haitianhistory:

Today’s term/concept is: HISTORIOGRAPHY 

So, what does this word mean in the context of historical research? 

Historiography usually refers to all the work on a given historical topic and/or the study of how historians have dealt with historical subject matters.
According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy “In its most general sense, the term refers to the study of historians’ methods and practices. Moreover, “historiography becomes itself historical when we recognize that these frameworks of assumptions about historical knowledge and reasoning change over time. On this assumption, the history of historical thinking and writing is itself an interesting subject. How did historians of various periods in human history conduct their study and presentation of history?" (Source)
Trent University defines historiography as “a summary of the historical writings on a particular topic … It identifies the major thinkers and arguments, and establishes connections between them. If there have been major changes in the way a particular topic has been approached over time, the historiography identifies them.” (Source)

So, to put it plainly, historiography can be understood as the the body of historical writing on a topic and the history of how historians have approached a particular topic over time. 

⇒ For example, if you encounter in your readings: “The Historiography on the Haitian Revolution is very large” It usually means → ”Lots of stuff have been written about the Haitian Revolution.”
Historiography of course, does not only refer to the grouping of works on a topic, as we have seen already, it also focuses on the changes in historical methodology. 

So, historiography evolves over time? Why?

Historians can rarely escape their own time. This is not to say that the historical discipline is entirely subjective, rather, this is to suggest that historians do not write in vacuums. Historiographical essays are thus important because they help us see how the methodology in studying a particular topic has changed over time. 
⇒ For example, in the 1960s, most (but not all) historians favoured an approach that gave a significant importance to economy and were often interested in making Marxist and class-based analysis of History. This is not necessarily true today when many historians prefer an analysis which gives more space to culture (hence, you will often hear references to a "cultural" or "linguistic turn" in History). 
Now, this change in the way historians understand events rarely means they debate over the occurrence of those events (although, it does happen), — what it actually means is that historians find that some approches highlight factors that better explain historical events than others. Historians’ major task is not simply to narrate events, their work also involves looking at the relationship between various instances (that is, their causal relationship) in explaining historical events. (To make this text more digestible, I will save you a discussion on the problems historians face with narration and causality, just remember that the two have an influence on historiography.)
So, as just mentioned, historiography helps us see how historical writing changes, in part, because historians often take different approches with time.
⇒ For example, for a long time, the dominent historiography on the causes of World War I suggested that the Great War was fought between European powers for colonies (i.e. the surproduction of goods forced European capitalist to pressure their own government to support their adventures in foreign lands in search of the new markets). Other historians, who do not necessarily completely reject the previous explanation, argue however that nationalism is better in articulating the drive to go to war. Historiography also suggest that we should not neglect the importance of European alliance system before WWI (i.e. the “domino effect”). More importantly, most (but not all) historians who have favoured the colonies and market explanation tended to be further towards the left (Marxist, Leninist and so on) in their analysis. (Notice “tended’ is in italics.)
At any rate, historiography is a complex term but it is necessary to understand it in order to comprehend some of the work historians do (and to grasp the real nature of most of their disputes). 
To recapitulate, in most instances, historiography is:
The body of work on a particular historical topic (i.e. : the historiography on the Haitian Revolution, the 20th century historiography on the French Revolution, the historiography on Thomas Jefferson…)
The “history of history” (the study how historians have dealt with particular topics, with a special importance given to the context in which their work was written. This usually emplies analyzing the approach(es) historians have favoured to write about History (i.e.: was this historian sensible to the Marxist turn in History, the Postmodern turn in History, the Cultural turn in History, the Subaltern and Postcolonial turn in History …?))
Warning: Before using a term, always make sure you are comfortable with its meaning and that it won’t be placed in your text simply as an ornament. If unsure, consult an appropriate dictionary or a Professor. 

haitianhistory:

Today’s term/concept is: HISTORIOGRAPHY 

So, what does this word mean in the context of historical research? 

Historiography usually refers to all the work on a given historical topic and/or the study of how historians have dealt with historical subject matters.

