic device of disguise. The Stranger is noble, royal or holy, possessed of powerful magic, but he is disguised as a filthy beggar. Be careful therefore how you treat strangers as they pass through your village. Do not be rude to filthy beggars or throw stones at them, because they may be princes or powerful priests in disguise. The subject of my remarks here is one of the many legends found all over Japan and testifying to the passage, long ago, of a noble Stranger through the place. The Stranger is disguised, and woe betide the village that treats him with the contempt and rudeness

Execution by Stoning in Athens

PEOPLE HAVE always thrown stones at other people, and sometimes the targets have been killed, but not every instance of stone-throwing is also an instance of stoning.1 For the purpose of this paper, stoning will be understood as a recognized and distinct method of capital punishment for crimes, either as the sentence arising from a regular judicial process, or as a legitimate form of communal self-help approved or tolerated in the absence of an adequate judicial process, or as a regrettable but typical form of mob violence.2 Our sources mention only two certain instances of Athenians who were communally stoned, the case of Lycides3 and his family who were slain in 479 when Lycides, as a

Hood River Valley Horticulture

Abstract Gone are the legendary days when Mt. Hood and Mt. Adams engaged in terrific quarrels–growling and rumbling and belching forth billowing black smoke as they spat ashes and threw stones.

Never Throw Stones, You May Live in a Glass House Yourself, One Day or

Never Throw Stones, You May Live in a Glass House Yourself, One Day or

The Capacity to Govern

rT iHE MEN'S souls tried in Thomas Paine's day were not found wanting, but in our day they have found their match. This is time to try men's will to survive. This is time to test their humanity and to contest their sanity. This is time to reflect on whether sages or madmen have produced what Sir Winston Churchill recently called this hideous epoch. The world in which men have so long thrown stones has itself become glass house, in which we stoically await shatter. This is a bad time to be a political scientist. The physicist is alarmed at what he has done, political scientist at what he has been unable to do. Just when humanists have persuaded us to join old lady in taking Carlyle's advice on universe to accept it!the scientists threaten to take it away. To perturbations caused by Spengler and Toynbee and atomic scientists, now comes Walter Lippmann with vigorous charge that we have lost, or are losing, capacity to govern, which means our capacity to shape our own destiny. To this we may add voice of disillusioned citizen whose universal lament is, What can I do-I as one of 160,000,000? And we may also add, on domestic scene, recent and persistently hopeful experiments to dismantle Washington, federal system, executive, treaty-making power, income tax, and even Bill of Rights. Reflecting times more hopefully than these contributions to our inability, or unwillingness, to govern, Arthur Krock was able to report in January, in a delightful phrase, administration is returning to the larger federalism. 1 In other words, if government is a necessary evil, much evil still seems to be necessary. One is no longer engaging in flamboyant rhetoric when he says that man not only cannot control his future except through his capacity to govern but that he otherwise literally has no future. The capacity to govern depends not only on political forms and institutions, as political scientists are prone to overemphasize, but also on that pervasive something which lies between institutions that force which holds institutional spheres in their orbits. Democracy is interstitial as well as institutional. To interstices, as much as to institutional forms and extensible federalism, we must look for answers to questions: how did our national government spread over a vast continent and remain

Again: Educational Determinism

It is with ardor that I open my educational periodicals now adays and hasten to see if Bagley or Terman or lesser lights have a contribution upon Democracy and the I. Q. Although what I find is keenly interesting I am, nevertheless, grieved, for I know that my former teacher and my present colleague, each of whom I sincerely respect and highly honor are both battling for the Lord and that they ought to be shoulder to shoulder in the fight. I find myself in sympathy with Bagley's belief in de mocracy and with Terman's insistence upon the reality and con sequence of innate and acquired individual differences. Pro fessor Bagley's trust in the outcomes of democracy inspired me when it was my privilege to be a student in his classes, but I did not get my initial concept from him. I have been a Democrat from the days when I threw stones at the young moron who used to call out rats, cats, and pickled bats are good enough for Democrats, ice cream and sugar plums are good enough for Re publicans. I have liked the term and as with vertical and hori zontal growth its meaning has broadened in my mind I have liked it more and more.