George Mason University's
History News Network
Top Young Historians Archive

Basic Facts

Teaching Position: Professor, Department of History, University of California, Davis.
Area of Research: US political, cultural, and intellectual history
Education: PhD in History, Stanford University, 1996
Major Publications: Rauchway is the author of Blessed Among Nations: How the World Made America (Hill & Wang, 2006) Eric Rauchway JPG, Murdering McKinley: The Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America (Hill & Wang, 2003), and The Refuge of Affections: Family and American Reform Politics, 1900-1920 (Columbia University Press, 2001). Rauchway is currently working on The Great Depression and the New Deal: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford University Press), and The Gift Outright: The West, the South, and America, 1867-1937 (Hill & Wang).
Awards: Rauchway is the recipient of numerous awards and fellowships including among others:
Murdering McKinley was named one the"Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" top ten for 2003;
Chancellor's Fellow, University of California, Davis, 2003-2008;
MA by Special Resolution of Congregation, Oxford University, 1998.
Additional Info:
Rauchway formerly was University Lecturer, Faculty of Modern History, University of Oxford (1998-2001), and Visiting Assistant Professor, Department of History, University of Nevada, Reno (1996-1998).
Rauchway has written for"The American Prospect,""The Financial Times,""The Los Angeles Times,""Newsday," and other publications.
He currently writes for"The New Republic's""Open University" feature.
Rauchway has contributed commentary and book reviews to MSNBC.com's"Altercation," and has commented on television for the History Channel and C-SPAN, and appeared on both public and commercial radio programs in the U.S. and abroad.

Personal Anecdote

Lacking a piquant or plangent anecdote I thought I would provide a brief explanation of why I am a historian. As I wrote here I have always had a sense of being not-quite: neither Protestant nor Jewish, I've lived in North, South, West, and overseas, as well as in towns both small and enormous; I register as a no-party voter and I attended a school that is famously neither entirely public nor private. I can't claim to contain multitudes -- I'm still squarely a white male American of middle-class standing, and a family man at that. But neither can I honestly claim to belong to any single one of the traditions within that identity.

Therefore I hope, and strive, to have some qualities in common with historians who used a similar sense of insider-outsiderhood to fuel their work. (Like Richard Hofstadter, as above; or Charles Beard, the dirt-farmer Ivy League political-scientist historian Republican radical -- I hasten to add I am as cool as neither, but one should aim high.)¹ They did not readily take sides, or come easily to any political position; even their scholarly conclusions they regarded as provisional and subject, always, to revision. Which is not to say that they were intellectually wimpy; on the contrary, I tend rather to think their working outside a fixed tradition made them feel especially responsible for defending the conclusions they reached.

I meant particularly my second and third books to reflect this ambition toward a strong insider-outsiderhood in different ways. Murdering McKinley is about the strength and weakness of social science -- it's about how by looking at age, race, work, belief, ethnicity, sexuality, education etc. we can tell so much about someone, while still failing to discover the most important thing (in this case, why they might shoot the President).² Blessed Among Nations is about the strength and weakness of American political tradition -- it's about how America's characteristic institutions reflect, not so much an ideological commitment to small government, but rather practical adaptations to circumstances, and how American policies succeeded or failed as those circumstances changed.

I guess that books especially designed not to stick with any political or interpretive tradition run the risk of being disliked, or worse, ignored. But I hope these books also exhibit another virtue typical of, though certainly not limited to, those older scholars -- they had, I think, a particular, emotional attachment to America as a country whose commitment to liberty didn't demand that you take sides too easily or too often, allowing people to live and believe as they wished. Certainly, that is the America to which I feel myself attached, and which I hope to serve well by good scholarship.

¹I purposely avoid mentioning anyone living, though certainly I have role models among breathing historians.

²Lest anyone mention the singular"they," see here.

