Medieval Social and Economic History as Viewed by North American Medievalists

1975 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 630-634 ◽  
Author(s):  
Archibald R. Lewis
Keyword(s):  
Social History ◽  
North American ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Lively Discussion ◽  
American Historical Review ◽  
Subsequent Discussion

The problem of how North American medievalists should deal with social and economic history is one which seems to have some importance the present time. Two recent articles in the JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC HISTORY are concerned with this matter. So are two others which have just appeared in the American Historical Review and which, since they examine quantitative history in general, throw light on this problem. Because of this kind of current interest, it was decided to hold a special session devoted to social and economic history at the recent semicentennial anniversary meeting of the Mediaeval Academy of America. This session was preceded by a questionnaire sent to 105 medieval historians of the United States and Canada who represented every field study, every age group, and every geographic area of this continent. Seventy replies were received and a lively discussion took place later at the meeting itself, which some thirty scholars attended. This article represents an attempt to sum up the results of both the survey and the subsequent discussion because it should be of value not only to medievalists but also to a wider body of scholars who share an interest in economic and social history in general.

The English Aristocracy, Its Crises, and the English Revolution, 1558-1660

1968 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-78 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. H. Hexter
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Social History ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
English Revolution ◽  
American Historical Review ◽  
York Review ◽  
Original Contribution ◽  
Historical Contribution

“A landmark in the historical landscape” —The Economist; “A major contribution … an impressive achievement, which must in future put all historians in his debt” —The Listener; “A remarkable achievement … an outstanding study of a very real and great value” —History; “A mammoth and marvellous book” —American Historical Review; “Immense value” —English Historical Review; “A model” —Journal of Economic History; “A major historical contribution … a magisterial and seminal work” —Journal of Modern History; “A brilliant and original contribution” —New York Review of Books; “Social history at its absolute best” —Past and Present.Such was the chorus of critical encomium that greeted the publication of Lawrence Stone'sCrisis of the Aristocracy, 1558-1641. Despite the chorus Stone could hardly have helped being disappointed at the actual reviews. One or two were almost as fatuous as they were brief. Others, sensible within their limits, were still too short. This seems to have been the fault of editors, so intimidated by the pejorative sense of the term “discrimination” that they refuse to discriminate between a work worth more than twenty pages and one worth less than twenty words, performing their editorial duties in the matter of book reviews with a sort of timorous and lunatic egalitarianism. Moreover, in considering Stone's work, many of the reviewers hastily plunged into what has come to be called “the gentry controversy” or “the storm over the gentry,” and some became almost totally immersed in it.

The Revival of Quantification: Reflections on Old New Histories

2021 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Steven Ruggles
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Social History ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Historical Analysis ◽  
The United States ◽  
First Century ◽  
Third Wave ◽  
Late Twentieth ◽  
The 1960S ◽  
Second Wave

AbstractQuantitative historical analysis in the United States surged in three distinct waves. The first quantitative wave occurred as part of the “New History” that blossomed in the early twentieth century and disappeared in the 1940s and 1950s with the rise of consensus history. The second wave thrived from the 1960s to the 1980s during the ascendance of the New Economic History, the New Political History, and the New Social History, and died out during the “cultural turn” of the late twentieth century. The third wave of historical quantification—which I call the revival of quantification—emerged in the second decade of the twenty-first century and is still underway. I describe characteristics of each wave and discuss the historiographical context of the ebb and flow of quantification in history.

Recently Published Articles: A Historical Bibliography of Interest to Africanists

1977 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 307-308 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Gardinier
Keyword(s):  
Historical Review ◽  
The United States ◽  
African History ◽  
Review Section ◽  
American Historical Association ◽  
American Historical Review ◽  
Extensive Coverage ◽  
The Cost