According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy “In its most general sense, the term refers to the study of historians’ methods and practices. Moreover, “historiography becomes itself historical when we recognize that these frameworks of assumptions about historical knowledge and reasoning change over time. On this assumption, the history of historical thinking and writing is itself an interesting subject. How did historians of various periods in human history conduct their study and presentation of history?" (Source)

Trent University defines historiography as “a summary of the historical writings on a particular topic … It identifies the major thinkers and arguments, and establishes connections between them. If there have been major changes in the way a particular topic has been approached over time, the historiography identifies them.” (Source)

So, to put it plainly, historiography can be understood as the the body of historical writing on a topic and the history of how historians have approached a particular topic over time. 

⇒ For example, if you encounter in your readings: “The Historiography on the Haitian Revolution is very large” It usually means → ”Lots of stuff have been written about the Haitian Revolution.”

Historiography of course, does not only refer to the grouping of works on a topic, as we have seen already, it also focuses on the changes in historical methodology. 

So, historiography evolves over time? Why?

Historians can rarely escape their own time. This is not to say that the historical discipline is entirely subjective, rather, this is to suggest that historians do not write in vacuums. Historiographical essays are thus important because they help us see how the methodology in studying a particular topic has changed over time. 

⇒ For example, in the 1960s, most (but not all) historians favoured an approach that gave a significant importance to economy and were often interested in making Marxist and class-based analysis of History. This is not necessarily true today when many historians prefer an analysis which gives more space to culture (hence, you will often hear references to a "cultural" or "linguistic turn" in History). 

Now, this change in the way historians understand events rarely means they debate over the occurrence of those events (although, it does happen), — what it actually means is that historians find that some approches highlight factors that better explain historical events than others. Historians’ major task is not simply to narrate events, their work also involves looking at the relationship between various instances (that is, their causal relationship) in explaining historical events. (To make this text more digestible, I will save you a discussion on the problems historians face with narration and causality, just remember that the two have an influence on historiography.)

So, as just mentioned, historiography helps us see how historical writing changes, in part, because historians often take different approches with time.

⇒ For example, for a long time, the dominent historiography on the causes of World War I suggested that the Great War was fought between European powers for colonies (i.e. the surproduction of goods forced European capitalist to pressure their own government to support their adventures in foreign lands in search of the new markets). Other historians, who do not necessarily completely reject the previous explanation, argue however that nationalism is better in articulating the drive to go to war. Historiography also suggest that we should not neglect the importance of European alliance system before WWI (i.e. the “domino effect”). More importantly, most (but not all) historians who have favoured the colonies and market explanation tended to be further towards the left (Marxist, Leninist and so on) in their analysis. (Notice “tended’ is in italics.)

At any rate, historiography is a complex term but it is necessary to understand it in order to comprehend some of the work historians do (and to grasp the real nature of most of their disputes). 

To recapitulate, in most instances, historiography is:

  • The body of work on a particular historical topic (i.e. : the historiography on the Haitian Revolution, the 20th century historiography on the French Revolution, the historiography on Thomas Jefferson…)
  • The “history of history” (the study how historians have dealt with particular topics, with a special importance given to the context in which their work was written. This usually emplies analyzing the approach(es) historians have favoured to write about History (i.e.: was this historian sensible to the Marxist turn in History, the Postmodern turn in History, the Cultural turn in History, the Subaltern and Postcolonial turn in History …?))

Warning: Before using a term, always make sure you are comfortable with its meaning and that it won’t be placed in your text simply as an ornament. If unsure, consult an appropriate dictionary or a Professor. 

Affiliates Post

Hello Everyone: This is just a formal announcement that I have added two formal affiliates to this blog for your perusal:

Both of these blogs are solidly run, recommendable, and a pleasure to follow. 

This is long overdue, as I had previously said some time ago I would add affiliates to this blog. However, for the last two weeks I have been A.) driving across the country and B.) moving to an entirely new city and beginning my graduate program. Unfortunately, this moderator only managed to set up wifi at home as of yesterday. My deepest apologies, as I have been less than prompt because of other pressing priorities.

For anyone curious to check the affiliates page, it’s also found here

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict Historical Bibliography: Ottoman Empire

historicity-was-already-taken:

Intro/Methodology
Bronze Age Collapse-Roman Period
Byzantine Empire and the Rise of Islam and Caliphate Rule

Crusades, Medieval European Jewish History, and Sephardic Jewish History

Ottoman Empire

Ottoman Brothers: Muslims, Christians, and Jews in Early Twentieth-Century Palestine by Michelle Campos

Becoming Ottomans: Sephardi Jews and Imperial Citizenship in the Modern Era by Julia Phillips Cohen

Osman’s Dream: The History of the Ottoman Empire by Caroline Finkel

A Brief History of the Late Ottoman Empire by M. Sükrü Hanioglu

The Arabs of the Ottoman Empire, 1516-1918: A Social and Cultural History by Bruce Masters

The Ottomans and the Mamluks: Imperial Diplomacy and Warfare in the Islamic World (Library of Ottoman Studies) by Cihan Yüksel Muslu

The Ottoman Empire, 1700-1922 (New Approaches to European History) by Donald Quataert

Frontiers of the State in the Late Ottoman Empire: Transjordan, 1850-1921 (Cambridge Middle East Studies) by Eugene L. Rogan

Palestine in Transformation, 1856-1882: Studies in Social, Economic and Political Development by Alexander Scholch

The Second Ottoman Empire: Political and Social Transformation in the Early Modern World (Cambridge Studies in Islamic Civilization) by Baki Tezcan

about me
ask me a question
reblog as text

scspeak said: What are some thoughts about West Asia? Though contemporarily recognized as the Middle East, I’ve had some discourse amongst people within U.S. Pan Asian communities and/or those with cultural ties in that particular region that went back & forth of whether there could be a claim of Asian identity (I’m still just scratching the surface of this). I’m wondering what are other people’s thoughts? Taking into account of our relation to the term "orientalism" with our histories in being racialized.

My answer will cover the individual answer and the broader academic answer: 

First: That as a personal individual, I do not (and can not) have an opinion about the Asian Identity in the U.S. or otherwise. This is because I myself am not Asian in any framework, and as a scholar, I’d rather not define who can and cannot subscribe to an identity that isn’t my own. Aside from telling you that if you’re not Asian, don’t say you are, I can’t really claim anything. 

Second: My own approach is therefore, covered in the FAQs:

#FAQ #3: So Who is Asian, then?

Whoever identifies as such. This is not really the purpose of this blog. You will find posts about people who are not considered Asian here, as long as the events transpire in Asia. 

Third: The definition game of “so where/what is Asia?” is also played out and explained in the FAQs: 

[…] For more on defining Asia, please read Columbia’s What is Asia?Asia is NOT a separate continent. Asia is part of the Eurasian Continental plate, and all “divides” are purely constructed. 

So on a scholarly level, when you come down to it, you’re playing the “what do words and labels mean?” game. Asia is a social, political, cultural, and geographic construct. Really, I encourage people to read the link I have there, it covers the basic questions at play. 

Really, all of AFE is easy to access and read through: http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/geography/

There are large discourses on how Asia has been defined, when it was defined, and by whom. 

You’ll also find that Orientalism refers to North Africa, the Middle East (and sometimes) the rest of Asia — usually East Asia. This can be confusing — Orientalism had predominately referred to the Islamic world, not a general Asian one.

The text for those wanting to dive right into the theory of this concept, is, of course, Edward Said’s Orientalism. A quick google will pull it up. 

Now for many, it seems that Orientalism generally might be applied to all of Asia, not just the Islamic dominated parts. After all — chinoiserie and japonisme are material styles of mimicking Asian cultures within “western” culture, not terms which can explain the fetishization or stereotyping of humans by race, ethnicity, etc. The word has adapted - much more recently. 

This is a complex sort of issue, and while I’m sure this doesn’t seem helpful, isn’t really one that should be answered by me as yes or no, or even with my own “feeling” on the matter. It’s more of a localized, intra-community issue regarding the US that can really only be answered by individuals of middle eastern descent about how they feel they should ID. 

mughalshit:

Diana, Goddess of the Hunt
India, Mughal, early 17th century
Ink, opaque watercolors and gold on paper

Although painted by an Indian artist, the style and subject of this painting of the Goddess Diana are distinctly European. It was likely painted in India during the reign of the Mughal emperor Jahangir (1605–27), who was an avid collector and connoisseur. Jahangir collected European paintings, and was particularly interested in religious, allegorical and mythological scenes. Believing his court artists to be as accomplished as European painters, he ordered them to copy several European paintings – it is likely that this folio was among those meant to prove the skill of his court atelier.

mughalshit:

Diana, Goddess of the Hunt

India, Mughal, early 17th century

Ink, opaque watercolors and gold on paper

Although painted by an Indian artist, the style and subject of this painting of the Goddess Diana are distinctly European. It was likely painted in India during the reign of the Mughal emperor Jahangir (1605–27), who was an avid collector and connoisseur. Jahangir collected European paintings, and was particularly interested in religious, allegorical and mythological scenes. Believing his court artists to be as accomplished as European painters, he ordered them to copy several European paintings – it is likely that this folio was among those meant to prove the skill of his court atelier.

(Source: metmuseum.org)

Date: approx. 155-130 BCE
Medium: Silver
Place of Origin: Northern Afghanistan | former kingdom of Bactria | Pakistan | former kingdom of Gandhara
Credit Line: Acquisition made possible in part by the Society for Asian Art
Label: Greek inscriptions, royal portraits, and images of Greek deities such as Athena were standard features on coins issued by the Indo-Greek rulers of Central Asia and northern Afghanistan during the centuries just before the Common Era. Many Indo-Greek coins contained translations of the Greek into a local script and language on their reverse sides, indicating the great cultural diversity in this area of the ancient world. 
The combination on coins of royal portraiture and divine imagery-a powerful statement of divinely sanctioned rule-was used for many centuries in Central and South Asia. On coins of the Kushan dynasty, images of the Iranian goddess Ardoksho and the Indian god Shiva reflect the expansion of the Kushans into former Iranian realms as well as into northern India. The Gupta dynasty, which later ruled northern India, issued many coins depicting on one side the goddess Lakshmi, who is associated with royal fortune. The portrait sides of Gupta coins contain several innovations. An early example showing the dynasty’s founder together with his queen proclaims the power and legitimacy he gained through a strategic marriage alliance. 

 

Mongol passport (paizi), Yuan dynasty (1271–1368), 13th century

centuriespast:

The Buddhist Guardian Mahabala
Period: Eastern Javanese period
Date: 11th century
Culture: Indonesia (Java)
Medium: Bronze
The Metropolitan Museum of Art

centuriespast:

The Buddhist Guardian Mahabala

Period: Eastern Javanese period

Date: 11th century

Culture: Indonesia (Java)

Medium: Bronze

The Metropolitan Museum of Art

romkids:

Pigeon Whistle
Used throughout Chinese history, the pigeon whistle is attached around the bird’s neck, and creates sound during flight as air rushes through the instrument (in this case the whistle is from a gourd).

You can just imagine how gorgeous and other worldly this would sound when thirty or more pigeons took flight- a flying orchestra.
We brought this out from our Learning Collections recently for a special table featuring artifacts from  throughout Chinese history.
Written by @kironcmukherjee. Last update: July 20th, 2014.

romkids:

Pigeon Whistle

Used throughout Chinese history, the pigeon whistle is attached around the bird’s neck, and creates sound during flight as air rushes through the instrument (in this case the whistle is from a gourd).

You can just imagine how gorgeous and other worldly this would sound when thirty or more pigeons took flight- a flying orchestra.

We brought this out from our Learning Collections recently for a special table featuring artifacts from  throughout Chinese history.

Written by @kironcmukherjee. Last update: July 20th, 2014.

lostsplendor:

"Revised Route Map of Japan" by Nagakubo, Sekisui c. 1775 via University of British Columbia Library Rare Books/Special Collections and UBC Library Digitization Center on Flickr Commons

lostsplendor:

"Revised Route Map of Japan" by Nagakubo, Sekisui c. 1775 via University of British Columbia Library Rare Books/Special Collections and UBC Library Digitization Center on Flickr Commons