Period and region

Abstract

Geographers have long maintained that region and period are similar types of generalization. Yet, while geographers have closely examined the nature of regions and regionalization, historians have remained largely silent on the assumptions that underlie the division of time into periods. Reflection on the nature of period and region reveals many similarities, including their basis in the material world but also the subjectivity of their recognition, the selective nature of their content and boundaries, their tendency to emphasize differences rather than commonalities, and their limited scope as generalizations. The great number of feasible ways of dividing space into regions and time into periods opens the door for alternative narratives, including those which challenge conventional Eurocentric interpretations. In the final analysis, periodization and regionalization should be seen as part and parcel of the art of representation.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 30 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.