The peculiarity of world history
Hartford Web Publishing is not the author of the documents in
World History Archives and does not
presume to validate their accuracy or authenticity nor to
release their copyright.
- The Changing Shape of World
- By William H. McNeill, University of Chicago,
Emeritus. Paper originally presented at the “History and
Theory” World History Conference, March 25–26,
1994. The model of world history that has emerged defines
it in terms of all-embracing inclusiveness. Therefore the
causal interaction of peoples ought to be the framework of
world history. McNeil then sketches the history of this
dimension of the past.
- A World History for the Future
- By Theodore H. Von Laue, Professor Emeritus, Clark
University. A paper presented at the premier
conference of the New England Regional World History
Association, Bentley College, Waltham, MA. 23 April, 1994.
Assessing the human experience through time is a novel
and urgent challenge in this age of wide-open
post-modernity. As we face worldwide uncertainties, we
need to experiment with historical interpretations that
convey a sense of control over the present and the
- Defining World History—Contribution
to a dialog
- By Haines Brown, 12 April 1995. A brief discussion of
trying to represent world history as a process rather than
as a collection of things or properties.
- World History for the Twenty-first
- By Haines Brown. 1995, rev. August, 1997. Defends notion
of “contemporary history” by suggesting that the
essence of historical statements is their focus a struggle
for constructive development in time, not simply the discovery
of the past.
- Review of Bruce Mazlish and Ralph
Buultjens, eds. Conceptualizing Global
- Reviewed by Jerry H. Bentley, University of Hawaii, for
H-World, 20 September 1995. Most would take interactions
between peoples participating in large-scale historical
processes to be one of the principal concerns of world
history, and it offers a context for modern
globalization. In contrast, Mazlich believes world history
is characterized by its universalism, but in need of
- Global History vs. World History
- By Eric Martin, 28 October 1996. Does a global economy
offer a vantage point to grasp the course of world
history? A discussion of a point of Bruce Mazlich
concerning global vs. world history.
- A global perspective
- By Haines Brown, 9 February 1998. Responds to the debate
over global history versus world history by attempting a
definition of global history.
- Introduction: The Golden Age of
- By Randall Collins, University of Pennsylvania, 10 May
1998. Whatever is large and widely connected can be
brought into focus within no perspective but one larger
still. Briefly explores the two sides of this century of
historical consciousness. A permanent gestalt switch in
the way we do macro-history; the subject of analysis can
no longer be taken as the isolated unit.
- Macrohistory? World history?
- Exchange between Whitney Howarth and Nikolai Rozov,
27–28 January 1999. Do the names that we call ourselves
(globalists, world historians, world-system analysts,
world systems scholars, macrohistorians, or universalists)
make a difference? Rosov defines the difference between
world history and macrohistorical dynamics.
- “But a Local Phase of a World
Problem”: Black History's Global Vision, 1883–1950
- By Robin D. G. Kelley, New York University, December
1999. “globalization” has pushed the U.S. scholars to
think beyond the nation-state, develop
“transnational” and international approaches, and
reconsider “diaspora” as an analytical
- Reinterpreting World History
- By David Livingstone, 5 September 2003. The construction
of history with a Eurocentric perspective from the 18th
century: the forward march of reason in history and its
obscuring of an alternative and hidden history based on
- Should we abolish black history
- By Haines Brown, 24 December 2005. There seem to be a
variety functions that are served by multicultural
studies, and we can't very well discuss them without
taking these functions into account.