Religion and the Intellectual Origins of the Eighteenth-Century Culture of Sensibility

Notes on Contributors

A Revolutionary Narrative of European History: Bonneville's <i>History of Modern Europe</i> (1789–1792)

Sámi Literature in Norwegian Language Arts Textbooks

The relationship of reason to religion is a preoccupation of our times. Some contemporary culture-warriors, particularly in Britain and the United States, vehemently maintain their inherent antitheticality, and imagine themselves engaged in a heroic struggle to preserve Enlightenment rationality and hard-won scientific advances in the face of a global upsurge of irrational belief. Behind much of the histrionics is a sense that history itself has gone off course. The longheld presumption of an essentially linear path of development, via such milestones as the Reformation, Scientific Revolution, and Enlightenment, towards a condition of benevolent and universal secular modernity has been thrown into disarray by the evident power of religious faith, not merely to maintain a fading hegemony, but to generate new forms of social identity and inspire cultural and political action across the developing and developed world. Where once the long sweep of the 'secularization paradigm' seemed axiomatic and universalizing, sociologists of religion now posit flowing and ebbing tides of 'Christianization' as a hallmark of modern European history.

This is a book about violence against women around the turn of the seventeenth century in England: its pernicious erasure in cultural texts of all kinds, the negotiations of that erasure in some of the most iconic plays in English theatre history, and the rehearsal of those negotiations on our late twentieth- and twenty-first-century stages. I shape my argument around the deliberate collision of the historical and the contemporary as I try to imagine what it might mean to represent early modern experiences of violence against women on the stage in an ethical way, a feminist way, today. The moment in theatre history dominated by Shakespeare’s cohort is often described as brutally spectacular. I ask: among its vivid, grotesque representations of bodies, blood, and revenge, how and why does violence against women go so spectacularly missing? What role does early modern England’s heady performance culture play in the shaping of this central absence, and what legacies does it leave for theatre makers, theatre scholars, and theatregoers working on its remains now? Can we rehearse the (often indeed spectacular) disappearance of violence against women in early modern performance without reproducing it? That is, can we rehearse it with a difference, rehearse its very cultural invisibility in order to get a better purchase on how and why violence against women so often (then, and even now) comes into existence as a violent and violating evacuation?

From the late eighteenth century in Britain to the late twentieth century in predominantly rural societies in the global south, most descriptions of peasants provided by government planners or economists have been remarkably similar. These descriptions focus on five alleged elements of peasant life: (1) peasants are backward and uncivilised – one aspect of that backwardness is their inability to control their sexual urges and thus their tendency to have too many children, (2) peasants are not sufficiently enamoured with consumption and their too easily met needs stifle economic development – this is often considered to be a function of laziness and thus peasants need to be compelled to labour harder, (3) peasants are inefficient and do not use land effectively and thus need to be compelled to labour more efficiently, (4) peasants get in the way of the necessary process of allowing capital to be applied to the land and thus need to be swept from the land, (5) peasants are dangerous and difficult to incorporate into states as responsible citizens. This paper provides examples of the rhetoric used to describe peasants in four different periods and places: during the enclosures and the consolidation of capitalism in Britain in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, the Irish potato famine in the middle of the nineteenth century, the spread of colonialism and a type of modernity in other than European locales in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the rise of development practice and national consolidation in what was then called the third world after the second world war. The paper argues that these descriptions were both the result of faulty imaginings of peasants and deemed necessary as a way to sell economic and social policies that worked to expel peasants from the land and turn them into wage labourers.

The core of this article is a comparative analysis of the double movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century (the belle époque and collapse of British hegemony) with the double movement of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century (the belle époque and current crisis of U.S. hegemony). In both periods the movement toward allegedly self-regulating markets called forth a countermovement of protection. Nevertheless, important differences exist due, first, to differences in the nature of the hegemonic state and, second, to the greater role of subordinate forces in constraining the movement toward self-regulating markets in the late twentieth century.

The core of this article is a comparative analysis of the double movement of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century (the belle époque and collapse of British hegemony) with the double movement of the late twentieth and early twenty-first century (the belle époque and current crisis of U.S. hegemony). In both periods the movement toward allegedly self-regulating markets called forth a countermovement of protection. Nevertheless, important differences exist due, first, to differences in the nature of the hegemonic state and, second, to the greater role of subordinate forces in constraining the movement toward self-regulating markets in the late twentieth century.

