This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are used for visitor analysis, others are essential to making our site function properly and improve the user experience. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Click Accept to consent and dismiss this message or Deny to leave this website. Read our Privacy Statement for more.
Print Page   |   Sign In   |   Register
History CfPs for RSA 2019 Toronto
Blog Home All Blogs
This blog is for CfPs for sessions in history for RSA 2019 Toronto. Members may post CfPs here: sign in to RSA and select "add new post" to do so. Your post should include a title, and the CfP itself should be no longer than 250 words. Adding tags (key words) to your post will help others find your CfP. Make sure the CfP includes the organizer's name, email address or mail-to link for email address, and a deadline for proposals. Non-members may email rsa@rsa.org to post a CfP. Please use the email address of the session organizer posted in the CfP to submit a paper proposal. CfPs are posted in order of receipt, with the newest postings appearing at the top of the blog. Members may subscribe to the blog to be notified when new CfPs are posted: click on the word Subscribe next to the green checkmark above.

 

Search all posts for:   

 

Top tags: social history  early modern  history  literature  gender  material culture  patronage  Religion  renaissance  urban spaces  architecture  art  art history  book history  devotion  history of science  identity  ritual  catholic reform early modern  charity  classicism  confraternity  cultural history  digital humanities  environmental history  global  history of reading  interdisciplinary  philosophy  piety 

Jesuit Studies

Posted By Kathleen M. Comerford, Thursday, July 19, 2018
The Journal of Jesuit Studies is looking to organize panels in any aspect of Jesuit studies in any region, up to the year 1700, to include history, literature, art history, music history, or related topics, in all geographical areas.

Individual paper abstracts should be no more than 150 words and should identify up to 5 keywords.  Panel submissions should include the name of a chair who is not also a presenter.  All submissions must include a/v requests and a brief CV (including affiliation, date of PhD completion, general discipline area, rank, and publications or other evidence of scholarship) for each participant.  Please submit to Kathleen Comerford, kcomerfo@georgiasouthern.edu, no later than August 5, 2018.  We will consider panels, individual papers, and roundtables for sponsorship by the Journal of Jesuit Studies.  Sponsorship does not guarantee acceptance to the program and implies no intent to publish.

Tags:  academies  architecture  book history  charity  classicism  community  cultural history  devotion  digital humanities  dress history; economic history; fashion; working-  early modern  empire  ethnographies  global  history  history of reading  history of science  identity  Jesuits  patronage  philosophy  Religion  ritual  social history  the other  theology  urban spaces 

PermalinkComments (0)
 

Philological Communities in Context(s) in the Early Modern World (1400-1850)

Posted By Jennifer Mackenzie, Wednesday, July 4, 2018

In recent years, scholarly collections such as World Philology (2015, Ed. Pollock, Elman, and Chang) and Philology and Its Histories (2010, Ed. Gurd) have brought philology to the foreground of humanistic study “not just [as] a mode of scholarship” but as “one of its objects” (Gurd, Introduction to Philology and Its Histories, 5). Questioning teleological histories that trace how philology achieved a modern and scientific status in the nineteenth-century European university, these studies call for a broad canvas to account for the multiplicity and complexity of textual practices over time and space. They include, within the study of philology, not only the study of the transmission and editing of texts, but also of hermeneutical activities more generally, from textual readings to historical and cultural interpretations.

Our RSA panels seek to contribute to these efforts by examining philological practices in the early modern period (1400-1850) on a micro-historical scale, in their various social, institutional and/or political contexts. The aim is to bring to bear on the analysis of these practices recent developments in the history of academies, patronage, princely courts, universities, salons, libraries, and schools. On the premise that philological work often takes place in communal settings and practically always in relation to structures of power, we seek papers that illuminate these settings, and the exchanges they generate in specific early modern contexts. We are particularly interested in contributions that examine the effects of these circumstances on the development of specific philological practices or hermeneutic perspectives.

Individual papers might shed new light on communities which have been overlooked, having not generally been associated with the most (proto-)modern representatives of the development of philology as a scholarly discipline.  Or they might open newly contextualized perspectives on communities that have already played leading roles in philology’s historiography. In either case, we hope to enrich our methodologies for studying philological communities in context(s), with the goal of gaining a greater appreciation of philology’s political stakes in the early modern world, and of the varieties of its institutional incarnations.

—   How were philological practices developed, taught, transmitted, and performed within specific communities? How did they contribute to building communities? Can philological communities be studied through their textual and hermeneutical practices — and, if so, how?

—   How were particular theories or practices of philology — that is explicit or implicit articulations of philology’s methods and aims – bound up with social (i.e. class, familial, professional) affiliations?

—   How did the institutions or political structures in which philology was carried out shape philological approaches, in theory and in practice? How was philology in turn used by those who performed it, theorized it, or patronized it? In particular, in what ways could philological activities legitimize and/or subvert power?

—   How did philological work participate in local dynamics (in courts, cities, city states, etc.) and/or how was it used in international politics, for diplomatic purposes or when international conflicts arose?

   How did institutional and/or political patronage constrain and/or nourish the practice of philology? Why were philologists valuable to institutions, powerful families, and princes — and how did they leverage their skills to serve the powerful, while also establishing their practices as valuable, legitimate and even autonomous forms of know-how?

Please submit a short (max. 150 words) abstract and CV by July 31, 2018 to Jennifer Mackenzie (jennifer.mackenzie@fandm.edu) and Déborah Blocker (dblocker@berkeley.edu).

