Suchergebnisse

This article discusses the challenges and constraints on the way toward more ecumenical forms of world historical scholarship. Refuting the charge that world history is necessarily Eurocentric in nature, the article points out that it is impossible to discuss intercultural conceptions of world history without touching on the international structures, flows, and hierarchies that characterize the field. The article argues that several transformations within the social sciences and humanities may prove to be relevant for transcultural and world history. The article concludes that internationally convincing perspectives can be gained only if the international landscapes of historiography become more ecumenical.

Big History is a seemingly novel approach that seeks to situate human history within a grand cosmic story of life. It claims to do so by uniting the historical sciences in order to construct a linear and accurate timeline of 'threshold moments' beginning with the Big Bang and ending with the present and future development of humanity itself. As well as examining the theory and practice of Big History, this Element considers Big History alongside previous largescale attempts to unite human and natural history, and includes comparative discussions of the practices of chronology, universal history, and the evolutionary epic

As Fritz Redlich has had occasion to point out, business history is neither of American nor of recent vintage–that interest in company histories which began on the Continent early in the nineteenth century had by 1900 prompted at least one prominent German scholar to suggest how a study of business might be developed into an academic discipline. What was new in the United States was the term "business history," and what is more relevant for my comments in this paper were the circumstances that led to its emergence as a special field and the effect that this separation has had on the relationship between business history and economic history.

A historical retrospective of the interrelationships of social & conceptual history is presented, particularly their basis in linguistic expressions, ie, speech & writing. Both histories presuppose a connection between synchronic events & diachronic structures. The example of marriage is detailed using two models, one oriented toward events, actions in speech, writing, & deed, & another toward diachronic presuppositions & long-term transformation. It is concluded that the two histories need & refer to one another without being able to coincide with each other; they have different rates of change, & are based in different repetitive structures, but both must be considered in any study of history. M. Malas

The ensuing remarks are addressed to two topics which seem to me important: (a) what conflicts, if any, are there between business history and economic history; and (b) how can research in the two areas be mutually helpful.