An Historiographical Guide to Subcarpathian Rus'

1973 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 201-265
Author(s):  
Paul R. Magocsi

It is customary among western scholars who have written about the Carpatho-Rusyns to consider them “the most forgotten among the forgotten.”2 Little is known in the West about the political, economic, and cultural developments of Subcarpathian Rus', especially before 1918. Yet such an enormous amount of material has been written in eastern European languages about this territory that as early as 1931 the noted Slavic linguist Roman Jakobson could write: “In the whole east Slavic world, there is hardly any other marginal area whose past has been examined with such affectionate meticulousness and scholarliness as Carpatho-Russia.”3The present study is intended as an introductory guide to the voluminous historiography of Subcarpathian Rus'. The material has been arranged according to the following topical and chronological subdivisions: bibliographical aids; general historical studies; early history to 1514; 1514 to 1711; 1711 to 1848; 1848 to 1918; 1918 to 1938; October, 1938, to March, 1939; 1939 to 1944; 1945 to the present; cultural developments; Rusyns in Hungary; Rusyns in Jugoslavia; and Rusyns in the United States. Works will be discussed under the heading which most nearly describes the period dealt with in the text regardless of the date of publication. The time periods were not designated arbitrarily but are based on certain historical events the significance of which will be clarified in the appropriate subsection. Most studies treated in this article deal exclusively or primarily with Subcarpathian Rus' only a few are concerned with problems of a more general nature. Many studies dealing with the recent history of the area are not necessarily included because they represent sound historical research but because they are valuable, highly selective accounts of crucial events, many of them written by the participants themselves.

PEDIATRICS ◽  
1966 ◽  
Vol 38 (6) ◽  
pp. 1033-1033
Author(s):  
THOMAS E. CONE

This book offers the reader an enormous amount of information about the history of medicine in America and at the same time is a delight to read. One would expect nothing else from Professor Shryock who is, in my opinion, our foremost medical historian. No one has been more successful than he in showing that the history of the medical profession represents a significant phase of our social and cultural evolution. Excellent work has been done in this area previously by Doctor Packard in his well received History of Medicine in the United States and by Doctor Sigerist in his superb study Amerika und die Medizin.


1999 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 355-382
Author(s):  
Cristina Altman

Summary When mention is made of Brazil in connection with American linguistics, it usually amounts to a reference to the Linguistic Circle of New York, where Roman Jakobson (1896–1982) and Claude Lévi-Strauss (b.1908), who had come from Brazil where he had done ethnological work, met and exchanged ideas. This singular event has cast a shadow on other contacts between Brazil and American linguistics, of which, the one between Jakobson and the Brazilian linguist Joaquim Mattoso Câmara (1904–1970) was much more consequential, at least as far as the implementation of structural linguistics in Brazil and in South America generally during the 1950s and the 1960s is concerned. Mattoso Câmara came to the United States and spent most of his time in New York City (September 1943 till April 1944), where he got exposure to Praguean type structuralism, notably through Jakobson’s lectures he attended at Columbia University and at the École Libre of New York, which had been established by European refugees at the time. He also participated in the first meetings of the Linguistic Circle of New York in 1943 as one of its co-founders. Following his return to Rio de Janeiro, Mattoso Câmara proposed, in 1949, as his doctoral thesis a phonemic description of Brazilian Portuguese. The work was published a few years later, in 1953. His most influential work, Princípios de Lingüística Gerai, first published in 1954, had two more revised and updated editions (1958, 1967) and served to introduce several generations of Brazilian as well as other South American students to structural linguistics during the 1950s and 1960s.


2014 ◽  
Vol 35 (2) ◽  
pp. 251-270
Author(s):  
Gabriele Balbi ◽  
Dan Bogart ◽  
Kurt R. Bell ◽  
Koos Bosma ◽  
Harry Gregory ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 1038-1044
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cullen ◽  
Jolynn L. Haney ◽  
Linda Houser ◽  
Jun Cao ◽  
Xi Mi

China has a long and complex history of political, economic, and educational shifts that have resulted in and from changing cultural values. Over time, the significance and format of social work education in China has changed, as has the need for professionally educated social workers that can support the ever-evolving social needs of China. To this end, some Chinese schools have begun to partner with schools in the U.S. to support the professionalizing of social work in China. This article presents the reflections of faculty and students involved in an exchange program for Chinese students to study in a U.S.-based master of social work program. Expectations, realities, needs, and recommendations of both faculty and students are discussed.


