"History is not the prerogative of the historian, nor even, as postmodernism contends, a historians ‘invention’. It is, rather, a social form of knowledge; the work, in any given instance, of a thousand different hands."

Raphael Samuel, Theatres of Memory, Volume I, Past and Present Contemporary Culture (Verso: 1994), 8.

This course is a graduate level survey of recent developments in the research and writing of history as practiced by professional historians. Time limitations require that the course be selective rather than comprehensive, and students should bear in mind that the course will raise many questions that cannot be answered during a particular class meeting or possibly even during the semester.

Required Texts:

John Tosh, The Pursuit of History: aims, methods and new directions in the study of modern history, fourth edition, Longman/Pearson paperback, 2006.

Anthony Molho and Gordon S. Wood, Imagined Histories: American Historians Interpret the Past, Princeton, 1998, 0-691-05811-3

Peter Burke, New Perspectives on Historical Writing, second edition, Penn State, 2001, 0-271-02117-9

Peter Burke, History and Social Theory, second edition, Cornell, 2005, 978-0-8014-7285-5

Ernst Breisach, On the Future of History: The Postmodernist Challenge and its Aftermath, University of Chicago Press, 2003, 0-226-07280-0

Robert O. Paxton, The Anatomy of Fascism, Knopf, 2005, 1-400-03391-8

Patrick J. Geary, The Myth of Nations: The Medieval Origins of Europe, Princeton, 2002,  0-691-11481-1

Mary S. Hartman, The Household and the Making of History: A Subversive View of the Western Past, Cambridge, 2004, 0-521-53669-3

Matthew Connelly, A Diplomatic Revolution: Algeria’s Fight for Independence and the Origins of the Post-Cold War Era, Oxford, 2002, 0-195-17095-4

James F. Brooks, Captives and Cousins: Kinship and Community in the Southwest Borderlands, North Carolina, 2002, 0-807-85382-8

Brooke Larson, Cochabamba, 1550-1990: Colonial and Agrarian Transformation in Bolivia, Duke University Press, 1998, 0-822-32088-6

Timothy Burke, Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women: Commodification, Consumption, and Cleanliness in Modern Zimbabwe, Duke, 1996, 0-8223-1762-1

Paul A. Cohen, History in Three Keys: the Boxers as Event, Experience, and Myth, Columbia, 1998, 0-231-10651-3

Mike Davis, Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino Famines and the Making of the Third World, Verso, 2001, 1-85984-382-4

Peter Barry, Beginning Theory: An Introduction to Literary and Cultural Theory, Manchester University Press paperback 1995 0-7190-4326-3

Patrick Baert, Social Theory in the Twentieth Century, New York University Press paperback, 1998 0-8147-1339-4

Jonathan Clark, Our Shadowed Present: Modernism, Postmodernism, and History, Stanford University Press 
paperback, 2003 0-8047-5149-8

Course Requirements and Grading:

Nine book reviews 27%

One historiography essay 33%

One seminar presentation 20%

Contribution to discussions 20%

Evaluation of Student Performance:

Thorough and critical reading of assigned materials is an essential first step for successful work in this course.  Students should also come to class prepared to discuss larger issues of the discipline of history raised in the assignments. Students are urged to read all the articles scheduled for seminar presentations, in order to be prepared to discuss issues raised in the articles.  Questions and comments should be posed in a spirit of constructive criticism, i.e. analytical in substance and supportive and collegial in style.

Participation in seminar discussions is mandatory, not optional, and will be evaluated according to criteria listed below. Students should be prepared to play active roles in both initiating and guiding discussion during class meetings.

Regular class attendance and active participation in discussions is a requirement in this course. The quality of your class participation is obviously important, and the ideal would be frequent, high quality, participation. We will always be guided by the questions of critical reading and analysis mentioned above and outlined below, and the following points tend to characterize effective participation.

1. Are the points made substantive and relevant to the discussion? Are they linked to the comments of others?

2. Do comments show that the participant has been listening?

3. Do comments clarify and highlight the important aspects of earlier comments and lead to a clearer statement of the concepts being covered?

4. Is the participant willing to interact with other  class members?

5. Do comments show evidence of analysis?

6. Do comments add to our understanding?

7. Does the participant distinguish between facts, opinions, beliefs, and between positive and normative analysis?

8. Is there a willingness to test new ideas?

Constructive class participation is an essential part of this seminar. I will monitor discussion during each class period. If I come to believe that a particular student is not participating as actively as I think he or she should, then I will make a point of calling on the student in hopes of eliciting a more satisfactory level of class involvement.

When we discuss assigned books, we shall organize our work in relation to the seven-point guide given on the Book Review sheet, as well as in relation to the Critical Reading guide sheet. At the very beginning of the course be sure to read these materials carefully and be prepared to answer the questions in relation to the book under discussion.

