Basics Flashcards
What are the 3 levels of reflection in Global History?
- methods and practices
- Theories of global History
- Discussion in the position of each scholar in the field of Global History
The approach of GH is…, because…
**The approach of GH is DECONSTRUCTIVE, because it deconstructs structures within research and history - moving beyond and away from spatial and temporal limitations (nation state) and biases in history (eurocentrism, concept of modernity)
What means Asymmetric Ignorance?
Western historians can produce their work in relative IGNORANCE of non-western histories - something non-western historians can´t do
How does eurocentrism show?
- the way we talk about conflicts
- concept of modernity (europe as the engine of process)
What does the “Dependency Theory” addresses and suggests
Dependency Theory addresses the primacy of western knowledge and suggests new patterns of academic knowledge
Doing global history is…
describing phenomena that happened on a global scale (focus not only on the Event in the nation state but on exchange and connections - how this was effecting further regions)
Modernity is as a concept…
deeply rooted in European history and criticized by GH
name the GH models of modernity
- multiple modernities (several concepts of modernity - not rooted in Europe)
- Connected modernities
- Unthinking modernity - downgrading the concept of modernity into a hypothesis - check if its true
Comparison as a key tool in GH can be conducted through several approaches name them.
- Macro-analytical comparison
- reciprocal comparison
- incorporating comparison
- Histoire croiseé
What is specific about Histoire croisée in its comparative approach?
The Comparison of connected SPATIAL UNITS - the element of comparison is more present then in connected history for example
What is specific about the incorporating comparison approach?
The comparison takes place across TIME and SPATIAL UNITS - comparison of connected spatial units that change across time
What is particular about the method of reciprocal comparison?
Comparing by asking questions emerging from both (or multiple) temporal and/or spatial contexts
- viewing both sides of the comparison as “deviations” when seen through the expectations of the other, rather tahn leaving one as always the norm
What are advantages of the reciprocal comparison? What does it prevent? What does it expand?
It prevents postulating the exceptionality of a historical proces before checking it empirically
prevents eurocentrism
it expands the research question
It creates an effect of estrangement/defamiliarization
What is particular about Macro-analytical comparison - what it is one main problem of this approach
- comparing by pre-defining spatial and temporal units and categories (factors)
- UNIVERSAL FRAMEWORK for each chapter
- Comparison through STRCUTURAL PARAMETER
- Problem: entirely dependent on secondary literature
- very static
- very broad synthesis
- simplifications (e.g. no focus on differences within each spatial unit)
The theory of Heterotemporality claims?
It describes the way in which…
The Coexistence of multiple temporalities in a single space, which can be seen as a form of temporal heterogeneity
it describes the way in which different temporalities intersect and inteact with each other in a given context.