Ancient Malagasy Dynastic Succession; The Merina Example

1983 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
pp. 247-292
Author(s):  
Paul Ottino
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Pedagogical Model ◽  
Arthurian Romance ◽  
Dynastic Succession

My paper dealing with the Andriambahoaka universal sovereigns and the Indonesian heritage that they embodied brought out the eminently religious character of the Malagasy marvelous tales, disarticulated fragments from a Malay myth of origin. As Françoise Raison has noted, the religious value of Ibonia was still perfectly felt in Imerina during the first half of the nineteenth century. I do not hark back to the possibilities offered by the notion of Hikayat--or in Malagasy the Tantara--at once narration and imitation--“semblance,” as it was called in the Arthurian Romance of the Grail. These notions refer to these Shiʿite syntheses, sometimes with gnostic and dualist ideas borrowed from neo-platonism and the ancient Babylonian philosophies of Lights which, introduced into Madagascar by an Indonesian relay, conceived the descendants of Andriambahoaka in the image of that of the imāms descended from Muḥammad through his daughter Fāṭima and her husband ʿAlī--prototype of Ramini, ancestor of the ZafiRaminia and fourth Caliph, but more importantly the first imām, initiator, after the cycle of revelation that Muḥammad closed, of the cycle of explanation, of initiation, of the “return,”, that is, of walayāt.We are far from this “pedagogical model” that I evoked previously with regard to the other celestial line of the knights seeking the Grail. Far, too, from the unsatisfactory notions of ideology or the “imaginary” such as Georges Duby uses in his recent work, even though his chapter on “L'exemplarité celeste” returns to an infinitely richer universe, very near that which Henry Corbin describes. Can one truly explain from an agnostic point of view facts that are essentially perceived and experienced as religious? In any event going from Ibonia and the marvelous tales of the Andriambahoaka to the historical legends and genealogies in the first chapter of the Tantara ny Andriana of Callet, translated as Histoire des rois, we pass on to something entirely different.

scholarly journals Revising Stanley’s footsteps: encountering the ‘other’ in Darkest England (1996) by Christopher Hope

Literator ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-98
Author(s):  
H. Roos
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Complex Structure ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Central Theme ◽  
Post Colonial ◽  
Black Africa ◽  
Colonial Texts ◽  
Travel Writings

As has now become a familiar image in Hope’s writings, once again ttie idea of looking at a society from the position of an outsider and an exile forms the central theme of Darkest England (1996). In this satirical novel, the tradition of nineteenth-century travel writings set in a colonial context is reversed, undermined, and then remarkably recreated to portray the present-day manifestation of encounters and relations between (black) Africa and the (white) West. Presenting the (fictional) journals of a Khoisan leader, David Mungo Booi, within a dynamic frame of reference to classical colonial texts by, among others, Livingstone and Stanley. Hope writes a new travel report. This essay discusses how, by the reversal of point of view, a change in time and space, and creating a satirical mood, the colonizer and the colonized are interchanged and the original texts are evoked to be rewritten. The notions of Self/Other, colonial /(post-)colonial and primitive/civilized are placed in new and disturbing contexts, adding to the complex structure of this fascinating text.

IV. Gladstone and the Composition of the Final Court in Ecclesiastical Causes, 1850–73

1966 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. D. Stephen
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Church And State ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Privy Council ◽  
Full Member ◽  
Legal Questions ◽  
Main Criticism ◽  
Court Of Appeal ◽  
The Church