This assignment is designed to afford students an opportunity to prepare and deliver a presentation that in all respects except for length approximates a professional lecture. Please follow these guidelines in preparing and delivering your twenty-five minute report. Prepare an outline of your report, including a bibliography of works consulted, for distribution (maximum two pages).

A. What is the author's purpose?

B. What is the author’s thesis and how is the thesis developed?

(Points A and B should be covered in no more than five minutes)

C. What can we learn about the topic of the class meeting from this particular article; how does the article contribute to an understanding of this particular field of historical research and writing? Spend a minimum of 10 minutes on this section, and show how the article compares and contrasts with the other readings assigned for the class meeting, as well as to relevant collateral reading.

D. What insights about trends in the discipline of history can be derived from this article? Devote at least 10 minutes to this section, placing the article in the context of its time, and referring explicitly to The Pursuit of History and relevant collateral reading.

Rehearsal will allow you to improve your presentation. If you do not rehearse, you will probably have trouble keeping your report within the time available. Rehearsal will also help you keep eye contact with the audience. It is vital that you do not read your report. Be prepared, also, for questions from the class and from the instructor. Think ahead about the kinds of questions that relate your work to the theme of the class meeting and to the course generally. Finally, remember that both the class and the instructor are on your side; stay calm, relax, and don't rush through your presentation.

The following reference works contain useful background information on concepts, theories, and methodologies. These should be used in preparing your oral reports, book reviews, and historiography essays.

Lloyd Kramer and Sahah Maza, eds.  COMPANION TO WESTERN HISTORICAL THOUGHT (2002)

Harry Ritter, DICTIONARY OF CONCEPTS IN HISTORY (1986) RBR D13R49

Adam & Jessica Kuper, THE SOCIAL SCIENCE ENCYCLOPEDIA (1996)
Second edition, reference stacks, first floor H41S631996.

David Sills, ed. INTERNATIONAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES (1968), Vols. 1-15, reference stacks, first floor H40A15

Raymond Williams, KEYWORDS: A VOCABULARY OF CULTURE AND SOCIETY revised edition (1976), RBR

Ernest Breisach, HISTORIOGRAPHY (1983) D13B6861983

William Outhwaite & Tom Bottomore, THE BLACKWELL DICTIONARY OF TWENTIETH-CENTURY SOCIAL THOUGHT (1993) reference stacks, first floor H41B531993

Michael Groden & Martin Kreiswirth, THE JOHNS HOPKINS GUIDE TO LITERARY THEORY & CRITICISM, second edition (2005)) reference stacks, first floor PN81J5551994

Richard Wightman Fox and James Kloppenberg, A COMPANION TO AMERICAN THOUGHT (1995) reference stacks, first floor E69.1C6851995

Alan Munslow, THE ROUTLEDGE COMPANION TO HISTORICAL STUDIES (2000) RBR.

Michael Bentley, COMPANION TO HISTORIOGRAPHY (1997) RBR.

Eric Foner, THE NEW AMERICAN HISTORY (1997) RBR.

COURSE AGENDA AND READING ASSIGNMENTS:

Personal Introductions

Seminar Report Assignments

The Pursuit of History, chapters 1-6

Report:

Thomas Cochran, "The Presidential Synthesis in American History," AHR, 53 (1948), 748-59.

The Pursuit of History, chapters 7 – Conclusion

Peter Burke, "Overture: The New History" in New Perspectives, 1-24.

Reports:

Bernard Bailyn, "The Challenge of Modern Historiography," AHR 87, (1982), 1-24.

Charles Tilly, "Retrieving European Lives," chapter 1 in Reliving the Past: The Worlds of Social History, edited by Olivier Zunz (University of North Carolina Press, 1985).

Report:

Dorothy Ross, "The New and Newer Histories: Social Theory and Historiography in an American Key" in Imagined Histories (9/15)

5. THE POSTMODERN CHALLENGE AND BEYOND Sept. 22

Report:

William H. Sewell, Jr., "Whatever Happened to the ‘Social’ in Social History?" chapter 13 in Schools of Thought: Twenty-Five Years of Interpretive Social Science (Princeton: 2001), pp. 209-226.

History in Three Keys SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Report:

Allan Megill, "Recounting the Past: Description, Explanation, and Narrative in Historiography, AHR, 94 (1989), 627-653.

Lifebuoy Men, Lux Women SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Gwynn Prins, "Oral History" in New Perspectives

Report:

Joseph C. Miller, "History and Africa/Africa and History" in American Historical Review, 104, 1 (Feb. 1999), 1-32.

Cochabamba SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Henk Wesseling, "Overseas History" in New Perspectives

Reports:

Steve J. Stern, "Africa, Latin America, and the Splintering of Historical Knowledge: From Fragmentation to Reverbertation," chapter 1, and "Feudalism, Capitalism, and the World-System in the Perspective of Latin America and the Caribbean," chapter 2, in Confronting Historical Paradigms (Wisconsin: 1993), pp. 3-20.

