Thinking through 1492: IR's Historiographic Operation(s) and the Politics of Benchmark Dates

IF 3.5 2区社会学 Q1 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

International Political Sociology Pub Date : 2024-10-04 DOI:10.1093/ips/olae032

Julia Costa López, Zeynep Gülşah Çapan, Ayşe Zarakol, Atsuko Watanabe, Adhemar Mercado

{"title":"Thinking through 1492: IR's Historiographic Operation(s) and the Politics of Benchmark Dates","authors":"Julia Costa López, Zeynep Gülşah Çapan, Ayşe Zarakol, Atsuko Watanabe, Adhemar Mercado","doi":"10.1093/ips/olae032","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Collective Discussion aims to open up space for an international political sociology of the production of historical knowledge that interrogates the politics around benchmark dates and what becomes knowable and unknowable through them. Specifically, it examines 1492 as a historiographical device through which to unpack how the discipline of IR knows history. 1492 presents a relevant case for this interrogation, for it is central for the historical narratives of a variety of approaches. In this sense, the different contributions do not seek to recover an alternative, ‘better’ history of 1492, but rather to explore its politics of knowledge production: what types of histories it makes visible, what types it precludes, and in what way it partakes in the reproduction of specific hierarchies of knowledge and the power structures that operate through them. In doing so, the Collective Discussion makes visible – and thus opens up for discussion – the historiographical operations performed by periodization and benchmark dating in IR, pointing to a way forward for an international political sociology of knowledge production in the discipline.","PeriodicalId":47361,"journal":{"name":"International Political Sociology","volume":"107 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Political Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olae032","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This Collective Discussion aims to open up space for an international political sociology of the production of historical knowledge that interrogates the politics around benchmark dates and what becomes knowable and unknowable through them. Specifically, it examines 1492 as a historiographical device through which to unpack how the discipline of IR knows history. 1492 presents a relevant case for this interrogation, for it is central for the historical narratives of a variety of approaches. In this sense, the different contributions do not seek to recover an alternative, ‘better’ history of 1492, but rather to explore its politics of knowledge production: what types of histories it makes visible, what types it precludes, and in what way it partakes in the reproduction of specific hierarchies of knowledge and the power structures that operate through them. In doing so, the Collective Discussion makes visible – and thus opens up for discussion – the historiographical operations performed by periodization and benchmark dating in IR, pointing to a way forward for an international political sociology of knowledge production in the discipline.

查看原文本刊更多论文

思考 1492 年：IR 的历史学运作与基准日期政治学

本集体讨论旨在为历史知识生产的国际政治社会学开辟空间，审视围绕基准日期的政治以及通过基准日期变得可知和不可知的东西。具体地说，它将 1492 年作为一种史学手段进行研究，以揭示国际关系学科是如何认识历史的。1492 年是这一问题的相关案例，因为它是各种方法的历史叙事的核心。从这个意义上说，不同的贡献并不寻求恢复另一种 "更好 "的 1492 年历史，而是探索其知识生产的政治性：它使哪些类型的历史变得可见，排除了哪些类型的历史，以及它以何种方式参与了特定知识等级制度和通过它们运作的权力结构的再现。在此过程中，《集体讨论》揭示了--并由此开启了--国际关系学中的时期化和基准年代所进行的史学运作，为该学科中的知识生产国际政治社会学指明了前进方向。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

International Political Sociology Multiple-

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

12.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： International Political Sociology (IPS), responds to the need for more productive collaboration among political sociologists, international relations specialists and sociopolitical theorists. It is especially concerned with challenges arising from contemporary transformations of social, political, and global orders given the statist forms of traditional sociologies and the marginalization of social processes in many approaches to international relations. IPS is committed to theoretical innovation, new modes of empirical research and the geographical and cultural diversification of research beyond the usual circuits of European and North-American scholarship.