Thesis (Doctoral) -- Institute of Fine Arts, New York University, 2006. / Electronic access only. Title from title screen (viewed Jan. 15, 2008). Includes bibliography (p. 294-309 in printed version).

Diss. Uppsala : Uppsala universitet, 2007. / Bibliogr. p. 232-244.

No description available.

Le 5 juillet 1830, Husayn dey signe une reddition. Alger tombe aux mains de la puissance conquérante, et, mécaniquement, les Algériens sont dits français. Cette automaticité de la nationalité tire sa force d'un principe général du droit des gens : l'État annexant attribue sa nationalité aux sujets dont l'État annexé disparaît en tant que sujet de droit international. Cette mécanique du droit est aussi une charge narrative toute contenue dans cet énoncé : les Algériens sont français. Or, pour impérative que soit la formule, d'un strict point de vue juridique, elle n'en demeure pas moins un raccourci historique que je me propose d'examiner. L'examen de la question de la nationalité des Algériens fixés à l'étranger, principalement dans l'empire ottoman, restitue au moment 1830 son caractère premier : son indétermination. Ce déplacement de la pensée dans la migration pose la colonie comme un arbitraire narratif, cet après-coup écrasant ce moment d'indéterminations. Réinscrire les conflits de nationalité dans leurs dimensions internationales donne à voir tout ce que le droit de la nationalité a de pragmatique dans l'essai de définition de l'Algérien, sujet français. Nous interrogeons le droit et ses récits comme opérateur d'une transaction historique, et, partant tentons de mesurer l'incidence du droit sur nos historiographies. L'examen attentif de suppliques en nationalité permet alors de raconter une autre histoire, déduite non plus des énoncés élémentaires du droit mais du droit en action et en contexte. / On July 5th, 1830, Dey Husayn surrendered. Alger fell to the hands of the conquering power and, mechanically, Algerian were said to be French. This automatic granting of nationality emanated from a general principle of the law: the annexing State grants its nationality to the subjects whose State disappears as an object of international law. Such mechanics of the law also held a narrative power expressed in this statement: Algerians were French. No matter how imperious the formula was legally, it nevertheless accomplished a historical leap that I offer to re-explore. Examining the question of the nationality of Algerians established abroad, principally in the Ottoman Empire, renders to the moment of 1830 its initial dimension: that of indetermination. The intellectual displacement created by studying migration reveals the colony as a narrative arbitrary, an after-the-fact that crushes the moment of indeterminations. Re­exploring conflicts of nationality in their international dimensions reveals the pragmatic aspect of the law on nationality when it comes to defining the Algerian as a French subject. This work questions the law and its narratives as the operator of a historical transaction and it aims to explore the impact of the law on our historiographies. The careful examination of petitions for nationality allows to tell another story, a story no longer produced from elementary statements of the law, but from the law in action and in context.

The aim of this essay is to examine the interpretation of the qur’anic word ummi by analysing how the term was interpreted by medieval muslim scholars in juxtaposition to the interpretation of the contemporary shiite muslim scholar Husayn Tabataba’i. The essay utilises a method of close-reading based on the given definition of the method by Grenholm and focuses on the medieval interpretation of the word ummi as researched in Sebastian Günthers academic article Muḥammad, the Illiterate Prophet as well as the given interpretation of Tabataba’i in Tafsir al-Mizan. The prophet Muhammed is described in the Qur’an as al-nabi al-ummi, an epithet often understood as ”the illiterate prophet”. By analysing the various exegetical interpretations of term ummi, the thesis hopes to reach a conclusion regarding the literacy or illiteracy of the islamic prophet in addition to elucidate what the meaning of ummi might be on a general level. The essay departs from the theoretical understanding of prophethood and the Qur’an as describe in shiite tradition, thus regarding the doctrinal affinity of  Tabataba’i in examining his interpretation.  The essay concludes that the perception of the prophet Muhammed being illiterate is a rather contemporary notion not shared by medieval muslim exegetical scholars. Husayn Tabataba’is exegesis in Tafsir al-Mizan suggest a different interpretation of the word ummi providing clarification and coherent explanation in his reading of the term.

<p>The present study has a twofold purpose: Firstly, it is an analysis of the Karbalā´ Drama—i.e. the death of Ḥusayn b. `Alī in the hands of an army which had been sent out by the Umayyad authorities, at Karbalā´ in 60/680—as it is retold by the Muslim jurist and historiographer Abū Ja`far Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923). Despite its importance, especially to Shī`ite Islam, this text as such has received relatively little attention among scholars of Islam. In this study, the Karbalā´ Drama is regarded as a myth and the method used to analyze it is inspired by the structuralism of Claude Lévi-Strauss. Lévi-Straussian structuralism has probably never before been applied to early Arabic material to the extent that it is used here. The second purpose of the study, then, is to investigate to what extent and in what mode such a method is applicable to this material.</p><p>A portion of the text, called the “Text of Reference,” has been selected and thoroughly analyzed. In that analysis, a number of structural features such as codes, oppositions, mediations, and transformations have been identified and made the basis for a more cursory study of the rest of the story. An important structural feature that is detected in this way is the way the argument of the story is forwarded. By the transformation of metaphors into metonyms, the story attempts to make arbitrary relationships look natural and intrinsic. Such a relationship is that between water and blood—two liquids which are at times shed, at times withheld in the story. Husayn takes a mediating position in that he <i>gives</i> his water and his blood. He acts as mediator both in a negative sense (he establishes the basic Islamic opposition of good and evil), and in a positive sense (as religious guide he acts as a bridge between them).</p>

The present study has a twofold purpose: Firstly, it is an analysis of the Karbalā´ Drama—i.e. the death of Ḥusayn b. `Alī in the hands of an army which had been sent out by the Umayyad authorities, at Karbalā´ in 60/680—as it is retold by the Muslim jurist and historiographer Abū Ja`far Muḥammad b. Jarīr al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923). Despite its importance, especially to Shī`ite Islam, this text as such has received relatively little attention among scholars of Islam. In this study, the Karbalā´ Drama is regarded as a myth and the method used to analyze it is inspired by the structuralism of Claude Lévi-Strauss. Lévi-Straussian structuralism has probably never before been applied to early Arabic material to the extent that it is used here. The second purpose of the study, then, is to investigate to what extent and in what mode such a method is applicable to this material. A portion of the text, called the “Text of Reference,” has been selected and thoroughly analyzed. In that analysis, a number of structural features such as codes, oppositions, mediations, and transformations have been identified and made the basis for a more cursory study of the rest of the story. An important structural feature that is detected in this way is the way the argument of the story is forwarded. By the transformation of metaphors into metonyms, the story attempts to make arbitrary relationships look natural and intrinsic. Such a relationship is that between water and blood—two liquids which are at times shed, at times withheld in the story. Husayn takes a mediating position in that he gives his water and his blood. He acts as mediator both in a negative sense (he establishes the basic Islamic opposition of good and evil), and in a positive sense (as religious guide he acts as a bridge between them).

No description available.