The Singularization of History: Social History and Microhistory within the Postmodern State of Knowledge.
The writer discusses how social history, dominated by quantitative methods of the social sciences, has failed to meet the challenges posed by postmodernism and the demands of cultural analysis. To illustrate his point, he focuses on microhistory, as representing the most effective reaction from wit...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Social History Vol. 36; no. 3; pp. 701 - 736 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Oxford University Press / UK
Spring2003
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ssf&AN=509363750&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ssf uiTerm: 509363750 longDbName: Social Sciences Full Text (H.W. Wilson) uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00224529 JSH jtl: Journal of Social History issn: 00224529 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Spring2003 vid: 36 iid: 3 pid: 622 pub: Oxford University Press / UK artinfo: ui: 509363750 10.1353/jsh.2003.0054 ppf: 701 ppct: 35 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 4.3MB tig: atl: The Singularization of History: Social History and Microhistory within the Postmodern State of Knowledge. aug: au: Sigurður, Gylif Magnússon su: Philosophy of history Study & teaching of social history Postmodernism (Philosophy) Historiography sug: subj: Philosophy of history Study & teaching of social history Postmodernism (Philosophy) Historiography ab: The writer discusses how social history, dominated by quantitative methods of the social sciences, has failed to meet the challenges posed by postmodernism and the demands of cultural analysis. To illustrate his point, he focuses on microhistory, as representing the most effective reaction from within the field of history to the dilemma facing social history. The response of microhistory was both groundbreaking and unconventional, he explains, turning attention away from the unremitting concentration on the huge structures, large-scale processes, and big comparisons and toward the small units in society. He finds, however, that microhistory, has as yet failed to make any significant impression on contemporary historiography, and he considers various reasons for this. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: N holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|