This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.
Notes and Comments 219 Response to Professor Ehud Toledano: I thank Professor Toledano for taking the time to read and comment on “What’s Up in Ottoman Studies?”. As it happens, I agree with most of his objections . For any one scholar to attempt to compile an Ottoman canon is a ludicrous idea. I never intended it to be such. I understood very early on in the construction of the bibliography that a comprehensive state-of-the-art approach has become an impossibility given the extraordinary diversity and opportunities which the internet and international scholarly communities have afforded us. It is still worth asking, however, if it is necessary and/or possible to produce a single volume history /narrative of the Ottoman Empire. A recent effort in that direction, which I neglected to include in my essay, is Alan Mikhail and Christine Philliou’s discussion of the pitfalls of comparing empires: “The Ottoman Empire and the Imperial Turn,” Comparative Studies in Society and History 54:4 (2012): 721-45. The three review articles in the previous issue of JOTSA were intended as a barometer of the terrain the editors wish to be represented in the revived journal of the Association. I hope exchanges such as this one continue, and we hear from those who take up Professor Toledano’s challenge to foreground and critique the vibrant new fields no longer bounded by the term “Ottoman Studies”. Virginia H. Aksan McMaster University March 2015 ...
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4