Quotes

By Eric Rauchway

  • The United States became the country we know today at the end of World War I, when it took over the role of"top nation" from Britain. The story of its rise to this position of strength began at the end of the Civil War.... With the winning of the West came the transformation of the United States into the world's largest economy. By 1917 ... America stood out among nations, its anomalously large economy yoked in uneven harness to an anomalously small government with unusually few powers.... We need neither admire nor despise these peculiarities to note them and assess how far they resulted from the impact of international factors. -- Eric Rauchway in"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • There is another way in which I hope this book will work like a lens. Like a lot of people, I need corrective lenses to see properly, and also like a lot of people I don’t like to go to the doctor very much. So people like me will wear a pair of glasses for years without seeing an optometrist. And during that time, those glasses, which were perfectly designed to help us see when they were made, get worse and worse at their job. The lenses aren’t changing, but our eyes are. We just don’t notice because it happens so slowly. Then, finally, we get tired of the headaches and the blurry vision and we go to the doctor and get a properly prescribed pair of spectacles. And we put them on, and suddenly we see the world as if it were new, and we realize we’ve been squinting through outdated lenses for far too long. I think that much of what we see nowadays when we look at American history is like this, a picture as seen through lenses that worked fine for us once, but don’t work so well now that we’ve changed. There’s nothing intrinsically wrong with our old glasses; they were just meant for a different set of eyes, and too much of the world now looks out of focus.

    Blessed Among Nation JPGWhen you put on your new glasses after delaying a visit to the doctor for too long, you suddenly wonder how you could ever have stood to look through the old ones. I hope this book will help us see America’s place in the world with the same freshness, so that we can see the same old story with a new clarity and begin to wonder how we could ever have stood to look at the world through those quaint old spectacles, missing so much of such importance.

    Specifically, using globalization as a lens brings into focus the relationship between the United States and the rest of the world in the late nineteenth century, and how this relationship shaped American political development. Capital and labor from overseas pushed American political development in noticeably unusual directions during a particularly important growth spurt. This early formative influence bequeathed the United States some peculiar and lasting habits of government. The effects of globalization helped the country become a powerful nation without developing (in comparative terms) a powerful central government. In the United States, as in some other countries, we often argue over the appropriate size and authority of national government, and usually we argue from principle: a big government is better because it can provide security; a small government is better because it can allow freedom. These arguments from principle have what to a historian seems like an unfortunately timeless quality, as if government were some uniform product, of which you can have too much or too little, but which is always the same thing. If we look at how government grew in the first place, we might remember that it is a set of solutions to a set of problems—not theoretical problems, but practical problems—and that, in practice, not all peoples face the same problems. During its growth into a powerful nation, the United States faced a set of problems unlike those any other nation has encountered. Americans formed their habits of government by solving a set of problems specific to their circumstances. And we know that habits often outlast the circumstances that justified them, just as we often wear prescription eyeglasses long after our eyes have changed, and sometimes with bad consequences. -- Eric Rauchway in"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • About Eric Rauchway

  • "Provocative...Blessed Among Nations combines the same fluid writing style, bold interpretive approach, and ambitious agenda that made the work of mid–twentieth century historians like Richard Hofstadter, Arthur Schlessigner, Jr., and C. Vann Woodward so important and so broadly relevant." — Joshua Zeitz in American Heritage reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "America's rise to preeminence, the author argues, was the product of a perfect storm of foreign investment, luck, and global instability, and we forget at our peril the fickle nature of such forces. With hegemony comes responsibility, he suggests, responsibility that the U.S. may presently be all too willing to shirk." — Atlantic Monthly reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "Written by an accomplished, imaginative historian who well understands those beginnings of modern America -- the years of the Progressive Era -- this book on one level suggests why socialism never took root in the United States, and why the supposed melting pot and the early Federal Reserve System worked as they did, but on quite another level develops a highly revealing argument how Americans' faith in their"empire" and their exceptionalism shaped in often unexpected ways what we now call globalization and their part in it." — Walter LaFeber, Tisch University Professor, Cornell University reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "I can always depend on Eric Rauchway to display the meticulousness of a careful historian with the literary flair of a fine novelist. Blessed Among Nations: How the World Made America adds to this admixture a powerful public voice as well; a tour de force." -- Eric Alterman, author of"When Presidents Lie: A History of Official Deception and Its Consequences" reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "With his trademark lapidary elegance, Rauchway shows us that America's position astride the currents of globalization is due not merely to a mysteriously voracious capitalistic impulse, but to often fortuitous effects of seemingly unconnected particulars, such as monopolies rather than government dominating lending, and the diversity of our immigrants impeding a socialist revolution. A flinty and compelling synthesis." -- John McWhorter, author of"Winning the Race: Beyond the Crisis in Black America" reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "American 'exceptionalism' is one of those things often asserted, seldom convincingly proved. By setting the history of the United States in the context of the history of the first age of globalization, Eric Rauchway has come up with a powerful new argument about what exactly made the American experience different. Blessed Among Nations is both brilliant and convincing. For the breadth of his vision, the author deserves to be blessed among U.S. historians" -- Niall Ferguson, Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History at Harvard University and author of"Colossus: The Rise and Fall of the American Empire" reviewing"Blessed Among Nations How the World Made America"
  • "A fascinating story of America at a crossroads . . . Murdering McKinley stands out as a well-reasoned and well-told chronicle about the dawn of modern America." -- Bob Hoover in the"Post-Gazette" reviewing"Murdering McKinley The Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America"
  • Murdering McKinley JPG"A compact masterpiece that explains more about the late 19th Century than most historians know and yet is readable enough to take on an airplane . . . Accurate, comprehensive and cutting-edge history, it is also a rip-roaring tale...a book that holds high the standard for popular history. Illuminating the society that inspired a coldblooded murder, Rauchway's Murdering McKinley is a brilliant trip through the heart of the 19th Century." -- Heather Cox Richardson in the"Chicago Tribune" reviewing"Murdering McKinley The Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America"
  • "Eric Rauchway is that rare historian who is also a first-rate storyteller. Murdering McKinley is almost as impressive a literary feat as it is a scholarly one; a fascinating window on a turbulent time in our untold history and a damn good read to boot." -- Eric Alterman, author of"What Liberal Media? The Truth About Bias and the News" reviewing"Murdering McKinley The Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America"
  • "Before Lee Harvey Oswald there was Leon Czolgosz (chol-gosh), the anarchist who shot and killed President William McKinley in 1901. Murdering McKinley tells the story of this assassin and the push he gave to progressivism by making Teddy Roosevelt president of the United States." -- Bruce Ramsey in"The Seattle Times" reviewing"Murdering McKinley The Making of Theodore Roosevelt's America"
  • "Highly recommended, best prof I've had at Davis. Very interesting, well thought out lectures."
    "He is an amazing professor. Though he talks very quickly he has such passion for the subject which encourages you. My best professor so far and if I could I would take his class again. History has finally become fun and you learn so much."
    "Good professor. Lectures are interesting enough to get me out of bed in the morning."
    "Simply fantastic professor. His lectures are highly lively and easy to understand... he will really highlight and increase your love of the subject, especially if you get involved in class. I highly recommend him."
    "Rauchway was a wonderful professor. He talks fast during lectures, but he is very animated and always keeps you interested. I would reccommend him to anybody, I LOVED his class."
    "Professor Rauchway is one of the few professors I really feel I have learned something from."
    "One of the greatest history lecturers of all time. I highly suggest taking his classes... or even more classes if you previously have. He has an excellent knowledge of history, even though it seems boring, he somehow makes it interesting." -- Anonymous Students

