BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//Talks.cam//talks.cam.ac.uk//
X-WR-CALNAME:Talks.cam
BEGIN:VEVENT
SUMMARY:Between Empire and Europe: Transnational Alternatives in the Briti
 sh Historiography of the Twentieth Century - Anne Friedrichs\, Trinity Hal
 l\, Cambridge
DTSTART:20061201T190000Z
DTEND:20061201T210000Z
UID:TALK5954@talks.cam.ac.uk
CONTACT:Su Lin Lewis
DESCRIPTION:This paper presents some\npreliminary thoughts on the relation
 ship between national\, imperial and\nEuropean historiography in Britain i
 n the course of the twentieth century.\nThe central aim is to analyse how 
 British historians dealt with the idea of\na common European past\, and re
 lated the latter to both the nation and the\nempire-commonwealth. Britain 
 represents a good example of how the\nprofessional writing of history deve
 loped in orientation and distinction to\nWestern European models\, i.e. in
  particular German and French\nhistoriography. Apart from a historical nar
 rative\, which focused on the\ngovernance of the isle by English-Scottish 
 dynasties\, and later by British\npremier ministers\, there emerged also a
 n intellectual tradition which\nattempted to locate its own country histor
 ically within the course of\nEuropean history. Within this narrative\, the
  history of the British Isles\nwas mediated with tendencies that seemed to
  characterise the European\ndevelopment in particular periods\, such as th
 e renaissance\, the religious\nwars following the reformation\, or the Rev
 olutions at the end of the\neigteenth century. Secondly\, Britain provides
  an example\, where a\nparticularly strong alternative - apart from Europe
  - was available to\nlocate one's own country world-historically\, namely 
 through the idea of an\nempire-commonwealth. Therefore\, historians of Eur
 ope relied not only on\nmediating European tendencies with English nationa
 l history\, but also on\nintegrating imperial connections\, especially of 
 their own country\, in their\nnarrative. At the same time\, however\, this
  impact was not one-sided\, as\nalso national and imperial interpretations
  of the past had to deal with the\nissue of a common European past. Finall
 y\, the respective bargaining of this\ntension between different spatial c
 oncepts was never a question concerning\nonly the past\, but\, as this pap
 er will argue\, was based on conflicts about\ndifferent political concepts
  referring to the present and future.
LOCATION:MCR\, Newnham College
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR