|
|
|
AHR Exchange
| The June 2007 issue featured an AHR Forum titled "Entangled Empires in the Atlantic World." In his commentary on the three articles in that forum, "Entangled Histories: Borderland Historiographies in New Clothes?" Jorge Cañizares-Esguerra took particular issue with the interpretation offered by Eliga H. Gould in his piece, "Entangled Histories, Entangled Worlds: The English-Speaking Atlantic as a Spanish Periphery." Gould had emphasized the overlapping and interconnected byways linking Spain's Atlantic empire with the British Empire and the early American Republic. Cañizares-Esguerra suggested that the most meaningful imperial cross-currents are to be found not in imperial competition, but rather in the central imperial narratives, often biblical in origin, appropriated and refashioned by the British and Spanish alike. In his contribution to this AHR Exchange, Gould responds to Cañizares-Esguerra's comments by asserting the importance of the periphery in imperial and postcolonial studies, charging Cañizares-Esguerra with attempting an outdated, "core" version of Atlantic history. Cañizares-Esguerra responds by defending his attention to these "core" narratives in terms that suggest political and contemporary concerns. What separates these two historians seems less a matter of their different understandings of Atlantic history than the importance and centrality they ascribe to very different areas of historical reality. |
1
|
|
|
Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.
|