Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T21:24:09.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Incidental Things in Historiography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2020

Jutta Wimmler
Jutta Wimmler*
Affiliation:
European University Viadrina, Große Scharrnstraße 59, 15230Frankfurt (Oder), Germany Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There are some obvious differences between an archaeological and a historiographical approach to things. Put crudely, archaeologists study material ‘things’ while historians study texts. If historians are confronted with things, it is usually through descriptions of them (texts)—thus through the medium of the written word. In the introduction to this issue, the authors propose that the concept of Beiläufigkeit can help us ‘to discuss the conditions and processes that are responsible for the variable status of things in a world of objects’. They also propose that a way of approaching the subject is by studying things ‘that were made to be incidental’. One way of applying this to historical scholarship is to look at the way things appear—and disappear—in the historiographical narrative. If Beiläufigkeit is a fundamental phenomenon of socialization, as they suggest, then it is also a consequence of historical learning: we are taught when things are historically relevant and when they are not. It seems important to question this, especially if we think of historiography as part of a larger discourse that stabilizes and perpetuates hegemonic narratives—such as the narrative of the emergence of the modern West.

Type
Special Section
Information
Cambridge Archaeological Journal , Volume 30 , Issue 1 , February 2020 , pp. 153 - 156
Copyright
Copyright © McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Andersen, N.Å., 2003. Discursive Analytical Strategies: Understanding Foucault, Koselleck, Laclau, Luhmann. Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckert, S., 2014. Empire of Cotton: A global history. New York (NY): Knopf.Google Scholar
Carney, J.A., 2001. Black Rice: The African origins of rice cultivation in the Americas. Cambridge (MA): Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Curtin, P.D., 1975. Economic Change in Precolonial Africa. Senegambia in the era of the slave trade. Madison (WI): University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Delcourt, A., 1952. La France et les établissements français au Sénégal entre 1713 et 1763. La Guerre de la Gomme [France and French institutions in Senegal between 1713 and 1763. The gum war]. Dakar: IFAN.Google Scholar
Foucault, M., 2003a. Vorlesung vom 7. Januar 1976 [Lecture on 7 January 1976], in Michel Foucault. Schriften in vier Bänden. Dits et Ecrits, Band III 1976–1979, eds Defert, D. & Ewald, F.. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 213–31.Google Scholar
Foucault, M., 2003b. Der Diskurs darf nicht gehalten werden für …[Discourse should not be understood as …], in Michel Foucault. Schriften in vier Bänden. Dits et Ecrits, Band III 1976–1979, eds Defert, D. & Ewald, F.. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, 164–5.Google Scholar
Harwich-Vallenilla, N., 1992. Histoire du chocolat [The story of chocolate]. Paris: Desjonquères.Google Scholar
Inikori, J.E., 2002. Africans and the Industrial Revolution in England. A study in international trade and economic development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landwehr, A., 2016. Die anwesende Abwesenheit der Vergangenheit: Essay zur Geschichtstheorie [The present absence of the past: an essay on the theory of history]. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer.Google Scholar
Ludwig, A., 2015. Geschichte ohne Dinge? Materielle Kultur zwischen Beiläufigkeit und Quelle [History without things? Material culture between incidentalness and source]. Historische Anthropologie 23, 431–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menard, R.R., 2006. Sweet Negotiations: Sugar, slavery, and plantation agriculture in early Barbados. Charlottesville (VA): University of Virginia Press.Google Scholar
Menninger, A., 2004. Genuss im kulturellen Wandel: Tabak, Kaffee, Tee und Schokolade in Europa (16.–19. Jahrhundert) [The cultural dynamics of pleasure: tobacco, coffee, tea and chocolate in Europe (16th–19th centuries)]. Stuttgart: Franz Steiner.Google Scholar
Norton, M., 2008. Sacred Gifts, Profane Pleasures: A history of tobacco and chocolate in the Atlantic world. Ithaca (NY): Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S., 2004. Tropical Babylons: Sugar and the making of the Atlantic world, 1450–1680. Chapel Hill (NC): University of North Carolina Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thornton, J., 1992. Africa and Africans in the Making of the Atlantic World, 1400–1680. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Trentmann, F., 2009. Crossing divides. Consumption and globalization in history. Journal of Consumer Culture 9(2), 187–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, J.L.A. Jr., 1985. The trade in gum arabic. Prelude to French conquest in Senegal. Journal of African History 26(2/3), 149–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, J.L.A. Jr., 1995. Desert Frontier. Ecological and economic change along the western Sahel, 1600–1850. Madison (WI): University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Wimmler, J., 2019. From Senegal to Augsburg: gum arabic and the central European textile industry in the eighteenth century. Textile History 50(1), 4–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar