The stubborn persistence of local land use powers: a comment on Morrill

Contrary to Professor Morrill's thesis, land use powers in the United States are not centralizing in the hands of regional and national elites favoring metropolitan consumption interests. Indeed, the article cites evidence that land use powers have decentralized since the 1970s. The white middle and upper classes, concentrated in suburban residential enclaves, are well-served by decentralized land-use controls. Morrill is right to be concerned about threats to local democracy in the United States. But his suggested solution, leaving local governments alone to set land use policies, is flawed. Regional land use planning, does not necessarily reduce local liberty but could enhance it by dampening the beggar-thy-neighbor chase for tax ratables and enhancing the residential choices of low-income, as well as minority, households.     

Comments on comments

This article is a comment on: Tubridge et al., 2012. Decennial reflections on a ‘geography of heritage’ (2000). International Journal of Heritage Studies, DOI: 10.1080/13527258.2012.695038     

十二卷本《剪灯丛话》虞淳熙题辞辨正

十二卷本<剪灯丛话>是一个罕见的文言小说选本.陈良瑞在<文学遗产增刊>第十八集、程毅中在<文献>1990年第2期先后撰文考述.然而,书前武林虞淳熙的题辞并没有得到学界应有的重视,惟程毅中先生称:"这本书没有编辑者的姓名,但书前有一篇武林虞淳熙的题辞,称编者为'自好子'.……如果不是刻书人冒名假托的话,那么自好子编辑<剪灯丛话>的时间大约在万历、天启年间.因此董康和戴不凡把<剪灯丛话>定为明刻本还是有根据的."很明显,虞淳熙题辞的真伪对于判定<剪灯丛话>的成书有重要启示.     

鉴书喻理与世事人情之相容兼得--介绍几则地方志藏书题记

在整理馆藏方志文献时,笔者得观几则清代、民国学者所留的藏书题记.这些或长或短的文字,不仅说明了某一文献的内容、刻印及流传情况,也反映了与刻印及流传相伴而行的世事与人情,是一个个生动具体的历史片断和一幅幅蕴含丰富的艺术画面.兹分别予以必要的介绍说明.     

Geography and geographic information science: An evolving relationship

GISystems have strong and longstanding roots in Geography, stemming from early developments in the 1960s and 1970s that defined a first phase of their relationship. But as the uses and sophistication of geospatial technology have grown and spread across virtually all areas of the academy, reducing Geography's claim to ownership, that relationship to Geography has evolved in new directions, forming a second phase. The critiques of the early 1990s have led to research into the societal context and social implications of GISystems that remains largely centred in Geography; techniques for the analysis of data embedded in space and time remain strongly associated with Geography; and rigorous principles have been discovered under the umbrella of GIScience that are widely recognized within and outside Geography. Today the relationship has entered a third phase, defined by the new opportunities that are being created by the growth of data science, by new sensors, and by new areas of application, suggesting that the relationship between Geography and GIScience will continue to evolve in interesting and exciting ways.     

Reply to comments on relative chronology

The court sites in south‐west Norway are a key material for discussing aspects of Roman period archaeology. So far, the Stand der Forschung is not satisfactory, mainly because the excavations that took place in the middle of the 20th century have not so far led to more systematic and synthesising studies being undertaken. It is argued in the article that the court sites can be considered indicative of central settlements in the Roman period, and that the sites were multifunctional. They probably served as gathering places for social activities like games, things and ritual, as production sites, and maybe as temporary accommodation for chieftains' retinues playing a role in intra‐Norwegian or perhaps Scandinavian military confrontations. The latter aspect is considered in some detail in the article, and it is suggested that the court site organisation is indicative of a Roman period (petty) south‐west Norwegian kingdom, and that the bog offering in Illerup place A might have originated from a south‐west Norwegian army defeated by ‘Danish’ forces. On an international level the court sites are an unparalleled type of archaeological monument reflecting social and functional aspects of general interest for European archaeology.     

戴名世的历史评论浅议

戴名世的史学评论和历史评论虽然蕴含有许多深刻的史学认识和历史认识,但由于戴名世论史、评史的出发点在于宣扬对明王朝的追思,宣扬狭隘的君臣之义,并据此反对清朝的统治,所以使他的史学评论和历史评论带有很强的政治和个人情感色彩,甚至不惜牵强附会,妄加比附,已经脱离了正确的历史评论范畴而演变为极端情绪宣泄.因此,在封建专制政治下,戴名世以文字遭祸也就不难理解了.