One attraction of microhistory, as mentioned by Tonio Andrade is the way its narrative element is engaging for readers. This would certainly be useful for global history where one concern is the worry of finding a wide readership for works which do not fit into familiar, traditional categories such as national history. The interest on the level of experience which microhistory brings may also be relevant to global history and provide a different angle given that global history is often driven by an interest in the large processes involved. As Gerritsen and De Vito say in their introduction such an approach would allow the definition of ‘categories, spatial units, and periodisations by historical subjects themselves’, echoing Marcel Van der Linden’s encouragement of this approach which would allow the historian to ‘follow the traces’ in the source material. This certainly ties in well with the motivations behind global and transnational history as many of these categories which historians use have been established based on eurocentric or national outlooks. This said there is the question of how historians will chose their sources, which in the case of microhistories will be very few and they will likely be chosen by their relation to a specific large process or on a category the historian is studying, but then again microhistory, with its reliance on primary sources and interest in specific cases is still the most likely area for these categories to be challenged.
Kreuder-Sonnen’s discussion of late nineteenth early twentieth century medical experts raises previously explored themes of globalisation and connections existing alongside fragmentation, in this case international institutions and ties reinforcing the national. The article in its description of the career of Bujwid is an example of how microhistory can be used to show the perceptions of interconnectedness. It is also suggested by De Vito and Gerritsen that such studies could form the basis for comparative histories. More broadly the article is also reminder for the importance of history writing that truly transcend the nation. The nation must be put into its context of being constructed though circulations rather than existing unchanged through them. It would be possible to write histories which were connected but did not do this and which was international rather than transnational. The nation is reinforced by connections as the existence of other nations is presumed and provides affirmation of the concept. Nationalism has from its first been international, and while internationalism may in some cases be a challenge to nationalism it is not always so and in fact upholds the nation.