Abstract
This essay is a critical discussion of Dipesh Chakrabarty's book Provincializing Europe as well as a first sketch of a History on Equal Terms. After giving a short summary of Provincializing Europe, I first argue, against Chakrabarty, that there is no necessary connection between the discipline of history and the metanarratives of modernity. To the contrary: the founding idea of the discipline of history was a turn against such grand narratives. With his attempt to deconstruct the narratives of the European Enlightenment and of modernity, Chakrabarty therefore has to be regarded as a thinker of radical historicism rather than as a critic of the discipline of history. Second, I criticize the use of the term "modernity" in Provincializing Europe and the concept of modernity in general. Instead of a deconstruction of the discipline of history, I propose a deconstruction of the concept of modernity. This could open up the way for a History on Equal Terms situated within the discipline of history, that is, a historiography that would - just as Chakrabarty rightly demands - in principle pay the same attention to and expect relevant results from any region in the world, depending only on the focus of research. © Wesleyan University 2008.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Dietze, C. (2008). Toward a history on equal terms: A discussion of Provincializing Europe. History and Theory. Blackwell Publishing Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2303.2008.00437.x
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.