• Digital Humanities and Cultural Heritage
• Swiss National Science Foundation close
• Digital Humanities and Cultural Her... close

AbstractPassion episodes such as the Buffeting are known for the powerful acts of compassion they occasioned within audiences through their performance of violence on the person of Jesus. Few critics, however, have considered that these episodes depend on antisemitic, Islamophobic, and anti-Black depictions of antagonists when engendering such emotional dispositions. By investigating the dynamics of mockery through a deeper look into the composite identities of Jesus’s antagonists, this study reveals that these plays and the communities that produced them rely on a disingenuous stance of victimhood for their effectiveness. This ‘victim play’—the collaborative community effort to claim the status of victim while simultaneously participating in the victimization of others—obscures that those who are attributed cruel acts of mockery are actually its targets. The powerful rhetorical strategies of the premodern English episodes are thus unearthed in this study.

Materials retrieved in the 1978-1979 campaigns at the site of Cova del Toll were given to Prof. Maria Hopf for analysis. Since no full quantification was provided and no report was available, the material was recently revised by Ferran Antolín. From the recovered remains, it seems that some sediment from different layers excavated was dry-sieved and some larger grains were sorted out. Most of the recovered material dates to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC. 22 samples were analysed from 7 different squares -arbitrary division of the excavated surface- (N34-35, K17, M43, B107-D104, B107-E104, D104, E104, D104-E104) separated int 11 layers/sublayers (C1, C1b, C1d, C2, C3, C3b, C3c, C4, C5, C5b, C5d). Layers C1, C1b i C1d belong to the Bronze Age, Layer C2 is connected to a Bell Beaker phase and the rest (C3 and C5) are considered Postcardial Neolithic dated to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC.

Opposing the treaties signed after the Paris Peace Conference, the Soviet state and the nascent Turkish Republic saw themselves as potential allies. The Treaties of Moscow and Kars in 1921 were the legal expressions of this. Among other things, both signatory powers agreed that a bilateral commission would demarcate their newly established mutual border in the South Caucasus. This article provides insights into the daily work of the Joint Turkish-Soviet Border Commission that met, after repeated delays, from March 1925 to September 1926. Based on the minutes of this commission stored in the National Archive of Armenia, it explores the following questions: Who were its members? What was its daily business? What sort of challenges occurred and how were they dealt with? This allows us to place this commission in context. Even though the Commission members stuck publicly to the terms of friendship and cooperation, they had conflicting geopolitical interests. Potential conflicts were deliberately silenced. Furthermore, regional representatives from the Transcaucasian Federation (on the Soviet side) or from the Kurdish minority (on the Turkish side) were marginalised in the decision-making processes. After one and a half years, the Commission was able to demarcate the bilateral border. From this perspective, its work was a success. The boundaries established in 1925/26 still exist today, separating Turkey from the three South Caucasian republics.

Several sediment samples from one pit (underneath a burial layer) dated around 4200-4000 BC and excavated in 1993 have been analysed. Vicente López carried out the on-site sampling and treated the samples by flotation (minimum mesh size of 0,25mm). In 2015, additional samples (14 litres of sediment in total) kept at the Museum of Vilafranca del Penedès (Vinseum) were also processed by flotation and wash-over by Raul Soteras, Hector Martínez and Aitor Labajo. The archaeobotanical analysis was performed by Ferran Antolín.

Several sediment samples from one pit (underneath a burial layer) dated around 4200-4000 BC and excavated in 1993 have been analysed. Vicente López carried out the on-site sampling and treated the samples by flotation (minimum mesh size of 0,25mm). In 2015, additional samples (14 litres of sediment in total) kept at the Museum of Vilafranca del Penedès (Vinseum) were also processed by flotation and wash-over by Raul Soteras, Hector Martínez and Aitor Labajo. The archaeobotanical analysis was performed by Ferran Antolín.

Nature is an amorphous concept. Yet, it is essential for the planet's well-being to understand how the economy interacts with it. To address the growing demand for information on corporate nature disclosure, we provide datasets and classifiers to detect nature communication by companies. We ground our approach in the guidelines of the Taskforce on Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD). Particularly, we focus on the specific dimensions of water, forest, and biodiversity. For each dimension, we create an expert-annotated dataset with 2,200 text samples and train classifier models. Furthermore, we show that nature communication is more prevalent in hotspot areas and directly effected industries like agriculture and utilities. Our approach is the first to respond to calls to assess corporate nature communication on a large scale.

Several sediment samples from one pit (underneath a burial layer) dated around 4200-4000 BC and excavated in 1993 have been analysed. Vicente López carried out the on-site sampling and treated the samples by flotation (minimum mesh size of 0,25mm). In 2015, additional samples (14 litres of sediment in total) kept at the Museum of Vilafranca del Penedès (Vinseum) were also processed by flotation and wash-over by Raul Soteras, Hector Martínez and Aitor Labajo. The archaeobotanical analysis was performed by Ferran Antolín.

Materials retrieved in the 1978-1979 campaigns at the site of Cova del Toll were given to Prof. Maria Hopf for analysis. Since no full quantification was provided and no report was available, the material was recently revised by Ferran Antolín. From the recovered remains, it seems that some sediment from different layers excavated was dry-sieved and some larger grains were sorted out. Most of the recovered material dates to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC. 22 samples were analysed from 7 different squares -arbitrary division of the excavated surface- (N34-35, K17, M43, B107-D104, B107-E104, D104, E104, D104-E104) separated int 11 layers/sublayers (C1, C1b, C1d, C2, C3, C3b, C3c, C4, C5, C5b, C5d). Layers C1, C1b i C1d belong to the Bronze Age, Layer C2 is connected to a Bell Beaker phase and the rest (C3 and C5) are considered Postcardial Neolithic dated to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC.

Materials retrieved in the 1978-1979 campaigns at the site of Cova del Toll were given to Prof. Maria Hopf for analysis. Since no full quantification was provided and no report was available, the material was recently revised by Ferran Antolín. From the recovered remains, it seems that some sediment from different layers excavated was dry-sieved and some larger grains were sorted out. Most of the recovered material dates to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC. 22 samples were analysed from 7 different squares -arbitrary division of the excavated surface- (N34-35, K17, M43, B107-D104, B107-E104, D104, E104, D104-E104) separated int 11 layers/sublayers (C1, C1b, C1d, C2, C3, C3b, C3c, C4, C5, C5b, C5d). Layers C1, C1b i C1d belong to the Bronze Age, Layer C2 is connected to a Bell Beaker phase and the rest (C3 and C5) are considered Postcardial Neolithic dated to the second half of the 5th millennium cal BC.