After flourishing in the late twentieth century, community labor history projects have languished in recent decades. 1 Perhaps not anticipating the new spark of labor mobilization of the past few years, labor historians and local museums and historical societies have missed opportunities to document the stories of ordinary workers and their unions and educate and inspire others through public exhibits and programs. Both public historians and their academic partners have faced new challenges in presenting stories about American workers. This is partly due to the neoliberal political economy, as editors Thomas Klubock and Paulo Fontes conclude in their introduction to a special issue of International Labor and Working-Class History on labor and public history, but also because of new priorities within museum and academic cultures. 2 Richard Anderson recently noted this disconnect between labor and labor historians and stated that making labor scholarship accessible is key to forming "a deep reservoir of inspiration and guidance" for current labor struggles, even as the demands of the academy require scholars to publish in more

The Women's Ordination Movement in the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints: Historical and Sociological Perspectives

AIDS unites the germ theory of disease with systems thinking. AIDS could only arise in the late twentieth century. The encounter with HIV/AIDS has brought tremendous inspiration to virologists' research. The disease model of HIV/AIDS that emerged in the late twentieth and early twenty-first century was clearly marked by the social and economic circumstances of the time. It had plausibility, but it did not correspond with reality. This plausibility gained its persuasiveness through several factors. At its center were systems thinking in economics, criminal law, and many other domains, which had been emerging since the mid-twentieth century. By the late twentieth century, systems thinking were set off by a growing consciousness of living in a hitherto intact world, now increasingly threatened by intruders. Closed borders or openness to immigration were the big political issues that were reflected in the HIV/AIDS metaphor, in which an organism whose immune system is weakened by intruders becomes vulnerable to all kinds of trouble and is ultimately killed.

Foreign Patenting in Germany, 1877-1932

INTRODUCTION Thinking about welfare and the welfare state has been reflected, among others, in three branches of intellectual activity: economics, ethics, and ideology. While economics and ethics are academic disciplines, ideology is practical and sometimes opaque thought in political and social movements that occasionally results in legislation. Issues of welfare or well-being demand a wide range of intellectual approaches, although they are often mingled together in economic, political, and social thought. For this reason, historical studies of welfare thought and policy should at least cover these three areas and investigate their interrelationship in a historical context. Debates on welfare issues have a longer history than the rise of so-called welfare economics and the welfare state in the twentieth century might suggest. The welfare thought specifically coined as “welfare economics” in the 1920s and the “welfare state” in the 1940s in Britain had been in circulation under different labels before these designations arose. The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries in Britain and Germany provided an intellectual scene in which the total configurations of economics, ethics, and ideology in the context of welfare first showed systematic patterns. This period corresponds to Schumpeter's periodization “from 1870 to 1914” in the history of economics (Schumpeter 1954). Although the main topic of this period must no doubt be the establishment and development of neoclassical economics by the Marginal Revolution, Schumpeter did not fail to characterize an aspect of economics during this period as the “ Sozialpolitik and the Historical Method.”

The first work of Jewish art to attract scholarly attention toward the end of the nineteenth century was the “Sarajevo Haggadah,” a medieval illuminated manuscript from Iberia. It was eventually published in Vienna in 1898. A few years earlier, one of the few surviving synagogues in Spain, a building commissioned by Samuel Halevi Abulafia in Toledo (1356), had been declared a national monument, and since 1910 the site has functioned as a museum. A dramatic turning point in the historiography of Jewish art occurred in 1932, with the discovery of the 3rd-century synagogue at Dura Europos in modern Syria. In the years to follow, numerous other synagogues and illuminated manuscripts were first documented and were later analyzed and contextualized. The late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries also saw the establishment of several collections of Jewish ritual objects. Whereas medieval finds in this field are extremely rare, such collections are relatively rich in early modern objects. Illuminated manuscripts began to appear in Jewish societies in the tenth century in the Middle East and around the 1230s in Iberia, France, the German lands, and Italy. Although numerous ancient synagogues have been unearthed by modern archaeologists, architectural remains from the Middle Ages are extremely sparse. The earliest structure that was still standing in 1938 was a Romanesque synagogue in Worms. Having been destroyed in November 1938 by the Nazis, it was reconstructed by the German authorities in 1961. Other structures were to follow, and the oldest continuously functioning synagogue (from c. 1280) is found in Prague. By the late nineteenth century, few medieval synagogues in Iberia that had passed into Christian hands in the course of the fifteenth century and after the expulsions of the Jews from Iberia in the 1490s were still standing. Several archaeological campaigns since the late twentieth century have revealed further remains. Significantly, more structures survive at various locations in Europe from the Early Modern period. What is described here as works of Jewish art were not always produced by Jews. Hence, the definition of “Jewish art” in the Middle Ages and the Early Modern period does not necessarily or solely depend on any artists’ identities. For the purpose of this survey, Jewish art will thus not be defined by means of its makers, but rather by means of its users. It refers to art not necessarily made by but for Jews, art that thus functioned as a fermenter in the formation of Jewish cultures. In many fields of Jewish art, the role played by preferences of Jewish patrons is still in need of serious attention in modern scholarship.

In Agent Running in the Field (2019), his final novel, John le Carré reprises elements of his post-Cold War critique of transnational espiocratic duplicity and collusion, while also emphasizing the moral imperative of principle-driven constancy and confession as an antidote to the pathology of infection he associates with contemporary geopolitics. His virtuosity in tackling this theme, one also addressed though differently in A Legacy of Spies (2017), validates fellow author Ian McEwan’s assessment that le Carré “will be remembered as perhaps the most significant novelist” of the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries in Britain.