Tutor: Maxine Berg (Maxine.Berg@warwick.ac.uk)
This is an introductory meeting to familiarise students with the general outline and requirements of the module. The module will consider both thematic dimensions of global history—gender, economy, globalisation, material culture, and modernity—and the organization and distribution of the world according to socio-geographical units (area studies). To set the stage for discussion in the subsequent weeks, we will begin by delving into various broad-based approaches to the historical study of the globe and the recent emergence of global microhistory.
Readings can be accessed via Aspire Reading List
Jeremy Adelman ‘What is Global History Now?' https://aeon.co/essays/is-global-history-still-possible-or-has-it-had-its-moment
Sebastian Conrad, What Is Global History?, chap. 4.
Francesca Trivellato, “Is there a Future for Italian Microhistory in the Age of Global History?,” California Italian Studies 2 (1) (2011), https://escholarship.org/uc/item/0z94n9hq (accessed 2nd April 2021).
Sebastian Conrad, What is Global History? (Princeton University Press, 2016), Chap. 4, 10.
Jan de Vries, 'Reflections on Doing Global History', in Writing the History of the Global: Challenges for the Twenty-First Century, ed. Maxine Berg (Oxford University Press, 2013), 32-47.
Dominic Sachsenmaier, Global Perspectives on Global History. Theories and Approaches in a Connected World (Cambridge University Press, 2011).
Anne Gerritsen, “Scales of a Local: the Place of Locality in a Globalizing World,” in A Companion to World History, ed. Douglas Northrop (Oxford, 2012), 213-226 GerritsenScalesofaLocal
John-Paul Ghobrial, “Introduction: Seeing the World like a Microhistorian,” in Global History and Microhistory, ed. John-Paul Ghobrial, Past & Present Supplement 14 (2019): 1-22, 16.
Natalie Zemon Davis, “Decentering History: Local Stories and Cultural Crossings in a Global World,” History and Theory 50 (2011):188-202.
1. "Once it is established that global history is everything, everything can become global history. This is less absurd than it seems.' (Sebastian Conrad, p.8). Discuss this statement.
2. Do you agree with Adelman's view that contemporary events have created a crisis for global history?
3. Do you prefer 'comparative' or 'connective' histories? Discuss their advantages and limits.
4. Is global microhistory a contradiction? What is the attraction of this approach?