The narration of humankind’s past, that is to say its history, has up to now been done using the extrinsic method of geographic territorial reference and temporal chronological and local topical reference, sometimes together, sometimes separately, almost to form a single expression or two different expressions: two approaches in which to insert the list (quantitative or selective or explicative or annotated) of human events. And it is to this that I address myself at first, before going on to examine the possibility of using a third approach to history, with the choice of intrinsic historical values to highlight.
Writing History in the Third Republic offers new insight to the historiographical output of French historians between 1860 and 1914, a period often referred to as of positivistic historians or the école méthodique. Asserting their independence from Germanic influence by emphasising the French element in their work, historians in the period described their approach as methodical and positivistic and maintained that this was a distinctively French way of studying history. A heightened concern with sources, with facts as basis for all true knowledge, and with truth itself were unifying elements of the historiography of those historians now called école méthodique. The école represented the most sophisticated theoretical considerations about history and a method for historical studies in French academia in the late nineteenth century. The purpose of this book is to reassess whether or not this school is legitimately to be seen as having emerged in the Third Republic in response to political developments of nineteenth-century France, or if the so-called méthodiques share more in terms of philosophy of history and methodology than previously emphasized by scholars. This book contributes to the debate surrounding the role of history and its method, offering a counter-argument to postmodernist scholars while reassessing the contribution of twentieth-century theorists of history to the history of historiography.
Methods in World History is the first international volume that systematically addresses a number of methodological problems specific to the field of World History. Prompted by a lack of applicable works, the authors advocate a considerable sharpening of the tools used within the discipline. Theories constructed on poor foundations run an obvious risk of reinforcing flawed assumptions, and of propping up other, more ideological constructions. The dedicated critical approach outlined in this volume helps to mitigate such risks. Each essay addresses a particular issue, discussing its problems, giving practical examples, and offering solutions and ways of overcoming the difficulties involved. The perspectives are varied, the criticism focussed, and a common theme of coalescence is maintained throughout. This unique anthology will be of great use to advanced scholars of World History, and to students entering the field for the first time.
Worldviews of Aspiring Powers provides a serious study of the domestic foreign policy debates in five world powers who have gained more influence as the US's has waned: China, Japan, India, Russia and Iran. Featuring a leading regional scholar for each essay, each essay identifies the most important domestic schools of thought—nationalists, realists, globalists, idealists/exceptionalists—and connects them to the historical and institutional sources that fuel each nation's foreign policy experience. While scholars have applied this approach to US foreign policy, this book is the first to track the competing schools of foreign policy thought within five of the world's most important rising powers. Concise and systematic, Worldviews of Aspiring Powers will serve as both an essential resource for foreign policy scholars trying to understand international power transitions and as a text for courses that focus on the same.
America’s Entangling Alliances challenges the belief that the US resists international alliances. By documenting thirty-four alliances—categorized as defense pacts, military coalitions, or security partnerships—Davidson finds that the US demand for allies is best explained by looking at variance in its relative power and the threats it has faced.
This book—the first of a three-volume overview of comparative and transnational historiography in Europe—focuses on the complex engagement of various comparative methodological approaches with different transnational and supranational frameworks. It considers scales from universal history to meso-regional (i.e. Balkans, Central Europe, etc.) perspectives. In the form of a reader, it displays 18 historical studies written between 1900 and 1943. The collection starts with the French and German methodological discussions around the turn of the twentieth century, stemming from the effort to integrate history with other emerging social sciences on a comparative methodological basis. The volume then turns to the question of structural and institutional comparisons, revisiting various historiographical ventures that tried to sketch out a broader (regional or European-level) interpretative framework to assess the legal systems, patterns of agrarian production, and the common ethnographic and sociocultural features. In the third part, a number of texts are presented, which put forward a supra-national research framework as an antidote to national exclusivism. While in Western Europe the most obvious such framework was pan-European, in East Central Europe the agenda of comparison was linked usually to a meso-regional framework. The studies are accompanied by short contextual introductions including biographical information on the respective authors.
The contributors to this volume, originally published in 1962, explain the raison d’être of their own specialism in history be it archaeology, political, local, economic or social history or historical geography.
