Search results

Report of a workshop held July 13-15, 1983 at the U.S. Air Force Academy. ; Includes bibliographical references. ; Mode of access: Internet.

A single theme is pursued in this book - the trade between peoples of differing cultures through world history. Extending from the ancient world to the coming of the commercial revolution, Professor Curtin's discussion encompasses a broad and diverse group of trading relationships. Drawing on insights from economic history and anthropology, Professor Curtin has attempted to move beyond a Europe-centred view of history, to one that can help us understand the entire range of societies in the human past. Examples have been chosen that illustrate the greatest variety of trading relationships between cultures. The opening chapters look at Africa, while subsequent chapters treat the ancient world, the Mediterranean trade with China, the Asian trade in the east, and European entry into the trade with maritime Asia, the Armenian trade carriers of the seventeenth century, and the North American fur trade. Wide-ranging in its concern and the fruit of exhaustive research, the book is nevertheless written so as to be accessible and stimulating to the specialist and the student alike

"1 August 1983." ; Proceedings of a conference held at the U.S. Air Force Academy on May 12-14, 1982, and sponsored by the Academy's Dept. of History and the American Historical Association. ; Includes bibliographical references (p. 84-93). ; Mode of access: Internet.

The word nationalism, as it is generally used in the United States by scholars and journalists, is a pejorative term. If by using the term the writer himself does not mean to evoke unfavorable associations, then by necessity he fails because the educated public in America understands the word to be derogatory. The question therefore is seriously to be considered whether the word continues to be serviceable for impartial analyses of world politics and modern history. Many journalists and unfortunately, also many historians and political scientists use the word as nothing other than an elegant expletive to disparage statesmen and countries–foreign and their own. One may suspect that diplomats and men of affairs have already learned to consider the word useless for day-to-day decisions. Unless scholars begin to use the word with more precision and discrimination, they will be forced to follow the example of practical men of affairs.