从衰落到转型:对奥斯曼历史新范式的思考

IF 0.2 4区 历史学 0 ASIAN STUDIES
O. Bouquet
{"title":"从衰落到转型:对奥斯曼历史新范式的思考","authors":"O. Bouquet","doi":"10.18589/oa.1223519","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article addresses transformation as a newly emerging paradigm in the field of Ottoman studies. It examines the relationship between two historiographical sequences: first, the decline theories widely supported by Ottoman studies of the 16th to 18th century conducted over the last three decades of the 20th century are criticised; second, the characterization of the 19th century as a new golden age of transformation in articles and books published in increasing numbers during the last twenty years is put under scrutiny. After questioning the novelty of this paradigm in light of dominant yet hackneyed themes, this paper proposes to measure its usefulness in terms of challenges and opportunities for research. Overall, it appears on the one hand that if \ntransformationism differs from declinism in that it denies providing a comprehensive model of analysis, on the other hand it mimics it insofar as it still depends on two dominant traits which it directly claimed to avoid - the omnipotence of the history of institutions and a theory of modernization that dares not speak its name. In short, under the pretence of an appeal to paradigmatic renewal, this statement of principle only reproduces old historiographical habits.","PeriodicalId":43709,"journal":{"name":"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From Decline to Transformation: Reflections on a New Paradigm in Ottoman History\",\"authors\":\"O. Bouquet\",\"doi\":\"10.18589/oa.1223519\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article addresses transformation as a newly emerging paradigm in the field of Ottoman studies. It examines the relationship between two historiographical sequences: first, the decline theories widely supported by Ottoman studies of the 16th to 18th century conducted over the last three decades of the 20th century are criticised; second, the characterization of the 19th century as a new golden age of transformation in articles and books published in increasing numbers during the last twenty years is put under scrutiny. After questioning the novelty of this paradigm in light of dominant yet hackneyed themes, this paper proposes to measure its usefulness in terms of challenges and opportunities for research. Overall, it appears on the one hand that if \\ntransformationism differs from declinism in that it denies providing a comprehensive model of analysis, on the other hand it mimics it insofar as it still depends on two dominant traits which it directly claimed to avoid - the omnipotence of the history of institutions and a theory of modernization that dares not speak its name. In short, under the pretence of an appeal to paradigmatic renewal, this statement of principle only reproduces old historiographical habits.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43709,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-12-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18589/oa.1223519\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"历史学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"ASIAN STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osmanli Arastirmalari-The Journal of Ottoman Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18589/oa.1223519","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ASIAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文将转型视为奥斯曼研究领域中一种新兴的范式。它考察了两个历史序列之间的关系:首先,在20世纪最后三十年进行的16至18世纪奥斯曼研究广泛支持的衰落理论受到了批评;其次,在过去二十年中,越来越多的文章和书籍将19世纪描述为一个新的黄金时代,这一点受到了仔细的审视。在根据占主导地位但又陈腐的主题质疑这种范式的新颖性后,本文提出从研究的挑战和机遇来衡量其有用性。总的来说,一方面,如果转型主义与衰落主义的不同之处在于它否认提供了一个全面的分析模型,另一方面,它模仿了它,因为它仍然依赖于它直接声称要避免的两个主要特征——制度历史的全能性和不敢说出自己名字的现代化理论。简言之,在呼吁范式更新的幌子下,这一原则声明只是再现了旧的史学习惯。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
From Decline to Transformation: Reflections on a New Paradigm in Ottoman History
This article addresses transformation as a newly emerging paradigm in the field of Ottoman studies. It examines the relationship between two historiographical sequences: first, the decline theories widely supported by Ottoman studies of the 16th to 18th century conducted over the last three decades of the 20th century are criticised; second, the characterization of the 19th century as a new golden age of transformation in articles and books published in increasing numbers during the last twenty years is put under scrutiny. After questioning the novelty of this paradigm in light of dominant yet hackneyed themes, this paper proposes to measure its usefulness in terms of challenges and opportunities for research. Overall, it appears on the one hand that if transformationism differs from declinism in that it denies providing a comprehensive model of analysis, on the other hand it mimics it insofar as it still depends on two dominant traits which it directly claimed to avoid - the omnipotence of the history of institutions and a theory of modernization that dares not speak its name. In short, under the pretence of an appeal to paradigmatic renewal, this statement of principle only reproduces old historiographical habits.
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
期刊介绍: The Journal of Ottoman Studies has been published continuously since 1980 and has carried the pluralist heritage of the Ottomans to contemporary academe by bringing together Ottomanists from different countries as well as from different disciplines and schools of thought. As the founder of the journal, the late Nejat Göyünç (1925-2001), stated in the preface he wrote for the first volume of the journal, the aim of the journal “is to become a means for the increasingly growing number of students of Ottoman Studies to get together in this journal, to encourage young members of the scholarly profession by publishing their interesting research …, to help them to become known, and to facilitate the presentation of their research to the scholarly world.”
×
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