The ‘Final Court’ of Appeal in causes ecclesiastical in this period was the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council as amended by 3 and 4 Viet. c. 86, s. 16, whereby every archbishop or bishop who was a Privy Councillor was made a full member of the Committee for Ecclesiastical Appeals, and one at least of them had to sit. The function of the Judicial Committee as the final arbiter of legal questions which might involve Anglican doctrine and usage was much criticized by churchmen throughout the nineteenth century. Criticism was directed mainly along two channels. It was argued that the Church's freedom to mould her own spiritual life could not be absolute while the Crown, through the Judicial Committee, might, by accident or intention, interfere in questions of doctrine. This argument aimed at removing the Church from all external judicial supervision and implied the eventual dis-solution of the constitutional bond between Church and State—a prospect which a few extreme High Churchmen regarded with equanimity. The other main criticism was that the Judicial Committee, as amended by 3 and 4 Viet, c. 86, was neither a truly civil nor a truly ecclesiastical court, but merely, as Gladstone described it in 1850, ‘pseudo-ecclesiastical’. Of this point of view, Bishop Wilberforce was the most consistent and the most powerful representative.

Can the ‘Subaltern’ Ride? A Reply to O'Hanlon and Washbrook

1992 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-184 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gyan Prakash
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Third World ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Progressive Change ◽  
The Third ◽  
Set Up ◽  
The Third World ◽  
Mode Of Production

The problem with Prakash, O'Hanlon and Washbrook conclude, is that he tries to ride two horses at once—one Marxist, the other poststructuralist deconstructionist. ‘But one of these may not be a horse that brooks inconstant riders. …’ So, they say we must choose only one to ride on, not both because the two, in their view, have opposing trajectories. One advances historical understanding and progressive change, the other denies history and perpetuates a retrogressive status quo. Posed in this manner, the choices involve more than a dispute over which paradigm provides a better understanding of the histories of the third world and India. At stake is the writing of history as political practice, and the only safe bet, from their point of view, is Marxism (of their kind), not the endless deferral and nihilism of deconstruction and postmodernism. Having set up this opposition, O'Hanlon and Washbrook's either/or logic has no place for the productive tension that the combination of Marxist and deconstructive approaches generates. They are uncomfortable with those recent writings that employ Marxist categories to analyze patterns of inequalities and exploitation while also using deconstructive approaches to contend that Marxism is part of the history that institutionalized capitalist dominance—approaches which argue that although Marxism can rightfully claim that it historicizes the emergence of capitalism as a world force, it cannot disavow its history as a nineteenth-century European discourse that universalized the mode-of-production narrative.

The Roots of Divergence? Some Comments on Japan in the ‘Axial Age’, 1750–1850

Itinerario ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 24 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 75-88
Author(s):  
Janet Hunter
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Social History ◽  
Major Part ◽  
The Other ◽  
Axial Age ◽  
History Of ◽  
Great Divergence

Much of the recent work on the economic and social history of Tokugawa Japan (1600–1867) has been driven by a desire to identify what T.C. Smith has called ‘native sources ofJapanese industrialisation’. From the Marxist-influenced historians in the 1920s who sought to explain the pre-industrial roots of the structure of production in interwar Japan, through to contem-poraryJapanese historians' studies of the pattern of Japanese development, a major part of the agenda has been to identify how Japan had got to where it was, in other words, what was the secret of its twentieth century successes and weaknesses. It is not possible to explore the situation of Japan's economy in the century 1750–1850 without benefit of this hindsight, without being aware that while Japan's situation may have been in many ways analogous to that of China and Europe in the mid-eighteenth century, its economic fortunes were by the latter part of the nineteenth century experiencing their own ‘great divergence’ from those of China, India and the other countries of Asia and the near East. To search for the antecedents of this divergence is for economic historians of Japan a parallel exercise o t any search for the sources of the European ‘miracle’. While a focus on the period 1750–1850 as an era of European/Asian divergence means, therefore, that we must highlight the situation inJapan during that century, it must also be accepted that in the case of Japan any comparison with other countries or regions may also suggest the causes of Japan's own divergence some fifty to a hundred years later.

scholarly journals George Potter, the Junta, and the Bee-Hive

1964 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 391-432 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen Coltham
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
The Other ◽  
Real Analysis ◽  
Labour Movement ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
The Way

