Biological continuity between the A- and C-groups in lower Nubia: Evidence from cranial non-metric traits

Data are presented on 45 cranial non-metric traits in skeletal samples of the Lower Nubian A-Group (ca. 3100–2500 BC) and C-Group (ca. 2000–1500 BC) cultural periods. Results, based on the mean measure of divergence statistic, reveal biological continuity, consistent with interpretations of in situ evolution as opposed to models of discontinuity resulting from gene flow. Any differences between the A-and C-Group cultural phases that may be evident in the archaeological record are therefore more likely the result of local cultural evolution, rather than the introduction of new ideas, customs, and materials through the migration of a new population into this area. The problem of small samples necessitates that our results be accepted cautiously.     

Dental morphological evidence for biological continuity between the A-group and C-group periods in lower Nubia

Data are presented on non-metric dental morphological traits in skeletal samples from the Lower Nubian A-Group (ca. 3100–2500 BC) and C-Group (ca. 2000–1500 BC) cultural periods. In order to examine possible biological differentiation between these two periods, their trait frequencies were analysed using the mean measure of divergence statistic. Results indicate biological continuity, consistent with in situ evolution, although the problem of small samples requires that these results be accepted with caution. Although the diffusion of ideas or material culture into the area through military and trade contacts is likely, any archaeologically observable cultural differences between these two phases are more consistent with local cultural evolution than with the importation of a new cultural system through the migration of a foreign population into the area. The timing of a population replacement in ancient Nubia that has been identified by other scholars should now be sought either before the A-Group period or after the C-Group.     

Who Counts? Dilemmas of Justice in a Postwestphalian World

Abstract: Who counts as a subject of justice? Not so long ago, it was widely assumed that those “who counted” were simply the citizens of a bounded territorial state. Today, however, as activists target injustices that cut across borders, that “Westphalian” view is contested and the “who” of justice is an object of hot dispute. This new situation calls for a new kind of justice theorizing, whose contours I sketch in this essay. Arguing, first, for a reflexive mode of theorizing, I introduce the concept of “misframing”, which can subject the Westphalian “who” to critical scrutiny. Arguing, second, for the necessity of a substantive normative principle to evaluate competing “who’s”, I introduce the “all‐subjected principle” as superior to three better known alternatives: namely, membership, humanism, and the all‐affected principle.     

Memory,Trauma, and the French-Algerian War: Michael Haneke's Caché (2005)

This article examines Michael Haneke's 2005 film Caché and its treatment of the October 1961 massacre in light of recent scholarship about memory and trauma. It argues that the film demands of its viewers a complex, critical position, requiring us not merely to passively re-witness the traumatising events of 17 October, but to take on as spectators a more active role in the work of remembering. The article examines narrative and visual elements in the film in order to demonstrate how Caché illustrates and questions how film and other media forms contribute to the working through of collective trauma and, in so doing, function as potential ‘sites of memory’.