Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Libelli famosi »

This research examines the surviving plea roll from Sir Henry Morgan’s 1685 libel action against London publisher Thomas Malthus, presenting what it reveals about the substance of the complaint in the context of contemporary English libel law and Morgan-related sources. Malthus and rival printer William Crooke had produced competing English translations of buccaneer Alexandre Exquemelin’s memoir of Morgan-led operations against the Spanish, which included passages Morgan objected to through his attorney. The document (in the UK National Archives) summarizes the form and resolution of the lawsuit in the Court of King’s Bench against Malthus, and offers insight into what Morgan’s attorney considered libellous; these points probably echo Morgan’s concerns about the edition printed by Crooke, who settled out of court. Though the truth of Exquemelin’s contested statements was never tested in court, the episode can be seen as marking the first step in an ongoing critical appraisal of the buccaneer-turned-author’s veracity.

Abstract Prima del 1960, anno in cui apparve il più famoso articolo di Coase, «Il problema del costo sociale», i giuristi avevano grandi difficoltà nell’analizzare, valutare e confrontare regole giuridiche alternative. Ne derivava che essi dovevano ricorrere di frequente a valutazioni soggettive, di natura morale ed etica. Gli economisti, dal canto loro, non avevano percepito le opportunità di ricerca di natura economica presentate dal sistema giuridico.Nel suo articolo, Coase affermò che se gli individui fossero liberi di contrattare e i costi di transazione fossero nulli, non avrebbe importanza, nella determinazione dell’efficienza del risultato, l’appartenenza all’una o all’altra parte del diritto di proprietà. Poiché, tuttavia, nella realtà i costi di transazione sono rilevanti, il «teorema di Coase» ha portato ad affermare che una norma giuridica dovrebbe essere cambiata qualora il suo mutamento riducesse al minimo i costi di transazione.

According to Aediluulf's poem De abbatibus, written in the early ninth century, the Irish priest Ultán was ‘a man called by a famous name’ (preclaro nomine dictus), who ‘could ornament books with fair marking’ (comptis qui potuit notis ornare libellos). Active during the first half of the eighth century in Aediluulf's otherwise unknown monastery located most probably in the area of what is today southern Scotland or northern England, Ultán has also won growing renown in modern art-historical writing, on the basis of Aediluulf's text, our only source for his life and work. Several of the older general reference works for artists include his name, Thieme-Becker terming him ‘Kalligraph und Miniator’, Bénézit ‘enlumineur et calligraphe’ and Bradley more cautiously ‘calligrapher’ while repeating the statement of the sixteenth-century antiquary John Leland, that Ultán was scriptor et pictor librorum optimus. In other words, these early sources agree in making Ultán not only a scribe but also a painter or illuminator.

Abstract The text deals with the genre ‘pasquill’ from the 16th to the 18th century in the German speaking world. Two strands of tradition can be ideally distinguished, which only gradually merge with each other. Originally, as in other regions of Europe, the Roman figure of the shoemaker Pasquino is adapted, who comments on actual politics or famous persons in mocking, more or less literary dialogues. This figure appears in printed works from the middle of the 16th century, mostly written by Protestants. At about the same time, the term ‘pasquill’ began to become synonymous with the mostly handwritten, anonymous libel, which is now increasingly criminalized by the authorities. The article characterises the early modern pasquill as a very special medium of communication, which served not only for personal defamation but also for objective criticism.