Most histories of the nineteenth-century labour movement give some account of George Potter's conflict with the men the Webbs called the Junta; and it is generally recognised that one main bone of contention was control of the Bee-Hive newspaper. But there has been little real analysis of this quarrel, and even less of the eventual reconciliation. It is true that some of the old generalisations are no longer accepted. Nowadays, most labour historians agree that the Webbs, writing under Applegarth's influence, dismissed Potter too contemptuously. There is also some recognition of the fact that Raymond Postgate's Builders' History, although more accurate on Potter's early position in the labour movement, gives a completely false impression of his later career and the changes that took place in the Bee-Hive. But through it all, Potter has remained a rather shadowy figure, and in published works the Bee-Hive's own history has been surprisingly neglected. Even a recent work in which the author avowedly sets out to correct the record on Potter – B. C. Roberts's The Trades Union Congress, 1868–1921 – is in many ways unsatisfactory. Roberts does make an attempt to analyse the conflict, and on the whole he sums up Potter's aims and achievements more accurately than either the Webbs or Postgate did. But in trying to give Potter due credit for his part in founding the TUC, Roberts has over-estimated his contribution, and minimised his weaknesses. Above all, he has paid too little attention to the Bee-Hive itself. As a result, the consequences of the way in which the paper was founded and conducted, and the relationship between Potter's other activities and the Bee-Hive's successive changes of ownership, editorship and policy, are either disregarded or mistakenly interpreted. Potter's career in the labour movement, and the development of the Bee-Hive, were completely interwoven, and neither can be fully assessed without the other.

The Letter concerning Enmities as a Polemical Source for Monastic Relations of the Mid-Sixteenth Century

2012 ◽  
Vol 39 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 77-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald Ostrowski
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Sixteenth Century ◽  
Single Copy ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Reliable Source ◽  
The One

The Letter concerning Enmities between the Kirillov and Iosifov Monasteries has been used since the middle of the nineteenth century as a major source for monastic relations of the early sixteenth century. It is a mid-sixteenth-century composition extant in a single copy. Most likely composed in the Volokolamsk Monastery by Vassian Koshka (d. 1568), the former archimandrite of the Vozmitsk Monastery, the Letter describes disagreements between Nil Sorskii and his follower Vassian Patrikeev, on the one hand, and Iosif Volotskii and his followers Dionisii Zvenigorodskii and Nil Polev, on the other. It is a polemical source intended to convince the reader that Nil Sorskii and Vassian Patrikeev provoked these disagreements. Containing inaccuracies, inexactitudes, and unconfirmable assertions, the testimony of the Letter differs from early sixteenth-century sources. It is not a reliable source of evidence for the early sixteenth century, but the point of view of its author is better understood within the context of Church-State and internal monastic relations of the post-Stoglav middle of the sixteenth century.

scholarly journals Remarks on the Epistemic Interpretation of Paraconsistency Logic

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 153-170 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicolás Lo Guercio ◽  
Damian Szmuc
Keyword(s):  
Recent Work ◽  
Paraconsistent Logic ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Epistemic Rationality ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Conflicting Evidence ◽  
Epistemic Interpretation ◽  
The One ◽  
The Way

In a recent work, Walter Carnielli and Abilio Rodrigues present an epistemically motivated interpretation of paraconsistent logic. In their view, when there is conflicting evidence with regard to a proposition A (i.e. when there is both evidence in favor of A and evidence in favor of ￢A) both A and ￢A should be accepted without thereby accepting any proposition B whatsoever. Hence, reasoning within their system intends to mirror, and thus, should be constrained by, the way in which we reason about evidence. In this article we will thoroughly discuss their position and suggest some ways in which this project can be further developed. The aim of the paper is twofold. On the one hand, we will present some philosophical critiques to the specific epistemic interpretation of paraconsistent logic proposed by Carnielli & Rodrigues. First, we will contend that Carnielli & Rodrigues’s interpretation implies a thesis about what evidence rationally justifies to accept or believe, called Extreme Permissivism, which is controversial among epistemologists. Second, we will argue that what agents should do, from an epistemic point of view, when faced with conflicting evidence, is to suspend judgment. On the other hand, despite these criticisms we do not believe that the epistemological motivation put forward by Carnielli & Rodrigues is entirely wrong. In the last section, we offer an alternative way in which one might account for the epistemic rationality of accepting contradictions and, thus, for an epistemic understanding of paraconsistency, which leads us to discuss the notion of diachronic epistemic rationality.

