Autobiography and Class Formation in Nineteenth-Century Europe: Methodological Considerations

1992 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 517-537 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary Jo Maynes
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Social ◽  
Large Populations ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Historical Accounts ◽  
Interdisciplinary Study ◽  
Historical Social Science

Historical social science—which I understand to be analysis of change over time that is informed by the theories, methods, and questions of the social sciences—has in the past 25 or 30 years established itself as an important area of interdisciplinary study. It emerged at a point in time when, in the United States at least, several of the social science disciplines were dominated by positivist epistemologies and models drawn from the natural sciences. In practice, much of what has been understood as social science history has centered on the recovery and analysis of largely quantifiable sources that allowed the writing of the collective biography of large populations—the ordinary people arguably under-or unrepresented in classic historical accounts of previous eras. Drawing upon social-scientific traditions provided concepts and methodologies for analyzing processes that encompassed everyone, rather than merely the events dominated by an elite, and for studying relatively anonymous collectivities rather than merely the “great men.”

Migration and the Nation

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Leslie Page Moch
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Presidential Address ◽  
Human Movement ◽  
The United States ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
International Perspectives ◽  
The Social ◽  
Global Movements

The theme of this year’s meeting, “International Perspectives on Social Science History,” rises out of two realities. The first is the recognized international character of phenomena under study, such as fertility decline, political contention, family strategies in response to changing conditions, gendered work, migration, labor, and policing. The second is the way in which the Social Science History Association (SSHA) operates across borders and among scholars in the Americas, Europe, and Asia to investigate common scholarly problems. The attention of migration scholars is now focused on global movements of people and international migrations, particularly immigration. The politics and policies of receiving newcomers are very important now–in the Americas and in Europe. The SSHA is giving its attention to the old and new international immigrants to the United States, as in last year’s session on Nancy Foner’s fine book on New York,From Ellis Island to JFK(2000), and the presidential address by Caroline Brettell (2002) on the quantitative and qualitative methods by which we can understand human movement.

Social Anthropology and Social Science History

2009 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
David I. Kertzer
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Cultural Anthropology ◽  
The United States ◽  
Social Anthropology ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Social ◽  
Clifford Geertz ◽  
Simultaneous Movement

In the 1970s, when the social science history movement emerged in the United States, leading to the founding of the Social Science History Association, a simultaneous movement arose in which historians looked to cultural anthropology for inspiration. Although both movements involved historians turning to social sciences for theory and method, they reflected very different views of the nature of the historical enterprise. Cultural anthropology, most notably as preached by Clifford Geertz, became a means by which historians could find a theoretical basis in the social sciences for rejecting a scientific paradigm. This article examines this development while also exploring the complex ways cultural anthropology has embraced—and shunned—history in recent years.

The Charles Tilly and Louise Tilly Fund for Social Science History

2010 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 403-404
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Science History ◽  
Interdisciplinary Field ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
Charles Tilly ◽  
Graduate Research ◽  
The Social ◽  
Historical Social Science

At the Albert O. Hirschman Prize ceremony in October 2008, the Social Science Research Council (SSRC), in cooperation with the Social Science History Association, announced the inauguration of the endowed Tilly Fund in celebration of the lifelong contributions of Charles Tilly and Louise Tilly (see www.ssrc.org/programs/tilly-fund-for-social-science-history). Charles Tilly died just a few weeks after receiving that year's Hirschman Prize. The Tilly Fund provides travel grants to graduate students participating in meetings of the Social Science History Association and awards an annual Tilly Prize for the Best Graduate Paper in Social Science History. Funds permitting, it will also support graduate research and other activities with the goal of advancing historical social science, the interdisciplinary field to which both Charles and Louise devoted their careers.

The Social Science History Association at 40: A Savory Chop Suey

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (4) ◽  
pp. 535-563
Author(s):  
Susan Boslego Carter
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Multidisciplinary Research ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
Academic Fields ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Geographic Regions ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Academic Rewards

Multidisciplinary conversations are tough. Language, habits of thinking, and styles of presentation and criticism differ profoundly across disciplines. Academic rewards to multidisciplinary research are unpredictable. Yet year after year, for 40 years running now, the Social Science History Association (SSHA) has hosted increasingly large, multidisciplinary conferences that attract scholars from a diverse set of academic fields and geographic regions. By fostering debate in an atmosphere of civility, respect, and inclusiveness, the SSHA has become a premiere venue for introducing the latest in social scientific topics, methods, and data. Here I salute the founders and guardians of the culture responsible for this impressive achievement with a multidisciplinary foray into the history of America's chop suey craze of the early twentieth century. Like the remarkable history of the SSHA, the history of chop suey illustrates the importance of civility, respect, and democratic inclusiveness in fostering innovation. It is a story that celebrates the rewards to institutions that promote such virtues.

