click links in text for more info

Oral law

An oral law is a code of conduct in use in a given culture, religion or community application, by which a body of rules of human behaviour is transmitted by oral tradition and respected, or the single rule, orally transmitted. Many cultures have an oral law, while most contemporary legal systems have a formal written organisation; the oral tradition is the typical instrument of transmission of the oral codes or, in a more general sense, is the complex of what a culture transmits of itself among the generations, "from father to son". This kind of transmission can be due to lack of other means, such as in illiterate or criminal societies, or can be expressly required by the same law. There has been a continuous debate over oral versus written transmission, with the focus on the perceived higher reliability of written evidence based on the "linear world of academia" where only written down records are accepted. However, "standard" theories of orality and literacy have been proposed. From a legal point of view, an oral law can be: a habit, or custom with legal relevance or when the formal law expressly refers to it.

An oral law, intended as a body of rules, can be admitted in jurisprudence as long as it shows some efficacy, therefore it needs that the law is public, the human action is evaluated by a judge and a punishment has to be put into effect. Some oral laws provide all these elements, while others miss some of them. Rabbinic Judaism maintains that the books of the Tanakh were transmitted in parallel with an oral tradition, as relayed by God to Moses and from him handed on to the scholarly and other religious leaders of each generation. Thus, in Judaism, the "Written Instruction" comprises the rest of the Tanakh; the interpretation of the Oral Torah is thus considered as the authoritative reading of the Written Torah. Further, Halakha is based on a written instruction together with an oral instruction. Jewish law and tradition is thus not based on a literal reading of the Tanakh, but on the combined oral and written tradition. Common law Uncodified constitution Customary law Jurisprudence Revelation Finnegan, Ruth H.

A Note on Oral Tradition and Historical Evidence, in History and Theory 10, 195–201. Goody, J. & Watt,I.? in J. Goody, Literacy in Traditional Societies Story of the Jewish People - The Jewish Law Vansina, J. Oral Tradition:A Study in Historical Methodology Vansina, J. Oral Tradition as History Finnegan, Ruth H. Oral Poetry: Its Nature and Social Context Henige, D. P; the Chronology of Oral Tradition: Quest for a Chimera Henige, D. P. Oral Historiography Tonkin, Narrating our Pasts: The Social Construction of Oral History

Crowfield Historic District

The Crowfield Historic District is a small residential historic district in North Kingstown, Rhode Island. It encompasses a cluster of four early 20th-century summer houses, all connected via family or friendship connections to the writer Owen Wister; the occupy a large parcel of land sloping down to the shore of Narragansett Bay on the east side of Boston Neck Road, a short way north of the Jamestown Verrazzano Bridge. The area was named "Crowfield" by Elizabeth Middleton Cope, who built a Shingle-style mansion in 1906. Owen Wister, her uncle, built Champ de Corbeau, in 1909-10 to a design by Grant Lafarge; the Jamieson House was built in 1906, was designed by the same architect, James P. Jamieson; the fourth house, Orchard House, was built in 1924. All are Shingle style houses; the compound is unusual for North Kingstown, where most summer estates were isolated individual properties. The district was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1985. National Register of Historic Places listings in Washington County, Rhode Island

Kids From Shaolin

Kids from Shaolin known as Shaolin Temple 2: Kids from Shaolin, is a 1984 Hong Kong–Chinese kung fu comedy film directed by Chang Hsin-yen. It stars Jet Li, Yu Chenghui, Yu Hai and Ding Lan from the original 1982 Shaolin Temple film, directed by Chang. However, the plot has no bearing with the first movie and hence Kids from Shaolin is a sequel to the original in name only. In the late Ming Dynasty, former Shaolin monk and his younger brother, raise eight orphan boys whom they saved from murdering bandits ravaging their home village; the children refer to Tianlong as their father and Yilong as their uncle and are taught Shaolin kungfu by the two. All have taken the last character name of Long, they settle at the mountainous area at Lijiang. The Long boys are playful and bicker and fight with the daughters of the Bao family who live just across the river and practice Wudangquan; the mischievous Sanlong, the oldest of the Long children, likes to tease the third sister of the Bao family, Sanfeng, a tomboy in her late teens and who has a nasty temper.

The Bao patriarch Bao Sanfeng is trying for a boy heir. Meanwhile, the Long family are saving up in order to pay the bride price - ten oxen - so that Tianlong can marry the eldest Bao girl, Taifeng; the marriage plans are met with some resistance: the Bao matriarch likes Tianlong, but Bao Sanfeng believes he is out to steal his Wudang martial arts. Nonetheless, he agrees to marry off his eldest daughter. Meanwhile, the vicious bandits who orphaned the eight Long boys have been training in secret for ten years to revenge the Shaolin counter-attack which injured them when they looted the village. A cross-eyed member of the bandits poses as a Taoist soothsayer to infiltrate the Baos to learn their martial arts and abduct their daughters; the Bao matriarch manages to bear a male son. The bogus priest now dupes Bao Sanfeng into believing; the Long family, he claims, has been throwing off the yin and yang balance for the Bao, making it impossible for the wife to bear a male heir. Bao Safeng refuses to accept the Long family's bride price.

Yilong is in love with Yifeng, the second daughter, to fulfill the couple and Sanfeng help the two elope. For their disobedience against feudal rules and Sanlong are sentenced to be drowned, but the two manage to escape underwater. Sanlong hides Sanfeng in a cave. Sanlong is struck by Sanfeng's beauty in female clothes and Sanfeng is grateful to Sanlong for rescuing her; the two develop romantic feelings for each other. The bogus priest informs Bao Sanfeng where his daughter is hiding and Bao Sanfeng pursues her fights Sanfeng in the cave, accusing the latter of abducting his daughter and stealing his swordplay style. Tianlong breaks them up and allows Bao Sanfeng to bring Sanfeng home. Meanwhile, the Long boys are maligned by the bogus priest for abducting the Bao newborn; the Long family vow never to step into the Bao residence again. Once their evil plot has become successful, the bandits burn down the Long's hut and show their true colors to Bao Sanfeng, they attempt to kidnap his daughters.

The Bao family tries to fight them until the Long family arrives. By combining their martial arts expertise, the two families roundly defeat and kill all remaining bandits; the film ends with a dual marriage: Tianlong marries Taifeng while Yilong marries Yifeng. The families are reconciled. Bao Sanfeng admits his folly and Sanlong and Sanfeng have become a couple. Kids From Shaolin at Hong Kong Cinemagic Kids From Shaolin on IMDb Kids From Shaolin at Rotten Tomatoes Kids From Shaolin at AllMovie

List of European stadiums by capacity

This is a list of the largest European stadiums. Stadiums with a capacity of 25,000 or more are included; the list includes stadiums in Europe and in countries that take part in European sporting competitions. They are ordered by their audience capacity; the capacity figures are for each stadium's permanent total capacity, including seating and any official standing areas. The capacity does include movable seating - used by multi-purpose stadiums to convert the stadium for different sports, retractable seating for safe standing, but excludes any temporary seating or standing, such as for concerts. Stadiums are sorted in the list based on the largest of these capacities. Notes: indicates retractable seating deployed, indicates retractable seating not deployed indicates movable seating deployed indicates capacity with temporary seats to be removed An asterisk - * - indicates that a team does not play all of its home matches at that venue; the "Category" column indicates whether the stadium has been designated by UEFA as capable of hosting Champions League or Europa League matches.