Tags:  academies  courts  history of reading  patronage  philology  social history  universities 

PermalinkComments (0)
 

More Than Merely Passive: Addressing the Early Modern Audience

Posted By John R. Decker, Monday, July 2, 2018
Updated: Monday, July 9, 2018

“… so that the learned may savor the profundity of the allegory while the humble may profit from the lightness of the story” (de modo praedicandi)

 

Early modern audiences were not homogenous. Differences in status, education, language, wealth, and experience (to name only a few) could influence how a group of people, or a particular person, received and made sense of sermons, public proclamations, images, objects, and spaces. The ways in which images, objects, proclamations, etc. were framed and executed could have a serious impact on their relevance and effectiveness. This session seeks papers that investigate the ways in which authors, artists, preachers, theologians, and civic or court officials took account of and encoded pluriform audiences in their works. Topics might consider, but are not limited to, questions such as: What sorts of strategies were employed to take into account multiple ‘levels’ of audience? How well did such strategies work? What were the consequences—possible or actual—when they failed? Please submit an abstract and CV by no later than 30 July, 2018 to: jdecker@pratt.edu.

Tags:  art history  artists  collaboration  cultural history  gender  identity  images  imagination  invention  literature  material culture  patronage  religious communities  representation  social history  urban spaces  urbanism  visual arts  visual communication  visual culture 

PermalinkComments (0)
 

New Approaches to Catholic Reform

Posted By Marie Louise Lillywhite, Monday, June 4, 2018
Updated: Monday, June 4, 2018

Recently, scholars have approached Catholic Reform in new ways, by looking beyond Tridentine frameworks, extending beyond European borders, and challenging traditional arguments and understandings of this critical period in the history of the Church. Rather than focusing purely on a top-down enforcement of reform, or failed attempts to combat Protestantism, scholars of history, history of art, music, and literature have used new and varied approaches to understand the impact of religious reform in the early modern period and the ways in which people negotiated it.

The organizers of this panel would like to invite papers that consider Catholic Reform from across the disciplines, with the aim of contributing to a broader and more holistic understanding of the process, bringing together research from different fields and varied geographic locations. Papers might directly address new methods and approaches, or might demonstrate them through specific research, but all will contribute to a growing conversation on the nature and significance of Catholic Reform.

Potential topics could include:

-       Approaches to Catholic Reform broadly or within specific field/subfields

-       Reinterpretations of older arguments and narratives about Catholic Reform

-       The influence of Catholic Reform on music, literature, culture, politics, etc.

-       The influence of Catholic Reform on art and architecture (patronage, examples of censorship, debates concerning the nature of the sacred image)

-       Limitations of Reform

-       Reform in a global context

-       Reactions of the laity to Catholic Reform

Proposals should include the presenter’s name, academic affiliation (if applicable), email address, paper title (15 words maximum), abstract (150 words maximum) and brief academic CV (300 words maximum). Please submit proposals by July 20 to Marie-Louise Lillywhite (marie-louise.lillywhite@history.ox.ac.uk) and Celeste McNamara (c.mcnamara@warwick.ac.uk). Presenters will need to be members of the RSA by the time of the conference. The RSA offers a limited number of travel grants; see their website for more information. 

Tags:  catholic reform early modern  confraternity  patronage  social history 

PermalinkComments (0)
 

CfP, RSA 2019 Panel Series: Cultures of Bureaucracy

Posted By Rachel Midura, Thursday, May 10, 2018

Organizers: Giacomo Giudici (Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Storici/Warburg Institute), Rachel Midura (Stanford University) & Luca Zenobi (University of Oxford)

We seek papers to contribute to a cultural history of Renaissance bureaucracy. During the last forty years, scholars have applied a cultural-historical perspective to the production, reception, and use of textual objects in a number of domains, yet the cultures of Renaissance administration remain largely unexplored.

The very notion of “bureaucracy” seems to run counter to themes of cultural history: hierarchy in place of agency, exclusion in place of collaboration, and formality in place of negotiation. A cultural approach to the people, practices, and material texts of Renaissance bureaucracy has the potential to challenge traditional notions of early modern statecraft and administration. Local and regional officials, secretaries and clerks, diplomats and couriers weathered the storms of war, the upset of regime change, and the occasional bankruptcy of their employers. Tax records, chancery documents, and ample official correspondence show an ongoing tension between ideals and customs in the worlds they moved between. How did notions of publicity and privacy, patronage and service, honor and dishonor guide documentary production, reception, and use? How do seemingly formulaic texts demonstrate both cultural influence and individual ambitions? How did protocol and administrative ideals shape the private lives of bureaucrats?

For this series of panels, we encourage papers to draw from any cultural-historical approaches, including material, gender- and class-based analyses. We particularly welcome papers that find collaboration and negotiation in bureaucratic archives, and/or contribute to a more humanized understanding of the Renaissance state. Potential themes might include:

  • bureaucracy from below: agency and informal networks in the production, use, and reception of political-administrative documents, including outsiders to bureaucracy, women and non-traditional office-holders
  • popular perceptions and depictions of bureaucrats, and their positive and negative influence on governance
  • spatial histories of administration and the spaces of action (from offices and archives, to public venues and private houses)
  • bureaucracy on the move: traveling personnel and exchange of administrative ideas
  • philosophical, literary and artistic themes related to imagined administrations, notions of civil service, and self-fashioning by agents of the state;
  • bureaucratic patronage and the political administration of art, music, and architecture.

Please send a brief abstract (max. 150 words) and CV to the panel organizers at info.culturesofbureaucracy@gmail.com. The deadline is June 30 2018.

Tags:  administration  bureaucracy  government  networks  patronage  statecraft 

PermalinkComments (0)
 
Membership Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal