The Dyos Prize has been awarded annually since 1992 for the best article submitted to the Urban History Journal in each calendar year. The articles are judged by the journal editors and two independent adjudicators. The prize is named after H.J. Dyos (1921–78) to commemorate his innovative contribution to the development of the field of urban history. To reflect the catholicity and interdisciplinarity which Dyos encouraged, no temporal, geographical or thematic restrictions exist, except that the paper must make a significant contribution to the study of urban history. The prize consists of a cash sum and the publication of the paper in Urban History.

This article presents an analysis of two constructions in the Eastern Algonquian language Passamaquoddy in which the position of the object of a verb of cognition (‘know’, ‘believe’, ‘remember’, ‘wonder about’, ‘suspect’) is linked, either by apparent raising or by apparent long-distance agreement, to a position within a clausal complement to the verb. The latter position may be arbitrarily deeply embedded. The analysis developed here, formulated in the framework of Head-driven Phrase Structure Grammar, demonstrates that the two constructions in fact represent alternative realizations of identical argument structures for the verbs in question and that the apparent long-distance dependencies involved can be accounted for in terms of a purely local principle of argument selection.

Indonesia's national ulama council, the Majelis Ulama Indonesia, or MUI, has successfully transformed itself during the reform era reversing its earlier relationship with government. It is the MUI that now sets the agenda on appropriate ways to recognize, protect, and promote the majority faith. However it does not operate entirely separate to the state, indeed, there are numerous points of contact and mutual dependence between this group of Islamic scholars and state agencies.

This article offers two case studies on religious freedom demonstrating different aspects of the MUI's self-appointed role of national mufti. The first case study demonstrates how the MUI has taken control of the high ground of religious doctrine. Through its response to blasphemy cases and deviant Muslim activities the MUI defines appropriate, orthodox Muslim conduct. The second case study deals with the revised regime of halal food certification. Here the state has sought to bring the MUI back into its embrace, partly as a result of corruption scandals. In doing so, however, Islam continues to be further entrenched in state law and regulation.

Indonesian Islam was said to be deconfessionalized, reflecting the nature of the former authoritarian and bureaucratic state's engagement with various Islamic institutions. The changing role of the MUI demonstrates that the state and law are becoming increasingly confessionalized. This change has significant implications for Indonesia's democratic constitutional framework, evident in what these cases say about the enjoyment of the fundamental right of citizenship.

The phenomenon of “secret” (siri) Muslim marriages—marriages that are conducted without state recognition—has become a hotly debated topic in Indonesia, particularly since the emergence of Muslim marriage agencies that organize unregistered online marriages. The issue is particularly contested between the state, women's activists, legal activists, and religious leaders. This article analyses the current efforts of the Indonesian state to bureaucratize Muslim marriages by insisting that unregistered marriages need to be registered with the state, and the societal responses to such regulations. Those who believe in the importance of state registration of Muslim marriage emphasize that it is an integral part of social reform. However, it has also been seen as creating problems when it only serves the interests of the majority and stands in the way of minority religious understandings, particularly by some conservative Muslims who believe that marriages within the Muslim community should be regulated by Muslim leaders (ʿulamāʾ) only, and not the state. This article argues that unregistered marriage has been the real test of the bureaucratization of religion in Indonesia. The government's effort to demonstrate its Islamic credentials by accommodating the people's majority religion has led it to assume an ambiguous position on the issue of unregistered marriages.