The following is a list of European stadiums which are under construction and will have a capacity of 25,000 or more. List of African stadiums by capacity List of Asian stadiums by capacity List of North American stadiums by capacity List of Oceanian stadiums by capacity List of South American stadiums by capacity List of stadiums in Europe List of association football stadiums by capacity List of closed stadiums by capacity List of indoor arenas in Europe List of future stadiums List of stadiums by capacity UEFA stadium categories Notes: References

Original order

Original order is a concept in archival theory that a group of records should be maintained in the same order as they were placed by the record's creator. Along with provenance, original order is a core tenet of the archival concept of respect des fonds. A primary goal of keeping records in their original original order is to preserve additional contextual information about the records' creator and the environment of their creation. Original order encourages the archivist to remain neutral as opposed to applying any interpretation to the records; the Society of American Archivists Glossary of Archival and Records Terminology calls original order a "fundamental principle of archives" and posits two primary purposes: preserving "relationships and evidential significance" of records and facilitating use of the records by maintaining "the record creator's mechanisms to access". The SAA definition qualifies that original order is not the order of the records upon their delivery to an archive. If the records are received without any discernible organization system original order may need to be created by the archivist.

The order in which records were created may provide some important information about the intention of the records' creator. Original order helps to keep the context of records intact, some records depend on their original context to tell their whole story. Researchers may use this context to better understand the records' relationship to each other, their creator, or the manner in which they were maintained, used, or transmitted prior to being received by the archives. Another benefit of maintaining original order is that it reduces the amount of time that archivists must spend processing and arranging new records as they are received into a collection. Instead of creating a new organizational system, developing new metadata, or writing new descriptions, archivists can use systems and descriptions developed by the creator, as outlined in the seminal article "More Product, Less Process". Original order is related to, but not the same as, which refers to the origin of a record's creation or ownership.

In addition to being kept in their original order, best practice dictates that records should be grouped together according to their provenance. Max Lehmann is credited as the first archivist to write about the principle of original order, when he developed guidelines for the Prussian Privy State Archives in 1881. Original order, or the Provenienzprincip, represented the easiest way for the Prussian archivists to maintain the complicated registry systems of the State Archives. Prior to this, many archives had organized their records according to format, content, or chronology. Many developed chronological registers a sequential list of records that grew as they were added to the archive; this made it difficult for archivists to process and describe records in large collections or when they were faced with arranging undated documents. The first noteworthy articulation of the practice of original order was presented in the Manual for the Arrangement and Description of Archives in 1898, where, in the chapter on the arrangement of archival documents, point #16 states: "The system of arrangement must be based on the original organization of the archival collection, which in the main corresponds to the organization of the administrative body that produced it."

These principles were not meant to apply to personal papers, as the Dutch Manual did not consider an individual's collection of personal papers to constitute an archive. In the first English-language manual for archive administration, published in 1937, Sir Hillary Jenkinson argued that only "documents which formed part of an official transaction and were preserved for official reference’ qualified as archives." Many, though not all, contemporary archivists, have changed their thinking and view personal papers as archives deserving of the same treatment as government or organizational records. Many archivists have provided critiques to the principle of original order. T. R. Schellenberg argued that the principle emerged from countries with a registry system of archival custodianship, in which registrars played an important role as intermediary between the agency or institution creating records and the archive that acquired and preserved them; the imposition of order by these registrars ensured records were logically and organized prior to their delivery to the archive.

By the 1960s, this registrar function no longer existed and records were instead delivered to an archive absent any coherent or comprehensible system of organization. Schellenberg argued that, "Normally should try to understand the system of arrangement, imposed on the records rather than to impose one of his preference, but he should have no compunction about rearranging series in relation to each other or single record items within them if by so doing he can make the records more intelligible and more serviceable." Frank Boles noted that adhering to original order means prioritizing the creators' arrangement of records over a system that best suits future users and researchers, this may at times limit the ability of researchers to access records. Other critics have pointed out that the restoration of a presumed original order can risk erasing evidence of the management of a group of records after their original creation and organization; the malleable nature of large organizations, in which grou

Grind (musical)

Grind is a musical with a book by Fay Kanin, music by Larry Grossman, lyrics by Ellen Fitzhugh. Grind is a portrait of a African-American burlesque house in Chicago in the Thirties. Reviews of the production were mixed at best. In his The New York Times review, Frank Rich wrote: "...the show has become a desperate barrage of arbitrary musical numbers, portentous staging devices, extravagant costumes... confused plot twists and sociological bromides..."Grind closed after a run of more than two months, losing its entire $4.75 million investment. It was one of a string of six Broadway flops directed by Hal Prince in the 1980s, Prince and three other members of the creative team were suspended by the Dramatists Guild for signing a "substandard contract." In a Broadway season described by theater historian Ken Mandelbaum as "dismal" for new musicals, Grind was nominated for seven Tony Awards, including Best Musical. The Prologue The singers, dancers and strippers who make up the ensemble of Harry Earle's Burlesque take the stage and welcome the audience.

