In search of Derek Freeman

Truth’s Fool is a sympathetic biography of Derek Freeman, the anthropologist best known for his scathing critique of Margaret Mead’s Coming of Age in Samoa. Hempenstall, a historian, chronicles Freeman’s life and work, including an appraisal of the Mead–Freeman controversy. Hempenstall is interested in Freeman’s ideas, motives, and intentions as well as his personal struggles. He argues that Freeman has been misunderstood, maligned, and vilified in an uncivil “war” among cultural anthropologists. This review examines Hempenstall’s interpretation of Freeman’s personal struggles and his perspective on Freeman’s two books on Mead and Samoa.     

The Odyssey Case: press,public opinion and future policy

The Odyssey Case refers to the dispute between Odyssey Marine Exploration Inc. (OME) and the Kingdom of Spain in the US courts to determine the ownership of more than 500,000 coins, as well as other artefacts, that OME recovered from a wreck‐site it had code‐named Black Swan. However, the process was much more than a dispute over the coins. It reflected many of the components involved in the protection of underwater archaeological heritage, especially when economic and political interests are at stake. Written from the perspective of an archaeologist working for the regional authority responsible for developing archaeological policy, this paper tries to assess the case's impact on future policy development.     

论《奥德赛》的和平结局

荷马史诗《奥德赛》叙述的是特洛伊战争后英雄奥德修斯历险回归和诛杀求婚人的故事。史诗最后以奥德修斯与伊达卡人缔结和平结局。史诗的和平结局不仅与"怜悯"主题相吻合,而且与求婚人的罪行相一致。史诗从第一卷到最后一卷中有关埃吉斯托斯之死的多次插话,预示求婚人的被杀下场,同时也为史诗的和平结局作了合理的铺垫。     

The right of resistance in Richard Price and Joseph Priestley

ABSTRACT

This article is concerned with the writings on resistance by Richard Price and Joseph Priestley, the leaders of the Rational Dissenters who supported the American and French Revolutions, from the late 1760s to 1791. The article discusses the differences between Rational Dissent and mainstream (Court) Whig resistance theory, as regards history in particular: the Dissenters viewed the Glorious Revolution as a lost opportunity rather than a full triumph and claimed the heritage of the Puritan opposition to Charles I, some of them justifying the regicide. Price's and Priestley's views on resistance are assessed against the benchmark of John Locke's conception of the breach of trust. While both thinkers presented themselves as followers of Locke, they departed from his thought by their emphasis on the constantly active role of the people. Each in their own way, they also argued that early, possibly peaceful, resistance was preferable to violent resistance as a last resort against a tyranny. In the end, Price and Priestley each articulated an original theory derived from Locke; their views were very close and their main difference concerned the treatment of history, Price's caution contrasting with Priestley's justification of tyrannicide.     

班克斯爵士与中国

班克斯爵士(Sir Joseph Banks,1743-1820)何许人也?熟悉英国近代科学史的人一定知道,从1778年开始到辞世四十多个寒暑间,他一直出任英国最高学术机构皇家学会(Royal Society)的主席,此时段也标志着从18世纪的"品鉴赏玩"之风到19世纪"格物致知"的科学态度的过渡.     

Joseph P. Bradley's Journey: The Meaning of Privileges and Immunities

Justice Joseph P. Bradley of New Jersey will forever be remembered as the judge who in 1883 cruelly scorned black rights in the Civil Rights Cases . ¹ Yet Bradley's position that year marked the end of a journey that had started in a quite different place. Thirteen years before, when he first joined the Court, Bradley had read Fourteenth Amendment protections of citizens' rights expansively, believing that "it is possible that those who framed the [Fourteenth Amendment] were not themselves aware of the far reaching character of its terms." In 1870 and 1871, Bradley wrote that the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities Clause reached "social evils … never before prohibited" and represented a commitment to " fundamental " or "sacred" rights of citizenship that stood outside the political process and "cannot be abridged by any state." ² By 1883, however, Bradley had turned away from such views. In the Civil Rights Cases , he wrote that nothing in the Thirteenth or Fourteenth Amendments countenanced a law against segregation. Blacks, he said, must take "the rank of mere citizen" and cease "to be the special favorite of the laws." ³