{"title":"UMA ANÁLISE SOBRE ASPECTOS DA HISTORIOGRAFIA DA ESCRAVIDÃO BRASILEIRA PÓS-1980: permanências, mudanças e matizes no interior dessa tendência","authors":"Luís Claudio Palermo","doi":"10.22264/clio.issn2525-5649.2019.37.2.03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the article is to examine two important books for the historiography of Brazilian slavery of the period after the 1980s. The discussion is based on two references: the first is the appreciation of the contextual perspective of a work; the second is the relational view between synchrony and diachrony. In this sense, the article both highlights the brand that the two books print in their period, as well as highlights the dialogues they have with the previous historiographical tradition. As a result, two important points are defended in the article: the ruptures promoted by the historiography of post-1980 slavery did not eliminate theoretical and interpretive differences in their own interior; the changes propounded by this historiographical tendency were not completely and absolutely carried out, since elements of permanence can, to some extent, be identified.","PeriodicalId":346865,"journal":{"name":"CLIO: Revista de Pesquisa Histórica","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLIO: Revista de Pesquisa Histórica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22264/clio.issn2525-5649.2019.37.2.03","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The aim of the article is to examine two important books for the historiography of Brazilian slavery of the period after the 1980s. The discussion is based on two references: the first is the appreciation of the contextual perspective of a work; the second is the relational view between synchrony and diachrony. In this sense, the article both highlights the brand that the two books print in their period, as well as highlights the dialogues they have with the previous historiographical tradition. As a result, two important points are defended in the article: the ruptures promoted by the historiography of post-1980 slavery did not eliminate theoretical and interpretive differences in their own interior; the changes propounded by this historiographical tendency were not completely and absolutely carried out, since elements of permanence can, to some extent, be identified.