The year is 1933 and the city is Chicago. We are introduced to the white characters: the owner of the venue. We are introduced to the black characters: LEROY, the lead black comedian. Act One Backstage, the color lines are harshly drawn: The white performers congregate in one dressing room, while the black performers congregate in another. Black and white performers do not perform together onstage during the various acts, as dictated by the local authorities. Leroy, a known playboy who has had affairs with many of the black chorus girls, flirts with Satin and orders ribs for the women. Harry interviews LINETTE, applying to become one of the black chorus girls. In a private moment, Gus confesses to Solly. Solly assures that Gus. Onstage, Gus performs a hospital sketch with Satin and an actor referred to as The Stooge; the sketch goes awry when Gus accidentally sticks The Stooge with a prop needle, which causes the actor to quit the show. Gus tries to brush off the incident, but Harry is quick to point out that this is the third “Stooge” to quit in two weeks.

Satin goes onstage to perform a strip routine. Gus, unable to find a replacement sketch partner, enters the alley outside the venue so he can think. In a moment of desperation, he enlists one of the many homeless men who reside in the alley. Doyle is drunk and doesn't speak. Inside the venue, Harry speaks with a neighborhood cop. Dix is assured that none of the performers are violating color lines and is invited to take a look around to ensure this fact. Gus introduces Doyle to Harry. Gus tells Doyle to wait for him in his dressing room. Doyle and unfamiliar with the venue, walks upstairs to the black dressing room. Leroy arrives with ribs and continues to flirt with Satin, unsettled by the appearance of Dix. Leroy assures her and the black chorus girls that everything will be fine; when he goes upstairs to the black dressing room, Leroy is surprised to find Doyle waiting. He leads the stranger downstairs to the white dressing room and offers him a bottle of whiskey, which Doyle eagerly accepts. Gus and Romaine try to sober Doyle up in time for his first performance.

In the alley, Satin meets with her kid brother, GROVER. Satin has been giving Grover money she's earned to help their mother, MRS. OVETHA FAYE. Mrs. Faye, who appears in the alley, makes it clear that she does not want her daughter's money, as it has been earned working at the burlesque venue. Mrs. Faye exits with Grover. Leroy tries to comfort her, she reveals her true name and insists that the woman Leroy sees onstage every night is not the woman he'd be bringing home. When she settles down, it will be with the kind of man “they don’t make anymore” (“All Things To One Man”. Leroy, taken aback by her display of emotion, makes a joke before heading onstage. During his routine, Leroy despairs over his inability to be serious. Gus and Doyle, having managed to squeak through their first performance, exit into the alley; when Gus tries to worm his way out of paying Doyle, the latter lashes out. Gus begs Doyle to return the next day. Doyle, left alone, begins to sing to son, he secretly longs to die. Satin asks if he's okay, to which Doyle replies, “I could tell you I’m feelin’ no pain, ma’am - but I'd be lyin’.”

The next morning, the performers enter as Gus waits for Doyle’s arrival. The company sings, with the performers complaining and Maybelle encouraging them to do their best. We see Satin discussing a bike with Leroy over the phone. Gus is delighted to find a newly shaven, cleanly dressed Doyle waiting in the dressing room. Leroy enters with a new bike; when it's revealed that Leroy doesn't know how to ride a bike, Doyle offers to ride it to Grover's home. Leroy and Satin mock Mrs. Faye. At Mrs. Faye's home and Leroy