Author(s):  
Robert T. Huber

The American Councils rose from earlier efforts by American scholars of the Russian language to build sustainable professional and programmatic ties with their Soviet/Russian counterparts. From the onset of the Cold War until the late 1960s, there had been virtually no such professional contact. Teachers of Russian in the United States were organized nationally through the American Association of Teachers of Slavic and East European Languages (AATSEEL).


Author(s):  
Renata Keller

Relations between the United States and Mexico have rarely been easy. Ever since the United States invaded its southern neighbor and seized half of its national territory in the 19th century, the two countries have struggled to establish a relationship based on mutual trust and respect. Over the two centuries since Mexico’s independence, the governments and citizens of both countries have played central roles in shaping each other’s political, economic, social, and cultural development. Although this process has involved—even required—a great deal of cooperation, relations between the United States and Mexico have more often been characterized by antagonism, exploitation, and unilateralism. This long history of tensions has contributed to the three greatest challenges that these countries face together today: economic development, immigration, and drug-related violence.


Author(s):  
Jodi Eichler-Levine

Thinking about American Jews, race, and religion entails confronting the instability of those terms. This chapter examines the history of Jews and race in the United States through three lenses. First, it looks at the history of how Eastern European Jews have been “raced” in America, and in particular how they became “white.” Second, it considers Jewish interactions with other groups, such as blacks, Native Americans, and Asians, and how Jewish identity has been co-constituted with and against that of other groups. Third, the chapter looks at internal Jewish diversity and the challenges presented by Euro-centric models of Jewishness. The chapter concludes by considering Jews, race, and religion in the age of Ferguson.


Author(s):  
Maurice S. Crandall

Spanning three hundred years and the colonial regimes of Spain, Mexico, and the United States, Maurice S. Crandall’s sweeping history of Native American political rights in what is now New Mexico, Arizona, and Sonora demonstrates how Indigenous communities implemented, subverted, rejected, and indigenized colonial ideologies of democracy, both to accommodate and to oppose colonial power.  Focusing on four groups--Pueblos in New Mexico, Hopis in northern Arizona, and Tohono O'odhams and Yaquis in Arizona/Sonora--Crandall reveals the ways Indigenous peoples absorbed and adapted colonially imposed forms of politics to exercise sovereignty based on localized political, economic, and social needs. Using sources that include oral histories and multinational archives, this book allows us to compare Spanish, Mexican, and American conceptions of Indian citizenship, and adds to our understanding of the centuries-long struggle of Indigenous groups to assert their sovereignty in the face of settler colonial rule.


2011 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 232-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. G. Hopkins

This essay reinterprets the evolution of the United States between 1783 and 1861 from the perspective of imperial history. The established literature on this period focuses on the national story, and particularly on the struggle to achieve liberty and democracy. Historians of empire, however, routinely distinguish between formal and effective independence and evaluate the often halting progress of ex-colonial states in achieving a substantive transfer of power. Considered from this angle, the dominant themes of the period were the search for viability and development rather than for liberty and democracy. The article illustrates this proposition by re-evaluating the political, economic, and cultural themes that are central to the history of the period. The argument in each case is that the United States remained dependent on Great Britain to an extent that greatly limited her effective independence. The standard controversies of domestic political history, notably the battle between Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian visions of the state, are recast as differing strategies for achieving real and permanent independence. Strategies for achieving economic development made practical politics of competing arguments for protection and free trade, but failed to release the economy from its dependence on the British market and British capital. Attempts to create an independent national identity were compromised by the continuing influence of British culture and by the related notion of Anglo-Saxonism, on which prevailing policies of assimilation relied. In all these respects, the United States was an unexceptional ex-colonial state, and indeed closely followed the trajectory of other colonies of white settlement that were classified as dominions within the British Empire. The United States, however, was a dependent state that failed in 1861, and its struggle for independence had to be renewed after the Civil War.


2016 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 331-362 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul A. Kramer

One of the chief promises of the emerging history of capitalism is its capacity to problematize and historicize relationships between economic inequality and capital's social, political, and ecological domain. At their best, the new works creatively integrate multiple historiographic approaches. Scholars are bringing the insights of social and cultural history to business history's traditional actors and topics, providing thick descriptions of the complex social worlds of firms, investors, and bankers, while resisting rationalist, functionalist, and economistic analyses. They are also proceeding from the assumption that capitalism is not reducible to the people that historians have typically designated as capitalists. As they've shown, the fact that slaves, women, sharecroppers, clerks, and industrial laborers were, to different degrees, denied power in the building of American capitalism did not mean that they were absent from its web, or that their actions did not decisively shape its particular contours.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document