John Dunstaple's reputation as the most famous English composer of the Middle Ages has stood almost unchallenged since his death. Two epitaphs attributed to one of his patrons, John Wheathamstead, Abbot of St Albans between 1420–40 and 1452–64, give him equal credit as a mathematician and astronomer (or rather, astrologer). Dunstaple was evidently proficient in the quadrivial arts of music, astronomy and mathematics (arithmetic and geometry), but only his musical activities have been thoroughly explored. At least two books that were in his library may provide hints about the level of his attainment in mathematics and astronomy. One is a fascicle within another volume that carries the often quoted ‘Iste libellus pertinebat Johanni Dunstaple cum duci Bedfordie musico’. The other and more extensive of the two manuscripts, Cambridge, Emmanuel College, MS 70, contains treatises on astronomy and astrology by standard authors in various hands. Some of these have what must be a scribal signature (often in the form ‘deo gratias quod Dunstaple’), apparently signalling his own hand for those treatises. If this is indeed the case, we have dozens of folios of closely written Dunstaple autograph and several signatures. His copy of the older astrological treatise by Bartholomew of Parma is copiously illustrated by excellent line-drawings of zodiacal signs and constellations. If these drawings are also in his hand (and they are harmonious with the surrounding script), we must add fine draughtsmanship to his known accomplishments.

The earliest maps entirely or at least partially dedicated to Muscovy appeared in Europe in 1520s as a result of an increasing interest in this land. Around this time a famous Italian humanist Paolo Giovio promised in his book «Libellus de legatione Basilii magni Principis Moscouiae ad Clementem. VII. Pont. Max.» to reproduce a map of Muscovy in print (in tabula typis excusa). But the map didn’t appear either in the first nor in succeeding editions of the Giovio’s book.Nevertheless, the map was discovered even in two versions. The first was found in manuscript atlas made in the first half of the 16th century in Venice by cartographer from Genoa Battista Agnese. The second one is a printed map prepared, as it seems, by Paolo Giovio for his book but for some reasons not added to it. Both maps have much in common, as a kind of introduction to them serves almost the same inscription: «Moscoviae tabula relatione Dimetrij legati descrypta sicuti ipse a pluribus accepit, cum totam prouinciam minime peragrasse fateatur anno M.D.XXV. octobris».After examining the two earliest maps of Muscovy I can support the opinion already expressed in historiography that for their resemblance they might be the variants of the same map. Nevertheless, there are some important and obvious differences in location of geographical objects and their names, which are difficult to account for in case the one map is a reproduction of the other.The fact that the first two European maps of Muscovy appeared in autumn 1525 coinciding with publication of three books about this country written by Paolo Giovio, Albertus Campensis and Johann Fabri is indicative of a great and intense attention which Europe payed to Muscovy in its oriental boundaries around this time. These maps complement the descriptions of Muscovy in above mentioned books by giving detailed and visual representation of Muscovy land as a complicated geographical object. We must acknowledge their authors – in spite of a great number of mistakes – were able to cope with this task.

El presente artículo versa sobre el origen de la represión de la difamación escrita en Derecho romano. Partiendo de un breve esbozo sobre la regulación en la Ley de las XII Tablas del malum carmen y de la iniuria y su posterior desarrollo a través de los edictos especiales emanados por el pretor, las reflexiones se centran en el surgimiento, difusión y represión de la escritura difamatoria, carmen aut libelli famosi, en la época de la República tardía

The Well of Loneliness, Radclyffe Hall’s most famous and most discussed novel, is considered one of the pillars of lesbian literature and historiography. In the same year of its publication, 1928, it undergoes a trial in England for obscenity because it was considered an “obscene libel” and was immediately censored as the first novel to deal openly with desire between women. The Well of Loneliness is an emblematic text and its story is exemplary for the understanding of that attempt to remove lesbianism in a patriarchal and heteronormative society. The aim is to draw a general picture of the construction of lesbian identity and its (in)visibility in the public space in the first half of the twentieth century, in particular between the twenties and thirties, trying to analyze the cultural, social and medico-legal framework in which Radclyffe Hall, Lesbian Identity and The Well of Loneliness are inserted.