  • Monday, January 29, 2007 - 17:55

    Basic Facts

    Teaching Position: Associate Professor of History, University of Chicago, 2006--
    Area of Research: Nineteenth and twentieth century United States, with an emphasis on the American South, Primarily a political historian, she has strong interests in African American history, legal history, and the politics of race.
    Education: Ph.D., 1995, Princeton University
    Major Publications: Dailey is the author of Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Post-Emancipation Virginia (University of North Carolina Press, 2000), published as part of the Jane Dailey JPG Gender and American Culture series, and Jim Crow America: A Norton Casebook in History (W. W. Norton & Co., forthcoming 2007). Dailey co-edited with Glenda Elizabeth Gilmore and Bryant Simon.Jumpin' Jim Crow: Southern Politics from Civil War to Civil Rights (Princeton University Press, 2000). Dailey is currently working on Sex and Civil Rights, A history of the politics of race and sex in America from 1865 to ca. 1980. and The American Republic a two-volume United States history textbook, with Harry Watson of UNC; Dailey is responsible for second volume on the US, 1877-2004.
    Awards: Dailey is the recipient of numerous awards and fellowships including:
    Berlin Prize Fellow, American Academy in Berlin, 2004-5;
    Fellow, American Council of Learned Societies, 2004-5;
    Fellow, John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation, 2004-5;
    Rice Undergraduate History Major Society Award for Outstanding Dedication to Students, 1998;
    Center for the Study of Cultures Fellow, Rice University, 1996-7; Mellon Post-Enrollment Fellow, Princeton University, 1992-3;
    Woodrow Wilson Fellow, Princeton Society of Fellows, 1991-2;
    Mellon Fellow, Virginia Historical Society, 1991
    Additional Info:
    Dailey is formerly Associate Professor of History, Johns Hopkins University, 2001—2006 and Associate Director of the Program in Comparative American Cultures, Johns Hopkins University, 2001-3. She was also formerly Assistant Professor of History, Rice University (Tenured: 2000) 1994-2000, and was a Visiting Fellow in History, Princeton University, 1996-7.
    Dailey has written numerous articles and book reviews for such publications as Journal of American History, Journal of Southern History, Law and History Review, American Historical Review, and Social History among others. Daily has also contributed book chapters including:"The Sexual Politics of Race in WWII America" in Kevin Kruse and Stephen Tuck, eds., Mobilizing the Movement (Oxford University Press, forthcoming 2007), and"Unintended Consequences: Protestants and Other Americans United for Separation of Church and State and the Question of School Prayer," with Sarah Barringer Gordon (Prof. of Law and History, University of Pennsylvania), in Glenn Feldman, ed., How the South Became Republican (forthcoming, 2007).

    Personal Anecdote

    "Ignorance is the mother of wonder," someone once said, and I've discovered that my favorite part of a project comes at the height of my ignorance, when I don't yet know what I'm supposed to find banal. It is at that point, and not later, that every shard of the world I am starting to explore seems to hold endless and exciting possibilities. An example: on the last day of my first research trip for what has grown into my current book project, I noticed a file labeled"Miscellaneous Race" at the University of Southern Mississippi and called it up. This file contained a number of unusual articles, each of which encoded a portal to narratives of the past. There was, for instance, a rubber dog toy of a hooded Clansman that exhorted Fido to"Krush the Klan!" There was also a bumper-sticker, unattributed and undated (as bumper-stickers tend to be). Probably from 1968, it read: “George Wallace Uses Hair Straightener." In many ways, my book manuscript, which looks at the interplay between white worries about miscegenation and racial knowledge and the African American freedom struggle, is an extended exegesis of this bumper-sticker. It is only at the beginning of a project, when one doesn't know better than to look at everything with wide-open eyes, that we open such boxes marked"miscellaneous."

    Apart from opening such boxes, another way of shocking ourselves out of ignorance is to make friends with an alien. When we think we know our world, there are questions we don't ask. A comparative perspective—looking at the same thing from far away—can make the too-familiar seem strange again. From that same research trip to Mississippi, I brought home piles of documents that deployed Biblical texts and religious language to express white opposition to desegregation, and to characterize"racial amalgamation" as against God's will. The historiography of civil rights tends to dismiss this language as inconsequential, and to focus instead on the religious arguments in favor of desegregation. I might have been tempted to stick with the consensus were it not for my resident alien, who glanced at one of my documents and exclaimed,"Hey, these guys sound like my people!" (He works on Christian/Jewish/Muslim relations in medieval Europe.)

