When Magema M. Fuze published his seminal book Abantu Abamnyama Lapa Bavela Ngakona in 1922, he could not have anticipated that one hundred years later, he would be an iconic writer; a representative of nineteenth-century black letters; a Kholwa intellectual and a remnant of the bygone era of mission stations and mission schools. This chapter will re-visit Magema Fuze’s readers and readings in light of this centenary and re-evaluate the extent to which his contribution to the study of African print cultures has enriched our understanding of the role played by the arrival of the printing press in Southern Africa. His pioneering work of history, ethnography and oral lore will be re-examined from the perspective of his journalistic texts and newspaper columns. The objective will be to show how a century of readers and readings have accrued to create a legacy; and, how such a legacy continues to challenge and be challenged by ever more increasing archiving practices and textual analysis.

This chapter examines the rights situation of religious and ethnic minorities in the Islamic Republic. All state institutions are in some ways responsible for the Islamic Republic’s discriminatory policies. The intelligence and security apparatus intimidate and arrest members of minority groups, and the judiciary usually issues harsh sentences against them. The executive branch also engages in discriminatory action, such as denying higher education and public sector employment to minorities. The parliament, having passed discriminatory laws, does not hold other state organs responsible for extra-legal actions against minorities. Nor has it conducted investigations necessary to determine the extent of discriminatory practices in the country. Courts have reacted to minority cases in diverse ways, often validating discrimination but in some cases also protecting them against rights abuses. If this diversity in court rulings indicates anything, it is that not all courts are completely on the government’s line but retain some modicum of political independence. The bigger picture is, however, that minority cases are often treated as politically sensitive irrespective of the nature of the case and are therefore tried in the revolutionary rather than the general courts.

Was the demythologization of Roman sarcophagus reliefs driven by a burgeoning Christian faith? To put it more succinctly, was myth a casualty of Christianity? This long-standing theory proposes that sarcophagi featuring mythless imagery – seasons, shepherds, philosophers, and hunters – gained in popularity because such imagery was religiously neutral and thus capable of appealing to both traditional “pagan” and new Christian clientele alike, a flexibility that the old mythological sarcophagi did not have. Testing this hypothesis requires that we consider Christian numbers and purchasing power in the city of Rome in the third century, as well as the question of who, exactly, was carving early Christian sarcophagi.