The word 'nigger' is arguably the most charged epithet in American English; thus it is surprising that this word has been appropriated by some African Americans to refer to themselves. To be precise, the African-American version of this term is not 'nigger' but 'nigga', a word that has, as Geneva Smitherman notes, "a variety of meanings ranging from positive to negative to neutral" (Black Talk 167). Henry Louis Gates, Jr., in his study of African-American literature, provides a theoretical foundation for understanding why some African Americans use this word and how it operates rhetorically. Building on Gates's work, I will argue that the co-optation of the slur often involves a complex of three rhetorical devices that fall under the rubric of an African-American rhetorical strategy called Signifyin(g)—a term that will be discussed at length later. The first of these devices is agnominatio, defined as "the repetition of a word with an alteration of both one letter and a sound" (Gates 46). The second, semantic inversion, is the reversal of the meaning of a term (Holt qtd. in Smitherman, "Chain"). Chiastic slaying, the third rhetorical strategy, is a critique that transforms the status of a group or individual.1 Through these three modes of rhetorical transfiguration, the slur 'nigger' becomes 'nigga' a positive term that carries with it a critique of racism. I will further argue that all of these rhetorical devices operate through a principle I term "semantic looping" in which a new term derives meaning by continual reference to an older, existing term. This principle is a key to understanding how Signifyin(g) works in the appropriation of 'nigger' and helps to reveal how, in the words of Michel Foucault, the appropriation is a culturally rooted form of "reverse discourse" (101). Ultimately, this rhetorical analysis reveals that the African-American usage of 'nigga' is a strategy for asserting the humanity of black people in the face of continuing racism, a strategy that celebrates an anti-assimilationist vision of African-American identity. Foucault has argued that while the naming of oppressed groups by those in power serves as an instrument for oppression, such naming can also engender group identification and resistance to oppression (101). The coining of the word 'homosexual', for example, allowed for the repression of gay people but also allowed homosexuals to organise a gay rights movement using the very terminology utilized to oppress them (Foucault 101). One strategy for resisting hostile slurs like 'queer' or 'nigger' is for the oppressed group to appropriate the name and transform it into a rallying cry or "reverse discourse". An understanding of how 'nigga' operates as a reverse discourse requires a culturally rooted rhetorical analysis of the term. Gates, in The Signifyin(g) Monkey, provides background for such an analysis. Because his project is ultimately to derive an African-American theory of literary criticism, he touches on the appropriation of 'nigger' only briefly, asserting that a "political offensive" was mounted against the term by African-Americans through a black rhetorical strategy called Signifyin(g) (47). Gates, however, does not explain precisely how Signifyin(g) works in this case, except to suggest that it involves agnominatio (46). Thus 'nigger' becomes 'nigga', a word that differs from the racial slur but originates from and recalls it.2 Although Gates's commentary on the appropriation of 'nigger' amounts to little more than a sentence, much of his explication of the term Signifyin(g) implicitly applies to the co-optation of 'nigger'. The rhetorical analysis presented in this paper is a logical extension of Gates's initial linkage of the appropriation of 'nigger' with the rhetorical practice of Signifyin(g). The social baggage attached to 'nigga' assures that every use of the term is double-voiced in the Bakhtinian sense. More precisely, 'nigga' is a Bakhtinian parody of 'nigger'; the new connotation parodies or comments on the original because the new term carries with it the history of its pejorative use as well as the refashioned connotation of defiant group pride.3 This kind of rhetorical turn or critique is an example of the African-American rhetorical practice Gates identifies as Signifyin(g). Pinning down exactly what constitutes Signifyin(g) is difficult. Numerous black language scholars have commented on the expansiveness of the term.4 Gates argues that in its broadest sense, to Signify means to be "figurative," further noting that "to define it in practice is to define it through any number of its embedded tropes" (81).5 For our purposes it can be described as a rhetorical action that indirectly critiques another term or sign by revising it. Gates explains that, fundamentally, this revision and critique involve "repetition, with a signal difference" (51). Gates distinguishes the African-American term, 'Signifyin(g)', from the word 'signifying' by capitalizing the 'S' and bracketing the 'g' (46). It is helpful to think of the former term as 'Signifyin(g) on' (or critiquing) something whereas the latter word 'signifies' (or means) something but does not inherently involve a critique. Thus, to parody the motions of a police officer behind his or her back 'Signifies on' the officer and 'signifies' one's disrespect.6 Signifyin(g) is inherently a counter-puncher's strategy, an act of resistance against an oppressive force. Gates even goes so far as to call it the "slave's trope" (52). In Signifyin(g), the revised term, through its parodic double-voicedness, enters into a semantic loop with the original term; recollection of past oppressive usage must occur to fuel the term's new meaning. Figure 1 - Semantic Loop of Semantic Inversion and Agnominatio This semantic loop recalls what W.E. B. Dubois termed African-American double consciousness, a consciousness that yields him no true self-consciousness, but only lets him see himself through the revelation of the other world. It is a peculiar sensation this double consciousness, this sense of always looking at one's self through the eyes of others, of measuring one's soul by the tape of the world that looks on in amused contempt and pity. (16-17) While 'nigga' recalls how blacks have been measured by the tape of the world, it also defies this estimation through ironic revision of the name. Although Dubois would criticize this pathway through the white term as a road to false consciousness, others might insist that since revision of the white term occurs through distinctly African-American rhetorical strategies, the revision is emblematic of an authentically African-American consciousness—which is a double consciousness. In this view the revision does not attempt to reconcile what DuBois calls the "two unreconciled strivings" of the black person as "an American and a Negro" but instead involves them in an endless interplay (17). The interplay of the two signs sustains an antagonistic stand toward the dominant white community through the polemical comment: "this is how whites see us but we are something more". 'Nigga', then, is "authentically black" speech because it recognizes and maintains the divide between black and white worlds. As Smitherman notes: [e]ncoded within the rhetoric of racial resistance, nigga is used to demarcate (Black) culturally rooted from (white) culturally assimilated African Americans. Niggaz are those Bloods (Blacks) who are down for Blackness and identify with the trials as well as triumphs of the Black experience… ("Chain") The defiance implied by the revision of the white slur is also an assertion of human subjectivity. Gates identifies a parallel strategy in African-American slave narratives. Referring to Frederick Douglass's famous chiasmus—"You have seen how a man became a slave, you will see how a slave became a man."—Gates asserts that "Douglass's major contribution to the slave narrative was to make chiasmus the central trope of slave narration, in which a slave-object writes himself or herself into a human subject through the act of writing" (172). By comparison, through the semantic inversion of 'nigger'/'nigga', dehumanized blacks speak themselves into human subjects through the act of speaking. This transfiguration conforms to what Gates terms "chiastic slaying" (66). His somewhat off-hand phrase is inspired by the African-American use of chiasmus, which is defined as, "a grammatical figure by which the order of words in one of two parallel clauses is inverted in the other" (Oxford English Dictionary qtd. in Grothe). Chiasmus is often represented as an ABBA pattern (so Douglass's chiasmus would be reduced to: (A) man - (B) slave - (B) slave - (A) man). In Gates's usage, chiastic slaying involves repetition and reversal but not necessarily a literal ABBA pattern of chiasmus. In the same vein, 'nigga' is a repetition of 'nigger' that reverses the position of African Americans (from objects to subjects). Analogously, 'nigger to nigga' can be conceived of as the inverted second clause of a chiastic statement like Douglass's 'man - slave - slave - man' in which personhood and agency are re-affirmed. This re-affirmation of humanity implicit in 'nigga' is not likely to be understood by many whites given, as Smitherman notes, that they often fail to recognize the semantic difference between 'nigger' and 'nigga'.7 Since whites are frequently unaware of the Signification of 'nigga', it is impossible for African Americans to kill (i.e. end) the white use of the racist term. In the context of Signification, chiastic slaying does not put an end to the idea Signified upon. In fact, Signification must be activated by what Gates calls the "absent presence" of the original term (48). The critique of racism and assertion of subjectivity implicit in the employment of 'nigga' is not aimed at white people or the elimination of their sign; it is aimed at a black audience that must survive in a continually racist environment. What, then, is the "slaying" of chiastic slaying? It must be seen as a refutation of the original term or sign. In the case of 'nigga', it is a rejection of the dehumanization implied by 'nigger' with the recognition that African Americans will still be continually subjected to this libel despite its refutation. Thus, the chiastic slaying of 'nigger' by 'nigga' requires a continual interplay or semantic loop between the two terms. The context of continuing racism, then, requires 'nigga' to recurrently signify on (i.e. assert the falsity of) the slur. The recurrent Signification can be thought of as a loop inscribed upon the linear chiastic pattern: Figure 2 - Semantic Loop Inscribed on the Chiastic PatternThe context of continuing racism is one factor that accounts for the value of semantic looping in African-American rhetoric. Since the semantic loops of African-American culture draw their strength from the oppression to which they react, they are continually useful. This kind