Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Toivanen, Mikko
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124
Resumo: A notable trend in historiography in the new millennium has been the emergence of the subfield of global history – a wide and occasionally disparate yet resilient movement committed to a conceptualisation of the historical world and historical processes as fundamentally interconnected and global, challenging conventional, Eurocentric historiographies. This paper examines the effect of two influential works of global history – The Great Divergence (2000) by Kenneth Pomeranz and On Their Own Terms (2005) by Benjamin Elman – on a conventional historical narrative of Chinese failure and European triumph in the early modern period. These evidently very different works of historical research are analysed to uncover some of the core ideas shared by mostauthors working on global history, and the challenge to historical comparisons they entail. This case study is then used to reflect more widely on the weaknesses of conventional forms of comparative history, and on the particular benefits and advancements that the global history family of approaches may bring to the field if used properly.
id RCAP_34cbdaa67173e388650019bc4c294fe3
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.revistas.rcaap.pt:article/24124
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failureRepensar comparações históricas - história global e a narrativa do fracasso chinêsBenjamin ElmanKenneth PomeranzHistória ComparadaHistória GlobalChinaComparative HistoryGlobal HistoryChinaKenneth PomeranzBenjamin ElmanA notable trend in historiography in the new millennium has been the emergence of the subfield of global history – a wide and occasionally disparate yet resilient movement committed to a conceptualisation of the historical world and historical processes as fundamentally interconnected and global, challenging conventional, Eurocentric historiographies. This paper examines the effect of two influential works of global history – The Great Divergence (2000) by Kenneth Pomeranz and On Their Own Terms (2005) by Benjamin Elman – on a conventional historical narrative of Chinese failure and European triumph in the early modern period. These evidently very different works of historical research are analysed to uncover some of the core ideas shared by mostauthors working on global history, and the challenge to historical comparisons they entail. This case study is then used to reflect more widely on the weaknesses of conventional forms of comparative history, and on the particular benefits and advancements that the global history family of approaches may bring to the field if used properly.Uma tendência importante no novo milénio tem sido a emergência do subcampo da história global – um movimento amplo e por vezes contrastante mas ainda assim resiliente, comprometido com uma concetualização do mundo histórico e dos processos históricos como fundamentalmente interligados e globais, desafiando as historiografias convencionais, eurocêntricas. Este artigo examina o efeito de dois influentes trabalhos de história global – The Great Divergence (2000) de Kenneth Pomeranz e On Their Own Terms (2005) de Benjamin Elman – sobre uma narrativa histórica convencional do fracasso chinês e do triunfo europeu na Idade Moderna. Estas obras historiográficas, evidentemente muito diferentes, serão analisadas para revelar algumas das ideias cen- trais partilhadas pela maioria dos autores que trabalham sobre história global, e o desafio de fazer comparações históricas que estas envolvem. Este estudo de caso será então usado para refletir de uma forma mais ampla sobre as fraquezas das formas convencionais da história comparada, e sobre os benefícios e avanços particulares que as abordagens da história global podem trazer para o campo, se usadas da forma certa.Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade NOVA de Lisboa2021-04-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124https://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past; No. 1 (2015); 89-111Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past; N.º 1 (2015); 89-1112183-590Xreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPenghttps://praticasdahistoria.pt/article/view/24124https://praticasdahistoria.pt/article/view/24124/17753Copyright (c) 2021 Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Pastinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessToivanen, Mikko2023-04-15T05:24:14Zoai:ojs.revistas.rcaap.pt:article/24124Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T17:49:23.848893Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
Repensar comparações históricas - história global e a narrativa do fracasso chinês
title Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
spellingShingle Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
Toivanen, Mikko
Benjamin Elman
Kenneth Pomeranz
História Comparada
História Global
China
Comparative History
Global History
China
Kenneth Pomeranz
Benjamin Elman
title_short Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
title_full Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
title_fullStr Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
title_full_unstemmed Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
title_sort Rethinking historical comparisons - global history and the narrative of Chinese failure
author Toivanen, Mikko
author_facet Toivanen, Mikko
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Toivanen, Mikko
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Benjamin Elman
Kenneth Pomeranz
História Comparada
História Global
China
Comparative History
Global History
China
Kenneth Pomeranz
Benjamin Elman
topic Benjamin Elman
Kenneth Pomeranz
História Comparada
História Global
China
Comparative History
Global History
China
Kenneth Pomeranz
Benjamin Elman
description A notable trend in historiography in the new millennium has been the emergence of the subfield of global history – a wide and occasionally disparate yet resilient movement committed to a conceptualisation of the historical world and historical processes as fundamentally interconnected and global, challenging conventional, Eurocentric historiographies. This paper examines the effect of two influential works of global history – The Great Divergence (2000) by Kenneth Pomeranz and On Their Own Terms (2005) by Benjamin Elman – on a conventional historical narrative of Chinese failure and European triumph in the early modern period. These evidently very different works of historical research are analysed to uncover some of the core ideas shared by mostauthors working on global history, and the challenge to historical comparisons they entail. This case study is then used to reflect more widely on the weaknesses of conventional forms of comparative history, and on the particular benefits and advancements that the global history family of approaches may bring to the field if used properly.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-04-01
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124
https://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124
url https://doi.org/10.48487/pdh.2015.n1.24124
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://praticasdahistoria.pt/article/view/24124
https://praticasdahistoria.pt/article/view/24124/17753
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade NOVA de Lisboa
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas da Universidade NOVA de Lisboa
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past; No. 1 (2015); 89-111
Práticas da História. Journal on Theory, Historiography and Uses of the Past; N.º 1 (2015); 89-111
2183-590X
reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799131575133143040

Registros relacionados