In February of 1976 the American Historical Association published the first issue of Recently Published Articles. RPA is a current, comprehensive bibliography of scholarly historical articles in all fields, and replaces the bibliographical sections previously published in the American Historical Review under the same title. RPA is issued three times a year and, at present, lists nearly 15,000 citations annually, of which about one-eighth relate to Africa -- a number second only to that for the United States.The creation of RPA resulted from the re-organization of the American Historical Association and its various services. A survey of American Historical Review subscribers revealed a desire by the majority for a more extensive and balanced book review section and most of the space left in the Review by the departure of the bibliography has in fact been filled by additional book reviews, including more in African history. Surprisingly -- and perhaps distressingly -- only a minority of those surveyed indicated that they consulted the bibliographical sections with any regularity. Because of this, and because the growth of the bibliographies during the 1970s (reflecting both increased output and better coverage) was adding steadily to the cost of producing the Review, it was decided to transfer these costs directly to the users -- a practice the reader will recognize as becoming more common. At the same time it was decided to intensify efforts at better and more extensive coverage, in particular to include more articles outside history proper which nevertheless have interest to historians.

A North American Historical Review of Three-Axle Freight Trucks

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
William Shust ◽  
Michael M. Palmieri
Keyword(s):  
20Th Century ◽  
North American ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Past Century ◽  
Heavy Duty ◽  
The Past ◽  
American Historical Review ◽  
Current Usage ◽  
Freight Trucks

Abstract At first glance, it seems appealing to suggest additional wheelsets under a given railcar type. From the track’s viewpoint, and in a simplistic analysis, trading a particular car’s four-axles for the use of six should allow half again more car weight. This paper will examine efforts to test this concept over the past century. Indeed, the railway marketplace has investigated the three-axle truck in both the freight and passenger car arenas multiple times over the past century. Except in heavy-duty flatcars, the record shows that each implementation has proven to be only temporary. In general, three-axle freight trucks were developed for use with steam locomotive tenders in the early 20th century. These designs were then adapted to other car types over several decades, involving thousands of individual cars. Today, three-axle trucks are nearly extinct. This paper will address the history and status of three-axle freight trucks (or bogies) as used in North American railcar operations. Various past 20th-century applications will be discussed. International efforts will be reviewed as well. The very limited and remaining current usage of three-axle trucks is also discussed.

Historiography (2001)

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruce Trigger
Keyword(s):  
Social History ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Analytical Techniques ◽  
Smithsonian Institution ◽  
The United States ◽  
History Of Archaeology ◽  
American Archaeology ◽  
The Public ◽  
History Of

Historical works dealing with archaeology have been written to entertain the public, commemorate important archaeologists and research projects, instruct students in the basic concepts of the discipline, justify particular programmes or ideas, disparage the work of rivals, and, most recently, try to resolve theoretical problems. These studies have taken the form of autobiographies, biographies, accounts of the development of the discipline as a whole, investigations of specific institutions or projects, and examinations of particular theories and approaches. They have used the analytical techniques of intellectual and social history and sought to treat their subject objectively, critically, hermeneutically, and polemically. Over time, historical studies have become more numerous, diversified, and sophisticated. Histories of archaeology are being written for all parts of the world, and in a growing number of countries, a large amount of material is being produced at local as well as national levels. There is no end in sight to the growing interest in this form of research. The history of archaeology has been written mainly by professional archaeologists, who have no training in history or the history of science, and by popularizers. Only a small number of these studies have been produced by professional historians. Archaeology has attracted little attention from historians of science, despite its considerable interest to philosophers of science. This lack of interest is hard to understand since the difficulties inherent in inferring human behaviour from archaeological evidence make archaeology an ideal discipline for addressing many of the issues of objectivity that are currently of interest to historians of science. The earliest use of the history of archaeology appears to have been for didactic purposes. In the mid-nineteenth century, the physicist Joseph Henry, the first secretary of the Smithsonian Institution, sought to purge American archaeology of useless speculation and to encourage an interest in factual research. To do this, he commissioned Samuel F. Haven, the librarian of the American Antiquarian Society, to write a critical historical review of studies of American prehistory titled Archaeology of the United States (1856). To improve the quality of American archaeology, Henry also published reports on developments in the discipline in the Annual Report of the Smithsonian Institution, which was widely distributed in North America.

