Contemporary debates on microhistory/ies: a jouney between the European and Latin American schools
This article takes upon the dialogue between two important perspectives on microhistory: the Italian school and the Mexican school. For this, it reviews what macro history is and the approach to society and reality as a whole. We consider the epistemological matrix of the cause-and-effect relationsh...
Kaydedildi:
| Yazar: | |
|---|---|
| Materyal Türü: | article |
| Dil: | spa |
| Baskı/Yayın Bilgisi: |
2018
|
| Konular: | |
| Online Erişim: | https://revistadigital.uce.edu.ec/index.php/CSOCIALES/article/view/927 |
| Etiketler: |
Etiketle
Etiket eklenmemiş, İlk siz ekleyin!
|
Etiketle | Özet: | This article takes upon the dialogue between two important perspectives on microhistory: the Italian school and the Mexican school. For this, it reviews what macro history is and the approach to society and reality as a whole. We consider the epistemological matrix of the cause-and-effect relationship, and the outcome of a positivist history first and then a scientific history. In light of this, we study the cultural revolution of 1968 and the crisis of paradigms and ideologies, and then review the epistemological ruptures given between macro and microhistory. Thus, microhistory comes as the result of interdisciplinary links with anthropology, sociology, demography, and other sciences. Despite its advances, three main criticisms are placed on microhistory: the brief and spasmodic time of microhistory and the label of traditional history; access to documentary sources and their interpretation; and, the specific criticism to the detective function of microhistory and its lack of theorization. Microhistory approaches a new historical subject, recognized as the individual, the oppressed, the voiceless, the anonymous or, in some cases, the subaltern. Finally, the article discusses types and trends of microhistory in Colombian, Argentine and Ecuadorian historians. |
|---|