of resistance does not attempt to overcome racism but instead draws African-American attention to it so blacks can survive it. The first step in this survival is to be aware, as DuBois might say, that blacks in America are perceived of as a "problem" (15). The Signification of 'nigga' also "keeps it real", by reminding African Americans of the harsh truth of racism and by continually enacting a refutation of racism through a complex of culturally familiar rhetorical strategies. In this respect, the appropriation of the white slur is, to borrow the words of Foucault, a culturally inspired "reverse discourse" aimed at responding to white oppression. The identification of semantic looping in this case opens up an array of other questions. How does semantic looping function in the appropriation of other epithets by other groups? (A few cases that may be worth investigating in addition to the previously mentioned 'queer', are 'dyke', 'girl'/'grrl' by young feminists and 'anorexia'/'ana' as well as 'bulimia'/'mia' by pro-eating-disorder advocates.) Do the cultural differences of various groups affect how semantic looping operates? What does semantic looping reveal about the struggle over authenticity or identity, especially with respect to gender, class and subculture? And lastly, how do groups respond to re-appropriations by dominant groups? (In particular I am thinking of the increasing use of 'nigga' by white American teenagers.) I hope others will find these questions worth pursuing. Notes 1. While Gates suggests that agnominatio is involved in the co-optation of 'nigger', he does not mention the term 'semantic inversion' at all (although he is obviously aware that Signifyin(g) often involves this rhetorical action). Gates's phrase, chiastic slaying, occurs only in the context of a general discussion of Signifyin(g). See 66 in Gates for his use of chiastic slaying. 2. Other English speakers including Australians and the English may find it difficult to distinguish between these spoken words and 'hear' them both as 'nigguh'. But to those from the United States the distinction is noticeable. 3. Gates identifies Bakhtin's notion of the double voiced word and his concept of narrative parody as relevant to African-American rhetoric. See 50, 110-13 and 131 in Gates. Bakhtin's most comprehensive discussion of double-voiced discourse can be found in 185-186, and 190-99. Bakhtin's distinction between parody and other types of discourse can be found in 193-99. 4. Gates lists the following as providing substantive definitions of Signifyin(g): H. Rap Brown, Roger D. Abrahams, Thomas Kochman, Claudia Mitchell-Kernan, Geneva Smitherman and Ralph Ellison (71). Gates considers Mitchell Kernan's data to be more representative than the others' and even she states that she could not get consensus from her informants regarding Signifyin(g) (Gates 80-81). 5. Gates has identified numerous rhetorical strategies that can be involved in Signifyin(g). See 52 in Gates for a complete list of these tropes. 6. I build on an example from Abrahams who states that "... it is signifying to make fun of a policeman by parodying his motions behind his back..." (52). 7. Smitherman notes that the semantic inversion of 'nigger' (or 'flippin the script' as it is known in the hip-hop world) "... is often misunderstood by European Americans and castigated by some African Americans" (Chain). Smitherman's comment suggests that the ability to discriminate between the two terms (as well as one's comfort level with the usage of 'nigga') is not racially monolithic. Whites who participate in hip-hop culture, for example, are likely to see the distinction between 'nigger' and 'nigga'. Some factors that seem likely to complicate any generalization about understanding and comfort level with 'nigga' are race, affinity for hip-hop, class, age and geographic location. References Abrahams, Roger D. Deep Down in the Jungle: Negro Narrative Folklore from the Streets of Philadelphia. Chicago: Aldine, 1970. Bakhtin, Mikhail. Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics. Ed. and Trans. Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1999. DuBois, W.E. Burghardt. The Souls of Black Folk. Greenwich: Fawcett, 1961. Foucault, Michel. The History of Sexuality: Volume I: An Introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage, 1980. Grothe, Mardy. Chiasmus.com. Online. Internet. 9 Oct. 2001. Available <http://www.chiasmus.com/whatischiasmus.shtml>. Gates, Henry Louis, Jr. The Signifying Monkey: A Theory of African-American Literary Criticism. New York: Oxford U P, 1988. Smitherman, Geneva. "'The Chain Remain the Same'." Journal of Black Studies 28 (1997): n.pag. Online. Academic Search Elite. 10 May 2002. - - -. Black Talk. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1994. Links http://www.chiasmus.com/whatischiasmus.shtml Citation reference for this article MLA Style Jacobs, Andrew T.. "Appropriating a Slur" M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 5.4 (2002). [your date of access] < http://www.media-culture.org.au/mc/0208/semantic.php>. Chicago Style Jacobs, Andrew T., "Appropriating a Slur" M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 5, no. 4 (2002), < http://www.media-culture.org.au/mc/0208/semantic.php> ([your date of access]). APA Style Jacobs, Andrew T.. (2002) Appropriating a Slur. M/C: A Journal of Media and Culture 5(4). < http://www.media-culture.org.au/mc/0208/semantic.php> ([your date of access]).