Bibliographical Note — The Vatican Film Library at Saint Louis University

1957 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 425-436
Author(s):  
August C. Bolino
Keyword(s):  
Economic History ◽  
Historical Review ◽  
Film Library ◽  
Bibliographical Note ◽  
Saint Louis ◽  
Saint Louis University ◽  
National Geographic ◽  
American Historical Review ◽  
Saturday Review ◽  
Fruitful Research

Although the Vatican Film Library at Saint Louis University has been described recently in such diverse publications as the London Times, Osservatore Romano, Time, The American Historical Review, the Saturday Review and the National Geographic, it has never been explored fully by the scholarly world. The object of this article is to describe the extent of the microfilm collection at Saint Louis University, to provide some guides to the use of the manuscripts, and to indicate some possible areas of fruitful research in business and economic history.

New Tools for the Economic Historian

1941 ◽  
Vol 1 (S1) ◽  
pp. 30-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. A. J. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Social History ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Social Life ◽  
The United States ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Single Industry ◽  
History Of ◽  
Women And Children ◽  
Wage Earners

Archeologists assure us that organized social life has existed on this earth for about two hundred and fifty thousand years. How millions of people have sought to satisfy their wants over this tremendous span of time is the acknowledged province of economic history. Yet, for lack of records, the gild of economic historians must, for the most part, confine their attention to the last one per cent of this time span; indeed the great bulk of research in economic history is devoted the last one-tenth of one per cent of the archeologists' two hundred and fifty thousand years of social history. Even then the economic historian is utterly overwhelmed with facts. He who essays to write the economic history of the United States, for example, must depict as best can the economic activities of people for more than a hundred and fifty years, farmers, merchants, manufacturers, wage-earners, rentiers; men, women and children in all walks of life, in all variety of occupations. The task is utterly staggering. An army of economic historians would be required to write a complete economic history of the United States; a regiment at least to write a faithful factual account of a single industry.

A Plea for Political History

1955 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 511-529
Author(s):  
Raymond P. Stearns
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Intellectual History ◽  
Social History ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Political History ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Today ◽  
Political Scene

“I am not a politician, and my other habits are good.” This statement appeared almost twenty years ago in a serious book about The American Political Scene, and it reflects a widespread opinion in the United States today. The term “politician” widely connotes evil, corruption, and crass self-aggrandisement at public expense. Politics is frequently looked upon as a disreputable profession; and political history is often considered dull, meaningless, and insignificant, especially when compared with economic history, intellectual history, or that unpredictable mosaic called social history. This state of things appears curious in view of these facts: that government plays a larger role in our lives than ever before and that politics is the process by means of which governmental policies are formulated. Indeed, it might well be argued that it is a regrettable and even an indefensible state of things if, as seems likely, “big government” is here to stay.

Frequency of Canine and Feline Tumors in a Defined Population

1978 ◽  
Vol 15 (6) ◽  
pp. 700-715 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. W. MacVean ◽  
A. W. Monlux ◽  
P. S. Anderson ◽  
S. L. Silberg ◽  
J. F. Roszel
Keyword(s):  
Mammary Cancer ◽  
Malignant Tumors ◽  
Mammary Tumors ◽  
Geographic Area ◽  
The United States ◽  
Benign Tumors ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Primary Tumors ◽  
Tumor Registry ◽  
Animal Tumor

The Tulsa Registry of Canine and Feline Neoplasms was the second animal tumor registry in the United States concerned with a defined population in a delimited geographic area. Only tumors histologically confirmed by registry pathologists were included in frequency statistics based on the annual dog and cat population presented to veterinarians. During the first registry year, about 1% of the 63,504 dogs and 0.5% of the 11,909 cats had one or more primary tumors. While the incidence rate for malignant tumors in dogs was similar to that in cats, the incidence of benign tumors of dogs was over 10 times that of cats. The most common tumors were sebaceous adenoma in dogs and lymphosarcoma in cats. Mammary cancer was the most common malignant tumor in dogs. Mammary tumors of female dogs were significantly more frequent in Pointers, Poodles and Boston Terriers, in that order, than in other breeds. A greater incidence of mammary tumors among intact compared to spayed female dogs was seen for virtually every age group except in the Pointer breed.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document