Afterword

Good Form ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 191-196
Author(s):  
Jesse Rosenthal
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Victorian Literature ◽  
Victorian Novel ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Literary Realism ◽  
Specific Time ◽  
Moral Thought ◽  
The Past ◽  
Other Hand

This afterword explores how the arguments in this book relate to the question of literary periodization. This is, without question, a book on Victorian literature, written in the context of Victorian moral thought. From that point of view, it is very much rooted to a specific time and place. On the other hand, many of the arguments and theoretical ideas in this book rely on a certain concept of realism that would seem to extend beyond Britain and beyond the nineteenth century. The closing thoughts of this chapter consider just how much of the book's argument is portable to a larger discussion of literary realism. In so doing, the afterword hopes to elaborate the ways in which the Victorian novel, and the moral thought that attached to it, has continued to influence people's larger sense of how works from the past can seem to be, in some odd way, about them.

REALIST NETWORKS: RECENT WORK ON VICTORIAN REALISM

2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (1) ◽  
pp. 209-216 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Thorndike-Breeze
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Recent Work ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
New Work ◽  
Value Judgments ◽  
Binary Oppositions ◽  
Fredric Jameson ◽  
Tools And Techniques

In his recently published bookThe Antinomies of Realism, Fredric Jameson presents his take on the pervasive struggle between the realist mode's origins and its ostensible demise. Throughout his career, Jameson has been dissatisfied with the numerous binary oppositions into which realism is so often inserted and the insufficiently historicized value judgments that tend to go with them. In this new work, Jameson argues that realism is instead caught between and constituted by the opposing poles of story and affect. He argues that “the irrevocable antagonism between [these] twin (and entwined) forces . . . are never reconciled, never fold back into one another in some ultimate reconciliation and identity; and the very force and pungency of the realist writing [here examined] is predicated on that tension, which must remain an impossible one, under pain of losing itself altogether and dissipating if it is ever resolved in favor of one of the parties to the struggle” (11). Jameson locates the “final battle” between the antinomies of realism “in the microstructures of language” and “against the dominance of point of view which seems to hold the affective impulses in check and lend them the organizing attribution of a central consciousness” (11). For Jameson, this formal and linguistic face-off “exhaust[s] and destroy[s]” realism, and whatever “odd assortment of random tools and techniques” we recognize in the post-nineteenth-century world are but remnants of realism's “shriveled posterity” (11). Thus, Jameson insists the book of realism is closed, and as Harry Shaw has noted, “he appears . . . to have maintained a consistent line throughout his career” (Narrating Reality 27n31).

Can the Academic Self-Concept be Positive and Realistic?

2005 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 129-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Reimer Kornmann
Keyword(s):  
Academic Performance ◽  
Opposite Effect ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self Concept ◽  
High Ability ◽  
Self Image ◽  
Other Hand

Summary: My comment is basically restricted to the situation in which less-able students find themselves and refers only to literature in German. From this point of view I am basically able to confirm Marsh's results. It must, however, be said that with less-able pupils the opposite effect can be found: Levels of self-esteem in these pupils are raised, at least temporarily, by separate instruction, academic performance however drops; combined instruction, on the other hand, leads to improved academic performance, while levels of self-esteem drop. Apparently, the positive self-image of less-able pupils who receive separate instruction does not bring about the potential enhancement of academic performance one might expect from high-ability pupils receiving separate instruction. To resolve the dilemma, it is proposed that individual progress in learning be accentuated, and that comparisons with others be dispensed with. This fosters a self-image that can in equal measure be realistic and optimistic.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document