L'obiettivo della ricerca è di indagare l’evoluzione del fenomeno dei libelli infamanti a Venezia nel corso del Cinquecento; in particolare, ci si focalizza sulle espressioni di infamia indirizzate in forma anonima ai detentori di autorità politica e spirituale, sulle caratteristiche che queste azioni di volta in volta assumevano e sulla reazione da parte delle magistrature. The objective of this research is to investigate the evolution of the phenomenon of infamous libels in Venice during the sixteenth century; the focus is on the expression of anonymous infamies addressed to political and spiritual authorities, on how these changed from time to time and on the consequent reaction of the judiciary.

The law of criminal libel emerged in the Star Chamber in the early years of the seventeenth century. Particularly important to its later development and historiography was Sir Edward Coke’s report of Pickering’s Case, described by him as the case De libellis famosis. The article reassesses the early history of the law of libel, placing it in the context of earlier statutes dealing with sedition. Close analysis of Coke’s report, and the relationship between his original manuscript and the printed version, reveals that the report should be analysed as a literary text in itself, with changes being introduced by Coke in order to produce a particular model of the law.

This chapter focuses on how Paterson became the center of what is probably the most important Anarchist group in the world. Italian anarchists were at the forefront of persistent local labor unrest, including the violent 1902 silk strike and famous 1913 general strike conducted by the Industrial Workers of the World (IWW). More infamously, a Paterson anarchist assassinated Italy's King Umberto I in 1900. However, by 1906, an exasperated Board of Aldermen threatened to bring charges of libel against publications that continued to equate the Silk City with anarchism. The chapter shows how behind the dramatic episodes that embarrassed city officials stood a dynamic radical subculture rooted in Paterson's Italian population and linked to major transnational revolutionary networks.

This personal and frank book offers an insider's view on the violent confrontations in Charlottesville during the “summer of hate.” Blending memoir, courtroom drama, and a consideration of the unhealed wound of racism in our society, the book shines a light on the conflict between the value of free speech and the protection of civil rights. The author has spent his career in the thick of these tempestuous and fraught issues, from acting as lead counsel in a famous Supreme Court decision challenging Virginia's law against burning crosses, to serving as co-counsel in a libel suit brought by a fraternity against Rolling Stone magazine for publishing an article alleging that one of the fraternity's initiation rituals included gang rape. The author has also been active as a university leader, serving as dean of three law schools and president of one and railing against hate speech and sexual assault on US campuses. Well before the tiki torches cast their ominous shadows across the nation, the city of Charlottesville sought to relocate the Unite the Right rally; the author was approached to represent the alt-right groups. Though the author declined, he came to wonder what his history of advocacy had wrought. Feeling unsettlingly complicit, the author joined the Charlottesville Task Force, and realized that the events that transpired there had meaning and resonance far beyond a singular time and place. Why, he wonders, has one of our foundational rights created a land in which such tragic clashes happen all too frequently?

This chapter provides the legal context for these discussions of eighteenth-century freedoms of press and speech and seditious publishing and speaking. The common law crimes of seditious libel and seditious words arose in England to criminalize dissent toward the king or government officials that could not successfully be suppressed as treason. The seventeenth-century crime of seditious libel was created by the Star Chamber’s Case of Libellis Famosis and other cases, and quickly attracted criticism for the Star Chamber’s prosecutions of such dissidents as Dr. Alexander Leighton, William Prynne, Dr. John Bastwick, Rev. Henry Burton, and John Lilburne. After the Revolution of 1688, that and other Star Chamber precedents were adopted by Lord Chief Justice John Holt, and an eighteenth-century framework of unique rules for prosecuting seditious libel was assembled by Holt in a series of cases, and was revised by Lord Chief Justice Mansfield.

This chapter shifts registers to focus on Blackstone's own embarrassment as marking the importance of the Commentaries as a written text, a materialized object that came to symbolize the permanence and reliability of written law. Blackstone's “diffidence,” his deficiencies as an orator, operated as legible affective signs of discomfort with the orally based theatricality of legal practice. Reading Blackstone's expressive body as a text in itself available for scrutiny in the famous libel case Onslow v. Horne (1770) suggests that although Blackstone's “stuttering” affect in Westminster Hall may have seemed to undermine his authority, it instead played a symbolic role in the global dissemination of the print text Commentaries. The inadequacy of his authentic but imperfect performance shifted attention to the perfectible text where Blackstone could perfect his style, if not always his content.

This chapter compares the background, attitudes, values, and practices of French Jewish families who send their children to Jewish day schools with those of other such families who send their children to public (state) schools or non-Jewish private schools. Choice of school plays a pivotal role in the formation and expression of French Jewish identity. The issue of school choice and the struggle of French Jews to preserve their identity must be understood in the context of the long and rich history of the Jews in France. Throughout their many centuries in the country, the Jewish community waxed and waned as its members were subjected to periodic legal restrictions, punitive taxation, violent attacks, attempts at forced conversion, ‘blood libel’ trials, and expulsion orders. Despite all this, the Jewish communities in the region persevered; indeed, some of the most famous Torah scholars of all time came from France.

This chapter uses the stories of three families, the ‘Kallikaks’, the Kennedys and the Fergusons, to narrate the key stages of the history of intellectual disability in the twentieth century. The so-called‘Kallikaks’ were used as part of the vicious eugenic libel against the intellectually disabled population that stoked the cruel mass institutionalization programmes of the early century. This section tells the story of Emma Wolverton, one of those on whose life stories the mythical Kallikaks were based and created to spread fear and drive segregational policy. The story of the famous Kennedy family shows the post-war journey of the intellectually disabled person from a hidden site of shame to the policy reforms of the community return. Finally, the story of the author’s own family shows some of the great post-reform liberating shifts towards a life of choice and inclusion that have taken place, and alerts us to the brooding threats that still lurk.