Report:

Volker Berghahn and Charles Maier, "Modern Europe in American Historical Writing" in Imagined Histories (9/22)

The Myth of Nations SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Report:

Gabriel M. Spiegel, "In the Mirror’s Eye: the Writing of Medieval History in America," in Imagined Histories

11. EUROPEAN HISTORY SINCE 1500:Oct. 13

The Household and the Making of History SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Joan Scott, "Women's History," in New Perspectives
Linda K. Kerber, "Gender" in Imagined Histories

Report:

Joan Wallach Scott, "Gender: A Useful Category of Analysis," in Joan Scott, Gender and the Politics of History (1988) and William Sewell, "Review Essay: Gender and the  Politics of History," History and Theory, 29 (1990), 71-82

Captives and Cousins SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Giovanni Levi, "On Microhistory," and Jim Sharpe, "History from Below" in New Perspectives

Report:

Ronald P. Formisano, "The Invention of the Ethnocultural Interpretation," AHR, 99, 2 (April 1994), 453-477.

David A. Hollinger, "Amalgamation and Hypodescent: The Question of Ethnoracial Mixture in the History of the United States," in American Historical Review, 108, 5 (December 2003), 1362-1390

Report:

Charles S. Maier, "Consigning the Twentieth Century to History: Alternative Narratives for the Modern Era," in American Historical Review, 105, 3 (June 2000), 807-831.

Late Victorian Holocausts SUBMIT BOOK REVIEW

Eugen Weber, "Western Civilization" in Imagined Histories

Report:

Jerry H. Bentley, "Cross-Cultural Interaction and Periodization in World History," and Patrick Manning, "The Problem of Interactions in World History," in American Historical Review, 101, 3 (June 1996), 749-782.

Gale Stokes, "The Fates of Human Societies: A Review of Recent Macrohistories," in American Historical Review, 106, 2 (April 2001), 508-525.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CRITERIA FOR GRADING ESSAYS

EXCELLENT

Outstanding work

Structure: Clear focus on the question; clear indication of definitions and the direction of the argument; coherence within and between sections; clear conclusion arising from preceding material.

Style: Well written; good vocabulary; attention to spelling, punctuation, grammar; well presented.

Argument: Clear analysis of the key issues; fully developed and complex argument that shows synthesis of material and independent judgment; all statements supported by evidence; familiarity with and manipulation of theoretical perspectives; originality.

Sources: Selections of material wide and relevant; assimilation of class work; reading well beyond course outline; good use of collateral material; all sources properly referenced.

VERY GOOD

Good to very good work, in the upper range containing elements of excellent work.

Structure: Focus on the question; some indication of progress of argument; attention to definitions; generally clear and coherent; adequate conclusion.

Style: Well presented; attention to spelling, grammar punctuation; reasonable vocabulary.

Argument: Good level of analysis; indicates some complexity, though not always fully developed; theoretical perspectives handled with some competence; sound rather than original.

Sources: Fairly wide selection of material; assimilation of class work; some reading beyond outline and class discussion; collateral material not always fully integrated; adequate referencing.

GOOD

Reasonable to good work

Structure: Needs greater focus on the question; needs clearer direction to the reader; better organization would give more coherence; introduction and conclusion could be more developed; lacks clear definitions.

Style: Adequate presentation; spelling, grammar and punctuation could be improved; vocabulary could be wider.

Argument: Needs better balance of analysis and description; point of argument needs to be clearer; relies too heavily on unsupported assertions and generalizations; more theoretical consideration needed.

Sources: Rather limited range of material; mostly class texts and discussion; needs better use of collateral material; over-reliance on class materials; incomplete referencing.

FAIR

Poor or barely acceptable work.

Structure: Very limited reference to question; difficult to follow; very loose definitions; poorly organized; inadequate conclusion.

Style: Spelling, grammar, punctuation need much more attention; vocabulary not appropriate; poor presentation.

Argument: Very simplistic or badly constructed argument; tending to the descriptive; unsupported assertions; point of argument not at all clear; little use of theoretical perspectives.

Sources: Very limited range of material; too much irrelevant material; very little evidence of reading outside class outline and discussion; over-reliance on secondary sources; incomplete or incorrect referencing.

FAIL

Unacceptable Work

Structure: Ignores question; no sense of construction; no indication to reader of line of argument; no introduction or conclusion.

Style: Careless spelling, grammar, punctuation; poor presentation; inappropriate use of vocabulary.

Argument: No sense of argument; no analysis; over-descriptive; unsubstantiated assertions; generalizations; lack of theoretical perspective.

Sources: Extremely limited range of sources; over-reliance on unanalyzed course material; little or no referencing to collateral reading; no indication of assimilation of class discussion.