In his recent post on March 31, Cristoph Strobel highlighted the important questions and critiques of the world history field by the final panel at the NERWHA symposium last Saturday. One of the issues brought up by Prasannan Parthasarathi (Boston College) and Govind Sreenavasan (Brandeis University) was the need to more clearly define labels, particularly those of global and world history.
Welcome to H-World, a network for practitioners of world history. The list gives emphasis to research, to teaching, and to the connections between research and teaching.
As promised in my post earlier this week, here are some thoughts on the final panel at the NERWHA symposium on Saturday. The session, “World History Research Now,” featured several noted historians: Erez Manela (Harvard University), Prasannan Parthasarathi (Boston College), Govind Sreenavasan (Brandeis University), and Carolein Stolte (Leiden University). While these scholars do not necessarily self-identify as “world historians,” they raised several compelling and important questions and critiques that the field should consider.
CALL FOR PARTICIPANTS
Genocide in World History
I enjoyed the NERWHA conference immensely and appreciate the effort the organizers exerted to make this an intellectually stimulating day. The various panels brought up a wide range of issues in the field of world history that I think are worth discussing on this list, including the question as to whether the “global turn” in historiography across the entire discipline of history has made the field of world history redundant. (I don’t think so, but I think it is worth discussing).
How to Respond to (or Create) a Discussion Post On H-World