    Quotes

    By Jane Dailey

  • "Faced with the obscenity and scope of the Jim Crow South, it is easy to see white supremacy as irresistible and to pass over attempts at interracial political cooperation between 1877 and 1900. But these attempts mattered just as much, and were often as heroic, as those of our more recent and eulogized past. . . . Knowing where we ended up, it has been difficult to imagine that we were ever elsewhere or that the route from there to here was not direct. By focusing intently on the hard-fought political battles of Readjuster Virginia, this book shows how significant these early encounters were. In particular, it demonstrates that late-nineteenth-century formulations of white supremacist racial ideology did not represent an easy continuation of past oppressions. It was not at all clear after the war that antebellum racial hierarchies could be reproduced in the context of the Reconstruction amendments to the federal Constitution, which outlawed slavery, embraced African Americans as citizens, and enfranchised black men. Although postwar southern society was eventually reranked according to racial hierarchy, the path from emancipation to Jim Crow was rockier than is sometimes realized, with many detours and switchbacks along the way. New forms of white dominance coalesced through the lived, and often conflictual, everyday experiences of black and white southerners after emancipation. The white supremacist South was not preordained, and its victory was never certain." -- Jane Dailey in"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia" (Chapel Hill, 2000)
  • About Jane Dailey

  • "This is a fine book--an elegant blend of political and cultural history, and a model of what state-level political history ought to look like in the wake of recent advances in our understanding of identity." -- Suzanne Lebsock, University of Washington reviewing"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "Before Jim Crow is one of the most exciting books on the South I've read in years. Dailey not only recasts the history of post-Reconstruction southern politics by recovering the virtually forgotten history of the Readjusters (and the critical role black people played in the movement), but she reminds us that nothing is inevitable. Southerners might have taken another path, and only violence, intimidation, and a realignment of race undermined a more democratic future." -- Robin D. G. Kelley, New York University reviewing"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "In Before Jim Crow, Jane Dailey brilliantly recreates the world of the Readjusters in late nineteenth-century Virginia. Emphasizing the fluidity of southern politics after the Civil War, Dailey makes clear that the emergence of segregation and disfranchisement was not preordained. An indispensable book for anyone who wants to understand the opportunities and challenges involved in building an interracial democracy in the South." -- Peter Bardaglio, Goucher College reviewing"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "A nicely written and sharply observed study, which adds theoretical precision and empirical substance to the growing body of scholarship that treats race as a socially constructed, rather than a 'natural,' category of historical analysis." -- Journal of American Studies review of"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "Impressive. . . . A sophisticated and complex analysis. . . . A provocative and important work, one that should influence the study of race for years to come." -- Journal of Southern History review of"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "The narrative of the rise and fall of the Readjuster Party provides a mere backdrop against which Dailey explores several fascinating issues . . . . An important addition to the growing literature about race in the late nineteenth-century South." -- American Historical Review review of"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "This study aids in developing a more complete picture of race relations and the struggle for equality in nineteenth century America." -- Civil War Book Review review of"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"
  • "Before Jim Crow is an elegant, often sardonic study of the Readjuster movement." -- Times Literary Supplement review of"Before Jim Crow: The Politics of Race in Postemancipation Virginia"

  • Sunday, January 14, 2007 - 20:16

    Basic Facts

    Teaching Position: Assistant Professor, Department of History, University of Virginia, 2004-present
    Area of Research: Modern Britain, British Empire, Imperialism and Colonization
    Education: Ph.D., History, Yale University 2002
    Major Publications: Jasanoff is the author of Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture, and Conquest in the East, 1750-1850Maya Jasanoff JPG (Alfred A. Knopf, 2005. London: Fourth Estate, 2005), (Paperback: Vintage, 2006; HarperPerennial, 2006). An Italian translation for Il Saggiatore is under contract. Edge of Empire is the winner of the 50th Duff Cooper Prize, 2005. Shortlisted for the Longman/History Today Book of the Year Prize 2005 and for the Whitfield Book Prize of the Royal Historical Society."Book of the year" choice in"The Economist,""The Sunday Times,""The Observer,""The Guardian,""The Independent.""Editor's choice" in"The New York Times Book Review."
    Jasanoff is currently working on Imperial Exiles: Loyalists in the British Empire, a book about the global diaspora of Loyalists after the American Revolution, in Canada, the Caribbean, Britain, Sierra Leone, and South Asia.
    Awards: Jasanoff is the recipient of numerous awards and fellowships including:
    Fellow, Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Center for Scholars and Writers, 2006-2007 New York Public Library Fellow, John W. Kluge Center, Library of Congress 2006;
    Postdoctoral Fellow, Society of Fellows, University of Michigan, 2002-2004;
    Jacob K. Javits Fellowship 1998-2002;
    Andrew W. Mellon Fellowship in the Humanities 1997-1998;
    Frank M. Knox Memorial Fellowship 1996-1997;
    Duff Cooper Prize, 2006;
    Shortlist, Whitfield Book Prize, Royal Historical Society 2006;
    Shortlist, Longman-History Today 2005 Book of the Year 2006;
    Harrison Research Award (Faculty Sponsor), Center for Undergraduate Excellence, University of Virginia 2006;
    National Endowment for the Humanities Summer Stipend 2005;
    Hans Gatzke Prize for Outstanding Dissertation in European History, 2003;
    Yale University;
    Phi Beta Kappa 1996.
    Additional Info:
    Jasanoff was formerly a postdoctoral fellow in the Society of Fellows at the University of Michigan, 2002-2004.
    Jasanoff has published numerous book reviews in general publications including the London Review of Books, and academic forums such as H-Net.

