To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure firstname.lastname@example.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This book will have two primary aims of analysis: the migration of Flemings and their settlement. The first will be to identify systems and build models of migratory movements within a long-term perspective, i.e. understanding migration paths and causes, networks, strategies and migrants’ personalities. The second will focus on what is commonly known as ‘integration’, that is, the immigrants’ settlement, acculturation and acquisition of their social, economic and political position in the host country. In addition to a detailed treatment of these two aims, the book attempts to evaluate the economic impact of the immigrant community on a specific industry. I will argue that the success of the immigrants was not solely reflected in the rise of their average earnings, but also in the fact that their skills and human capital acquired prior to emigration contributed to the development of the English textile industry in the fourteenth century.
The introduction leverages the insights and interventions of world, global, and transnational histories to bring a rich world of interaction between China and the Philippines in the early twentieth century to life. After overviewing the layered connections that formed the Sino–Philippine link, which is the subject of the book, the introduction turns toward methodological approaches that best expose and explore the depths of those connections. It starts this endeavor by highlighting some limitations of world, global, and transnational history, such as their tendency to be prescriptive rather than responsive, their tendency to privilege actors and institutions from the Global North, and the high cost of entry for new scholars to the field. It argues that, while these limitations are important to recognize, transnational, global, and world histories still have much to offer if they can become more accessible, flexible, and representative. Finally, the introduction outlines the approach of the book, which adopts an interdisciplinary, decolonial, connected approach to world history that pays attention to disintegration as well as creation, implements selective silences, centers cultural and discursive flows between peoples of the Global South, and explores unencumbered articulations of race, modernity, and gender.
The Introduction sets out the historiographical and theoretical grounding for this study on old age in slavery, and provide information on the demographic conditions of slavery appertaining to old age. This book challenges narratives of solidarity between enslaved people and their elders, and shows how far age affected the performance of mastery and shaped white southerners’ interactions with one another. In examining how individuals, families, and communities felt about the aging process and dealt with elders, it emphasizes the complex social relations that developed in a slave society. Showing how old age ran through the arguments of Black activists, abolitionists, proslavery propagandists, and enslavers, the book reveals how representations – and the realities of aging – spoke to wider debates on the politics of paternalism and resistance. Ultimately, by illuminating age as a crucial aspect of the complex web of relations that bound together enslavers and enslaved, the book asks readers to rethink existing narratives relating to networks of solidarity in the American South and emphasizes the all-encompassing violence and exploitation of American slavery.
This article broadens the understanding and empirical study of regime complexes by shifting the focus from the negotiation outcome to the processes of negotiating new international agreements. Although they are important to regime-complex formation and delimitation, the sites where states negotiate new agreements are rather neglected. We aim to enhance the methodological toolbox available to scholars studying global governance in two ways: (1) by demonstrating how dynamic relationships between states and international organisations (IOs) unfolding within the social space of international treaty negotiations contribute to regime-complex formation; and (2) how social network analysis (SNA) can help us to detect patterns in these relationships. Combining participant observation and collaborative event ethnography (CEE) with social network analysis, we present new empirical material illustrating how we delimited a regime complex and how IOs interact throughout the negotiation process. We applied our methodology to the case of marine-biodiversity governance and use observational data collected during three intergovernmental conferences (IGCs) (2018–19) on a new treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) for our analysis. We discuss the results in relation to our approach’s strengths and weaknesses and implications for future research on regime complexity.
In this commentary we reflect on Shaalan, Eid, and Tourky's (2022) article in which they investigated the Chinese concept and practice of guanxi in the Middle East,1 a region in which wasta represents the common way of informal networking.2 While we encourage and welcome research into informal networks, we have serious concerns about the conceptual and methodological approaches taken by Shaalan et al. (2022) in investigating informal networks in the Middle East and explain herein why we do not believe guanxi should have been used in place of wasta.
Undoubtedly one of the most prominent and most important Russian directors of the past two decades, Yury Butusov here refers to several landmarks of his artistic trajectory, gradually revealing a sense of oeuvre, of a body of work connected by a distinctive worldview. Not all of his productions of exceptional significance are cited here, and Flight (2015), at the Vakhtangov Theatre in Moscow, not having found its rightful place here, appears separately at the end. This Conversation, while intentionally taking a wide perspective, nevertheless focuses on production details so as to foreground various artistic qualities that distinguish his approach. Butusov discusses at some length what constitutes his directorial method and methodology, stressing, above all, the primacy of creative freedom for his actors and himself from which emerge complex and highly charged theatre constructions. Butusov, who is against war as such, speaks of his position on the Russian-Ukrainian war, which led to his resignation in 2018 from the artistic directorship of the Lensoviet Theatre in St Petersburg. He became Principal Director of the Vakhtangov, alongside the acclaimed Rimas Tuminas, Artistic Director of this theatre. Tuminas resigned from his post in spring 2022. Butusov and his family left Russia for Paris, and Butusov resigned from the Vakhtangov in November 2022. His production of Tom Stoppard’s Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is to be premiered at the Russian- and Lithuanian-speaking Vilnius Old Theatre in September 2023. This conversation took place on 23 March and 27 April 2023 on Zoom, and was translated from the Russian and edited by Maria Shevtsova.
This chapter provides an introduction and overview to the idea of the collaborative constitution, sketching out the central claim that protecting rights is a collaborative enterprise between all three branches of government, where they each play distinct roles, whilst working together in constitutional partnership. This Introduction also clarifies the constitutional methodology employed in the book, namely, a methodology which connects theory with practice, and analyses the UK constitutional order in comparative context.
This chapter deals with research priorities that were obtained during the writing of this book. We first illustrate the recent insights that were published since the publication of the first volume. New research topics deal with further exploring and identifying critical habitat components and the effect of land improvement initiatives. Demographics need to be studied in less covered areas using methods that have been perfectioned in the typical highly researched countries. Examining responses of Little Owl populations to land uses and the effects of abiotic environmental factors should allow for more quantitative management and follow-up on the effectiveness of taken measures. The adoption of the information-theoretic approach, focus on process variation and searching for mechanisms will need more statistical background and thoroughness, leading to even more long-term observational studies and focus on the cumulative effects. To do this in an optimal way, more experiments are urgently needed, to enable controling for certain parameters. Finally there is a need for the expansion of the investigated geographic range and an increase in research and experiment maturity in emerging countries, hopefully enabled by highly mature research teams and international co-operation.
The history of internationalism has tended to focus on power centres in the Global North – London, Geneva, New York, Paris – and institutions like the League of Nations, United Nations and UNESCO. What happens when we flip our perspective, and view internationalism from the point of view of the decolonising South? What do we get when we shift our focus from world leaders to the internationalism of activists, intellectuals, feminists, poets, artists, rebels and insurgents operating in Asia and Africa? Moreover, how are our methods of researching and debating international history – in universities, archives and conferences in the Global North – structured by economic inequalities, colonial legacies and visa regimes that limit participation by scholars from the South? This paper considers how we might decolonise both the content and the methods of international history, focusing especially on leftist internationalism and South–South connections in Southeast Asia and the wider Global South.
Has Visual International Relations (IR) become too distant from the content of visual artefacts? This is a paradoxical question. Visual IR is a vibrant and pluralist field exploring visuals in innumerable ways. Nonetheless, the field tends to focus on ‘deep’ readings of the socio-political implications of visual artefacts at the expense of a close and attentive observation and description of the events, situations, or phenomena they may depict. Simply put, visual IR usually analyses visuals-as-visuals rather than seeing them as entry points for studying the social world. But might a video of torture teach us something about the practicality of torture? Might a video of peace negotiations teach us something about their successes or failures? Can we gain a fleeting glimpse of ‘reality’ within visuals? We address these questions by first situating our focus on close ‘visual (data) observation’ in conceptual conversation with the literature’s existing focus on deep interpretation. Second, we outline three approaches to visual observation as they are deployed outside IR. Third, we unpack how those approaches might be of value for IR, especially vis-à-vis the study of practice, materiality, and discourse. Finally, we conclude by asking if visual data observation can retain critical political potentiality.
The separation of powers principle and antitrust both relate to power and, notably, deal with the concentration of power. However, they are usually conceptualized, analyzed, and promoted separately. Separation of powers primarily refers to branches of government or to the main functions of the state and, in this respect, to public or state power or powers, while the economic power of private or, to a lesser extent, public firms is at the core of antitrust. Though appealing, this distinction is not clear-cut. These powers interact with one another. The concentration of politico-economic power in one or a few hands also raises fundamental issues in a democracy. Currently, and in the future, special attention must be given to the fact that a few digital platforms contribute to the digital infrastructure of democracy.
This article challenges the justification usually offered by the Inter-American Court of Human Rights for its broad use of external sources when engaging in evolutive interpretation of the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR). It analyses the Court's jurisprudence concerning international humanitarian law, the rights of the child, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transexual and intersex (LGBTI) rights, in addition to drawing on interviews conducted with lawyers of the Court. It argues that the discursive strategy used by the Court to justify its ‘import’ of external sources fails to provide a complete normative justification and remains open to the charge of ‘cherry-picking’. The article recommends that the Court tailors its discursive strategy to the specific type of external sources used and suggests that more attention be paid to searching for internationalized consensus when determining the relevance of non-binding sources to evolutive interpretation of the ACHR.
This article concludes an exchange on developing and improving longitudinal estimates of state-level public opinion in the United States by introducing the U.S. Partisanship and Presidential Approval Dataset, which combines more than 1.1 million survey responses from 1948 to 2020 into a single harmonized “mega poll.”
Informal borrowings constitute an important linguistic phenomenon, yet they remain underrepresented in scholarly literature. This book is to remedy the situation. Drawing from the methodological framework of documentary linguistics and sociolinguistics, it relies on lexical material from a large database of citations from diverse sources – including spoken utterances, films and TV shows, print, and social media – to ensure authenticity and representativeness. Much space is devoted to the presentation, explanation, interpretation, and illustration of language data; the format of description is designed to be extensive, covering a wide range of themes which allow an examination from various perspectives. The description is amply supported throughout the text with usage examples that illustrate linguistic patterns, show the sociocultural context in which they are used, and attest to the very existence of these expressions.
This chapter, which serves as the introduction, outlines the objectives and key questions of the volume, reviews existing scholarship on ancient women philosophers, and highlights the original philosophical contributions of each chapter. A substantial section is devoted to the specific challenges in the study of ancient women philosophers, with special focus on source issues, as well as the methods the contributors of the volume have adopted to face these challenges and approach these female thinkers philosophically. We argue that the study of ancient women philosophers has a special value for our understanding of the history of philosophy. While at first daunting, this unique set of thinkers and the available evidence both enrich our insight into the methodology of the history of philosophy and re-introduce philosophical contributions which would otherwise be lost.
Arete of Cyrene was daughter and disciple of the founder of the Cyrenaic school and mother and teacher of the figure who codified its principles. Our sources emphasize her as a link in the intellectual chain connecting the school it its Socratic roots, to the detriment of preserving her own philosophical ideas. In this chapter, I make a case for her philosophical contribution to the Cyrenaics, as revealed in a careful reading of the few sources we have. I follow this with methodological reflections on how we might access a figure like Arete. I argue that this task requires and licenses the adoption of severed methodological strategies related to an added open-mindedness to source material. I reflect on how these methodological points contribute to a wider project of recovering the thought of marginalized figures.
This chapter analyzes Cavell’s interpretive methods to show how he generates novel insights into traditional political philosophy concepts. It argues that methodologists in political theory answer three crucial questions. What texts should one read? Why should one read those texts? How should one read those texts? I contend that Cavell is neither a textualist nor a contextualist. Instead, he is an intertextualist interested in how texts relate to each other and what effect the text has on the reader. Cavell understands political theory as a practice of responding to political texts. To demonstrate the salience of Cavell’s approach, the chapter identifies three interpretive techniques within his work. First, the technique of creative reading juxtaposes at least two disparate texts to draw out a previously neglected dimension in both. Second, through conceptual analysis of the ordinary use of terms such as “democracy,” Cavell can resolve longstanding debates in political theory. Third, through an attention to the authorial voice, Cavell can identify how a text provokes a change in political attitude in its readers.
Dividing the Latin language into neat chronological periods will not work without severe reservations. Usages that may seem to be ‘early’ often turn out not to be confined to a particular period, or alternatively their attestations may be genre-related, that is characteristic of a genre that happens to survive mainly from an early period. As for ancient grammarians and commentators on the language, no single concept of what early Latin is may be extracted from their works. Early Latin, or the Latin of ueteres, was a different thing for different commentators. One could use ‘early Latin’ (arbitrarily) of the Latin of the period before about 100 BC, provided that one excludes from the category ‘early’ usages which, though they were current early, also remained current beyond that time. Latin is attested over many centuries, and it was definitely not static. There was not however an entity ‘early Latin’ in use until a convenient date, which then changed into ‘classical Latin’. Recovery of early phenomena requires careful analysis of the distribution, comparative evidence across periods and genres, and a distinction between usage and fashion.
Despite the common misconception that ancient philosophy was the domain of male thinkers, sources confirm that ancient women engaged in philosophical activity. Bringing together a collection of essays on ancient women thinkers, with special focus on their ideas and contributions to the history of philosophy, this volume is about the earliest women philosophers, their breakthroughs, and the methods we can use to excavate them. The essays survey the methodological strategies we can use to approach the surviving evidence, retrieve the largely unresearched thought and the original ideas of ancient women philosophers, and carve out a space for them in the canon. The broad focus includes women thinkers in ancient Indian, Chinese, and Arabic philosophy as well as in the Greek and Roman philosophical traditions. The volume will be valuable for a wide range of researchers, teachers, and students of ancient philosophy.
This chapter guides the researcher through key elements of developing a research methodology for conducting research on and at global environmental negotiations and agreement-making sites. It addresses four important components: 1) Methodological: how to develop a research project; 2) Ethical: how to reflect on and comply with ethical standards; 3) Legal: how to protect, manage and store data and 4) Organizational: how to prepare research on-site. We address key cross-cutting issues relevant to all chapters of the book and the central question of how to decide whether you need to be on-site to answer your research question and advance the state of the art on global environmental agreement-making. The chapter includes three main takeaways: First, the ethical, legal, and organizational aspects of this kind of research are as important as the conceptual and methodological work that prepares scholars for data collection and participant observation on-site. Second, access, funding, and data protection need to be addressed early in the research process and should be reflected at different stages of the research process. Third, regardless of the research puzzle and methodology, conducting research on and at negotiations will always imply a high degree of reflexivity and preparedness.