帝国的来源:历史IR写作中的谈判历史与虚构

IF 1.7 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Julia Costa Lopez
{"title":"帝国的来源:历史IR写作中的谈判历史与虚构","authors":"Julia Costa Lopez","doi":"10.1080/09557571.2023.2271998","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In framing themselves as myth-busters, historical IR scholars have inscribed the distinction between history and fiction into how they speak to the discipline. And yet, engagement with what this might mean for the status of historical knowledge has mostly focused on broad metatheoretical distinctions and debates. Against this, I argue that questions about historical knowledge and its status are best understood as contingent settlements in the research practice of writing history, pursuing specific questions and writing specific answers. Through an exploration of the early stages in the creation of the Iberian Empires in the fifteenth century and the chronicles that provide an account of it, the article seeks to make visible the negotiations and settlements involved in writing history along four aspects of the distinction between history and fiction: facticity, emplotment, genre and the situated politics of history.","PeriodicalId":51580,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Review of International Affairs","volume":"39 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sources of empire: Negotiating history and fiction in the writing of historical IR\",\"authors\":\"Julia Costa Lopez\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/09557571.2023.2271998\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In framing themselves as myth-busters, historical IR scholars have inscribed the distinction between history and fiction into how they speak to the discipline. And yet, engagement with what this might mean for the status of historical knowledge has mostly focused on broad metatheoretical distinctions and debates. Against this, I argue that questions about historical knowledge and its status are best understood as contingent settlements in the research practice of writing history, pursuing specific questions and writing specific answers. Through an exploration of the early stages in the creation of the Iberian Empires in the fifteenth century and the chronicles that provide an account of it, the article seeks to make visible the negotiations and settlements involved in writing history along four aspects of the distinction between history and fiction: facticity, emplotment, genre and the situated politics of history.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51580,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Review of International Affairs\",\"volume\":\"39 4\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Review of International Affairs\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2023.2271998\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Review of International Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2023.2271998","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在将自己定位为神话破坏者的过程中,历史IR学者将历史与虚构之间的区别写入了他们对这门学科的讲话方式中。然而,这对历史知识地位的影响主要集中在广义的元理论区别和争论上。与此相反,我认为,关于历史知识及其地位的问题最好被理解为写作历史的研究实践中的偶然解决方案,追求特定的问题并写下特定的答案。通过对15世纪伊比利亚帝国创建的早期阶段的探索,以及对其进行记述的编年史,本文试图让人们看到历史写作中涉及的谈判和和解,以及历史与小说之间区别的四个方面:真实性、就业、体裁和历史的情境政治。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Sources of empire: Negotiating history and fiction in the writing of historical IR
In framing themselves as myth-busters, historical IR scholars have inscribed the distinction between history and fiction into how they speak to the discipline. And yet, engagement with what this might mean for the status of historical knowledge has mostly focused on broad metatheoretical distinctions and debates. Against this, I argue that questions about historical knowledge and its status are best understood as contingent settlements in the research practice of writing history, pursuing specific questions and writing specific answers. Through an exploration of the early stages in the creation of the Iberian Empires in the fifteenth century and the chronicles that provide an account of it, the article seeks to make visible the negotiations and settlements involved in writing history along four aspects of the distinction between history and fiction: facticity, emplotment, genre and the situated politics of history.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
7.10%
发文量
39
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信