INA BAGHDIANTZ MCCABE, The Shah's Silk for Europe's Silver: The Eurasian Trade of the Julfa Armenians in Safavid Iran and India (1530–1750), Armenian Texts and Studies 15 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania 1999). Pp. 436.

2001 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 291-293
Author(s):  
STEPHEN FREDERIC DALE ◽  
Thomas K. Park

It has long been recognized that Iranian silk constituted the principal source of foreign exchange of the Safavid state in the reign of Shah [ayn]Abbas I (1589–1629), and widely appreciated that Armenian merchants of New Julfa, Isfahan, played a critical role in marketing Iranian silk both within the country and abroad. It is all the more remarkable therefore to consider that Ina Baghdiantz McCabe has produced the first major study of the Iranian Armenian community's business organization, their relationship with the Safavid state, and the nature of their involvement in the production and marketing of Iranian silk. Based on Armenian, English, French, and Persian sources, this well-illustrated publication in the University of Pennsylvania's Armenian Texts and Studies series represents an ambitious work of political economy. In it, Baghdiantz McCabe argues forcefully that the Armenians' position reflected the implementation of systematic economic goals by Iranian monarchs; that Armenians during the reign of Shah [ayn]Abbas I became part of the political elite; that Armenian trade, far from being the work of itinerant peddlers, was directed by a highly organized, extremely wealthy commercial elite; and that Armenian merchants operating within the Safavid system were successful in excluding European companies from gaining significant influence in the Iranian silk trade.

Architectura ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-213
Author(s):  
Christine Beese

AbstractThe following article will point out the way in which the roman Città Universitaria (1932 –1935) played a crucial role for the historiography of architecture in Italy. While the debate of the 1930ies was marked by negotiations of a genuine fascist art, essence and appropriate form, important historians and critics of the post-war era were engaged in establishing the master narrative of an ethical and progressive modernity in contrast to a retrograde and reprehensible traditionalism. The endeavor to take the Universities architecture and artwork in for a particular concept of artistic quality exerts a significant influence on todays estimation as well as handling of the building complex. By focusing on the issue of a ›true‹ modernity, architectural historians tend to lose sight of the planning program of the entire building complex, the political content of its spatial organization. Regarding its capacity of embodying ideologies, universities in contrast to government buildings are often underestimated as less telling. The article shows that at least the fascist regime used the university building complex as an important political instrument for performatively actualizing its educational policy, a policy which was indissolubly connected to the idea of forming the fascist ›uomo nuovo‹. Considering its continuous use for educational purposes the author suggests taking account of this aspect when valuing the actual qualities of the Città Universitaria.


2020 ◽  
pp. 030582982093706
Author(s):  
Isaac Kamola

Why does IR scholarship seem so resistant to travel into other disciplinary spaces? To answer this question, I look at the tendency for scholars within our discipline to talk to the discipline, about the discipline, and for the discipline. We obsess over ‘IR’ and, in doing so, reify IR as a thing. I turn towards Edward Said’s arguments about the worldliness of texts, and how reification shapes how ideas travel. I then provide two illustrations of how scholars have reified IR as a thing: Robert Cox’s approach to critical theory and Amitav Acharya’s call for a ‘Global IR’. In both cases, contrary to expectation, the authors reify IR as a thing, portraying the discipline as distinct from the world. IR is treated as something with agency, ignoring how disciplinary knowledge is produced within worldly institutions. I conclude by looking at three strategies for studying worldly relations in ways that refuse to reify the discipline: showing disloyalty to the discipline, engaging the political economy of higher education, and seeking to decolonise the university. Rather than reifying IR, these strategies help us to engage our scholarly work in a way that prioritises worldly critical engagements within our disciplinary community, and the world.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document