scholarly journals The Revivalism of Narrative: A Response to Recent Criticisms of Quantitative History

1984 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-149 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Morgan Kousser
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Presidential Address ◽  
Original Sin ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Social ◽  
Degree Of Acceptance ◽  
Employment Trends ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Historical Profession

In his presidential address to the Social Science History Association Convention in November 1981, Robert William Fogel declared sanguinely that social scientific historians had won their battle for legitimacy within the historical profession in America, and that we should now stop feeling embattled, spend less effort proselytizing, and calmly go on with our substantive work. While his statistics on the occupational advancement of social scientific historians do indicate a degree of acceptance, and while his advice to worry less and pay attention to business will be followed (as that is what nearly all of us were doing anyway), I am less optimistic than Fogel, read the employment trends differently, and see more signs of a reaction against quantitative social scientific history—or what I like to refer to as QUASSH—than he does (Kousser, 1980). Perhaps Professor Fogel and I differ only temperamentally. As a former Marxist, he still retains a bit of faith in the inevitable triumph of progressive forces; as a former Methodist, I am unable to shake off the pessimism that is the psychological residue of the doctrine of original sin. In any case, whereas Fogel seems to think that most recent criticisms of QUASSH are so obviously flawed as to require no answer, I fear that some people, especially those with substantial investments in “history-as-it-used-to-be-done,” may still be susceptible to false messiahs or, perhaps more precisely, false Jeremiahs.

Feudal Europe, 800–1300: communal discourse and conflictual practices

1992 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 427-466 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Critical Theory ◽  
Social Science ◽  
International Relations ◽  
Social Theory ◽  
Structural Theory ◽  
Historical Change ◽  
Fundamental Significance ◽  
The Social ◽  
Social Scientific ◽  
Scientific Argument

The discipline of international relations faces a new debate of fundamental significance. After the realist challenge to the pervasive idealism of the interwar years and the social scientific argument against realism in the late 1950s, it is now the turn of critical theorists to dispute the established paradigms of international politics, having been remarkably successful in several other fields of social inquiry. In essence, critical theorists claim that all social reality is subject to historical change, that a normative discourse of understandings and values entails corresponding practices, and that social theory must include interpretation and dialectical critique. In international relations, this approach particularly critiques the ahistorical, scientific, and materialist conceptions offered by neorealists. Traditional realists, by contrast, find a little more sympathy in the eyes of critical theorists because they join them in their rejection of social science and structural theory. With regard to liberal institutionalism, critical theorists are naturally sympathetic to its communitarian component while castigating its utilitarian strand as the accomplice of neorealism. Overall, the advent of critical theory will thus focus the field of international relations on its “interparadigm debate” with neorealism.

Life Cycles in Social Science History

1999 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 481-489
Author(s):  
Andrew Abbott
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Life Cycles ◽  
Science History ◽  
The Past ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
The Social ◽  
Definition Of

When one is asked to speak on the past, present, and future of social science history, one is less overwhelmed by the size of the task than confused by its indexicality. Whose definition of social science history? Which past? Or, put another way, whose past? Indeed, which and whose present? Moreover, should the task be taken as one of description, prescription, or analysis? Many of us might agree on, say, a descriptive analysis of the past of the Social Science History Association. But about the past of social science history as a general rather than purely associational phenomenon, we might differ considerably. The problem of description versus prescription only increases this obscurity.

Personal Reflections on the 1982 Special Anthropometric Issue of Social Science History

2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-349 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stanley L. Engerman
Keyword(s):  
Social Science ◽  
Economic History ◽  
Local Population ◽  
Human Growth ◽  
The United States ◽  
National Bureau ◽  
Science History ◽  
Social Science History ◽  
Christopher Lasch ◽  
Personal Reflections

Looking back at the more than 20 years that have gone by since the 1982 special issue of Social Science History, it is interesting to observe how important the study of anthropometric data has been in contributing to economic history and related disciplines.While there had been numerous earlier comments by contemporary observers as well as by scholars about heights and their implications as seen in JamesTanner's marvelous study, A History of the Study of Human Growth (1981), the systematic work that was reflected in the 1982 volume was then only about six or seven years old in the United States. It represented the early output of a study directed by Robert Fogel, primarily through the Development of the American Economy (DAE) project of the National Bureau of Economic Research.There had been a few previous publications including my own piece in Local Population Studies (Engerman 1976). My first use of the height-by-age data was in response to a dinnerparty conversation in 1974 with two ofmy colleagues in the Rochester history department:Herbert Gutman and Christopher Lasch.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document