When reading about transnational and microhistories, two thoughts came predominantly to mind. The first was on how one could reconcile history on what is seemingly its grandest scale with its smallest (and often its most irregular). At first glance, perhaps,
When I first applied to take this module, it was because of the unique format and the ability to retain flexibility in what one would like to study. Personally, the idea of studying the movement of ideas, people and cultures
Having been reading Thomas Bender’s “Introduction” to the edited volume of Rethinking American History in a Global Age, I’d like to deepen our previous conversations on the methodology of transnational history, as well as the rationale behind it. We’ve often
The reading this week has focused on actors and networks. This is particularly interesting for my project as my starting point was the role of African independence leaders as transnational actors and the network of political figures that they were
I know we’ve not had our discussion of agents and agency yet, but I had a few quick thoughts I wanted to share. Firstly, I appreciate the basic approach of understanding transnational connections through identification of actors (individuals) and the
Tonio Andrade’s Microhistory of the Siege of Fort Zeelandia is an excellent article in highlighting both the benefits and the pitfalls of micro history. Although Andrade begins his study with a rejection of the importance of the episode he pieces
A look at how microhistory may be closer to cultural history and transnational history to international politics, even if both histories adopt the micro lens of analysis.
I’ll admit that one of the issues I have been having in attempting to envisage global and transnational history and what they might entail is the potential scope of the subjects. At times, it seems that there are so many
In the introduction, Tyrell begins with a brief outline of the traditional narrative often ascribed to the formation of the United States as a nations. This narrative focuses on domestic developments which championed internal forces over European cultural influence, almost
This entry compares the way transnational history is practised in two books, one by Ian Tyrell and another by Rita Chin. I started with their central arguments presented in the book, then went on to use the three aspects of transnational history presented by Patricia Clavin in last week’s reading – ‘time’, ‘manner’ and ‘place’ – to discuss their differences.
In the first chapter of her book The Guest Worker Question in Postwar Germany, Rita Chin makes an excellent case for the roles played by both Aras Ören and the wider Ausländerliteratur community in the German phenomenon which she calls
The attempt in the American Historical Review to more closely pin down what it means to write transnational history certainly makes for compelling reading as it presents the developing views of six historians with very varied backgrounds on a
~~howl howl~~ In this entry I offer summaries of Patricia Clavin’s two articles on transnationalism published in 2005 and 2010, pointing out for instance how transnational history treats time and space, its distinct methodology and implications for historical writing.
The relation of global history to transnational history is more complex than I first thought. An interesting point raised, that I wish to address here, is the idea that the two schools converge. Behind this is the idea that transnational
Patricia Clavin’s article on Global, Transnational, and International history is an adequate introduction of these approaches’ potentials and limitations in reshaping European history. She divides her article into three parts, time, manner, and place, to describe how specifically a transnational