    Personal Anecdote

    My dissertation about British imperialism in India and Egypt was partly inspired by traveling around the former empire. So it was only fitting that I should actually start writing it while visiting a one-time British colony: with pen and paper one July day, on the roof-terrace of the British Hotel in Valletta, Malta.

    The hotel overlooked Valletta's spectacular Grand Harbour, ringed in the sixteenth century by elegant, severe stone walls. A couple of days before, a friend and I had seen it as it was designed to be seen: we sailed in, coasting past the pointed batteries and watchtowers, one mysteriously carved with a staring eye. We had arrived on a Maltese container ship named—could it be otherwise?-the Maltese Falcon. For the voyage from Genoa, we had had the run of the ship; the only other passengers were two truck-drivers who spent the whole journey closeted in the small lounge, curtains drawn, smoking and watching pirated action movies. On the bridge, the Iraqi skipper let us peer at his charts and quiz him about the instruments. The ship's cook, Salvator , regaled us with his decades of sea-won wisdom, which he delivered in emphatic outbursts composed chiefly of nouns. One of the senior sailors, slicking another layer of green paint onto the deck while I sunbathed next to the empty turquoise “pool,” offered his own nuggets of enlightenment like milestones punctuating long stretches of silence.

    The cargo ship turned out to be a suitable introduction to the rather lost-in-time quality of Valletta itself. (The Maltese Falcon has now been sold, and the national shipping company, Sea Malta, dissolved.) From 1800 to 1964 Malta was a British colony. The bar of the British Hotel, with its dust-caked bottles of cheap whisky and liqueurs, looked as if nobody had frequented it since the British had left. Under British rule, Valletta boasted a huge naval dockyard and served as the home port of Queen Victoria's Mediterranean fleet. Now, that great naval tradition was evoked by two quite different warships, French and American, on NATO service. Maltese families strolled past to look at the dour, steel craft; off-duty officers got boisterously drunk in a nearby bar.

    British influences lingered elsewhere. Converted British troop carriers from the 1940s now served as Malta's signature public buses. Menus advertised fish fingers, chicken and chips, spaghetti bolognese, and, in one gourmet touch, chicken"Gordon Blue." Where every other Mediterranean country comes to life again in the evening after a siesta, the Vallettans, in most un-Mediterranean style, closed up shop at siesta-time and never came back. (Indeed, the only place that seemed to serve reasonable evening meals was the café of the Maltese Labour Party.) To walk the streets on those baking July afternoons was to walk with echoes and ghosts, across a historical stage set.

    I wrote about India while I was in Valletta, and Malta only figured in two or three sentences in my entire dissertation. But I will always remember how and where it first took shape—in the blaring sunlight by the Grand Harbour, in a city tinted by imperial memories.

