Peripatetik Konsepti Çerçevesinde Gallangıçuşağı Aşireti

Abstract

Peripatetik terimi antropoloji literatüründe mobilite düzeyleri komşu topluluklara göre yüksek, endogamik ve geçimlerini çeşitli zanaat ve hizmetlerin sunumu üzerinden karşılayan grupları tanımlamak için kullanılmaktadır. Bu makalede Malatya’nın Darende ilçesinde yaşayan ve göz doktorluğu ve çerçilik yaparak geçinen Gallangıçuşağı aşiretinin peripatetik olarak sınıflandırılıp sınıflandırılamayacağı söz konusu grupla ilgili yazılı kaynaklarda mevcut bulunan bilgiler üzerinden tartışılmaktadır

Keywords

• Peripatetik gruplar, Darende, Gallangıçuşağı, Ali’nin Uşağı Tekellimi, Hazeyn

Abstract

The term peripatetic in anthropology and sociology literature is used to define endogamic groups whose mobility level is higher than their neighbours and who subsist on providing services and craft productions. In this article, it is discussed that if the Gallangıçuşağı tribe, who lives in Darende district of Malatya and is famous for their mastery on ophthalmology and peddling, can be classified as peripatetic or not over the knowledges concerning the group published in written sources

Keywords

• Peripatetic groups, Darende, Gallangıçuşağı, Ali’nin Uşağı Tekellimi, Hazeyn

References

1. Герц Г. Письмо С.Ерохину от 19.05.2011. 2.Гессерт Дж. История искусства с привлечением ДНК.// Логос. 2006. №4(55)- С. 127-147. 3. Евин И.А. Искусство как сложная самоорганизующаяся система./Автореф. дисс. доктора философских наук: 09.00.04. М., 2009. 4. Ерохин С.В. Цифровое компьютерное искусство. СПб: Алетейя, 2011. Ерохин 5. С.В. Эстетика цифрового изобразительного искусства. СПб.: Алетейя, 2010. 6. Масаока М. Письмо С.Ерохину от 17.05.2011. 7- Фейнберг Е.Л. Две культуры. Интуиция и логика в искусстве и науке. Фрязино: Век 2, 2004. 8. Хэней Л. Письмо С.Ерохину от 31.05.2011.
2. Вакег S. Postmodern Animal. Reaktion Books, 2000.
3. Вгоwег М. Animals at Thee Zoo.// (Hertz’ Internet site) 2007. //URL: http//conceptlab.com/ roachbot/press/2007-ineraccess-zoo-essay-brower.html
4. Chalmers C. American Cockroach. Aperture, 2004.
5. Fraser J., Nelson M.C. Communication in the courtship of the Madagascan hissing cockroach: Normal courtship. Animal Behavior. 1984. Vol. 32. Pp. 194-203.
6. Halloy J. et al. Social Integration of Robots into Groups of Cockroaches to Control Self- Organized Choices. // Sciıence. 2007. Vol. 318. Pp. 1155-1158.
7. Hertz G. Cockroach Controlled Mobile Robot: Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine. Genıeral Conceptual Overview. // [Hertz’ Internet site] // URL: http://www. conceptlab.com/roachbot
8. Hertz G. Ethology of Art and Science Collaborations: Research Ethics Boards in the Context of Contemporary Art Practice. Lecture Notes. // [Hertz’ Internet site] 2002. // URL: http://www. conceptlab.com/ethology/hertz-ethology-notes-v20o8ii24.pdf

9. Hertz G. Posthuman System #1: Cockroach with Wireıless Video. Project Description. // [Hertz’ Internet site] 2003. // URL: http://www.conceptlab.com/cockroach
10. Holzer R., Shimoyama I. Locomotion Control of a Bio-Robotic System via Electric Stimulation. // Proc. of the Interınational Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.1997.
11. Lanier J. A Time Capsule that will survive One Thouısand Years in Manhattan. // [Lanier’ Internet site] 03.05.1999. // URL: http://www.jaronlanier.com/roach.html
12. Lippit A.M. Electric Animal: Toward a Rhetoric of Wildlife. University of Minnesota Press, 2008.
13. Lockwood J.A. Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War. Oxford University Press, 2008.
14. Metz R. When Cockroaches Seize Controls. // URL: http://www.wired.com/science/ discoveries/ news/2005/07/68oi5
15. Nelson M.C., Fraser J.M. Sound production in the cockıroach, Gromphadorhina portentosa: Evidence for communiıcation by hissing. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 1980. Vol. 6. Pp. 305-314.