    Quotes

    By Maya Jasanoff

  • "So familiar is the late-nineteenth-century empire of crowns and trumpets (or, more accurately, pith helmets and bagpipes), of white church steeples among the palm trees, gin and tonics on club verandas, and rubicund Englishmen attended by bevies of native servants, that it is sometimes difficult to think back to an earlier period before the ideology of an imperial 'civilizing mission' was in place. This book endeavors to do just that. It steps back into a time and into places where people lived, loved, fought, and identified themselves in ways considerably more complicated than later imperial chauvinism, or even many present-day treatments of empire, might suggest. Edge of Empire JPG Most of all, this book is a plea for bringing a human dimension to imperial history, a topic that is often treated in the abstract, whether by sweeping chroniclers of conquest or by postcolonial critics of imperial discourse. These collectors and their world have vanished. But the objects they collected, moved, and brought together still tender proof of their passion. In Britain and in its former colonies-indeed, around the world—the artifacts give hard evidence of the human contacts that underpinned the otherwise intangible quantities of globalization and empire.... To the extent the history offered here seeks to reflect on a newer age of empire, it is to make an appeal for remembering the essential humanity of successful international relationships: for borrowing, learning, adapting, and giving. For collecting, and for recollecting." -- Maya Jasanoff in"Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture, and Conquest in the East 1750-1850" (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005)
  • About Maya Jasanoff

  • "Maya Jasanoff stumbled on a new way of looking at empire almost by accident. She had embarked on a study of European collectors in India and Egypt, the sometimes significant but often marginal figures who purchased or plundered the artefacts of the ancient cultures that they encountered and shipped them back to Europe. In the course of what might have seemed a somewhat esoteric area of study, she began to see the often ill-tutored mania of the imperial collectors as a metaphor for the formation of the empire itself - not the planned seizure of distant lands or the remorseless expansion of capital, but the piecemeal and haphazard acquisition of territory that only developed the lineaments of a distinct imperial pattern with the benefit of hindsight.... This brilliant insight has produced a riveting and original book that gives an entirely fresh dimension to our understanding of the creation and expansion of empire.… Britain's empire will never look quite the same again." -- Richard Gott in"The Guardian" reviewing"Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture, and Conquest in the East 1750-1850"
  • "A new history of empire, no longer either triumphalist or cast in the shades of black and white favoured by the post-colonialists, is beginning to be written. It assumes that the metropolis and the colonies were not self-contained realms (as the older `imperial history' often assumed); it recognises that empires were made and ruled by individuals with often very different, even conflicting aspirations. Above all it recognises that all empires were precarious, porous, multicultural and multilingual, and that of all the political orders ever devised they, more than any other, defy simple description or heavy abstraction. Maya Jasanoff's book - her first - is a brilliant contribution to this literature.

    Her theme is not how 'Others' were excluded by the imperial process, but the far more elusive, and in the end more illuminating ways in which so many were included in what she calls the 'rhetoric and systems of empire'. Edge of Empire is about crossing boundaries; about the porousness of culture in the early years of the British Empire; about frontiers, both geographical and mental, and how they are constructed and reconfigured." -- Anthony Pagden in"The London Review of Books" reviewing"Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture, and Conquest in the East 1750-1850"
  • "Jasanoff...refuses to see Britain's imperial history as a simple"saga of colonizers versus colonized".... She also declines to share the"postcolonialists'" view of the British Empire as"an insidious behemoth" and argues that historians should be wary of making moral judgments from afar. Denying she is an apologist for any empire, past or present, she points out that"empires are a fact of world history. The important question for this book is not whether they are 'good' or 'bad,' but what they do, whom they affect, and how."... Historians who are interested in the people who make history are usually better writers than those who prefer theories. And Jasanoff is certainly a fine writer. She delights in scenes from the past; she knows how to describe the sights and smells of an eighteenth- century bazaar as well as the personalities of her art collectors. She can visualize and imagine history, as well as study it in the archives and the seminar room, and this makes her book a particularly valuable account of the realities of empire." -- David Gilmour in"The New York Review of Books" reviewing"Edge of Empire: Lives, Culture, and Conquest in the East 1750-1850"
  • "Great class. Lectures were always very interesting and entertaining."..."Probably one of the better professors at this school. Very clear and to the point during her lectures, extremely knowledgeable, and very approachable."..."She's the best lecturer I've had at UVA"..."Really good teacher and pretty good lecturer. She has a sense of humor about the topic." -- Anonymous Students

  • Wednesday, January 10, 2007 - 19:16