Macro History

Neste artigo tecemos algumas das possíveis relações entre a História (produção acadêmica) e a vida de Gandhi, amplamente registrada, porém pouco absorvida pelos diversos setores da academia que poderiam se beneficiar com o estudo do seu pensamento e ação. Feito esse diagnóstico, passamos a examinar a noção de verdade e sua instrumentalização por Gandhi através de sua autobiografia, com o objetivo de nos aproximar de um entendimento acerca da importância histórica do método de luta política não-violenta por ele posto em prática – o satyagraha (firmeza na verdade). Com isso retornamos à macro-história para fazer um exercício de apreciação das questões gandhianas nos relatos do imperialismo e da descolonização.

The ultimate cause of much historical, social and cultural change is the gradual accumulation of human knowledge of the environment. Human beings use the materials in their environment to meet their needs and increased human knowledge of the environment enables human needs to be met in a more efficient manner. The human environment has a particular structure so that human knowledge of the environment is acquired in a particular order. The simplest knowledge is acquired first and more complex knowledge is acquired later. The order of discovery determines the course of human social and cultural history as knowledge of new and more efficient means of meeting human needs, results in new technology, which results in the development of new social and ideological systems. This means human social and cultural history, has to follow a particular course, a course that is determined by the structure of the human environment. Given that a certain level of knowledge will result in a particular type of society, it is possible to ascertain the types of societies that were inevitable in human history. The course of history is not random and can be rationally and scientifically understood.

In history, generally historians interested in general events and majority. Maybe this situation emerged from the idea that majority lead the history. In the 19th and 20th century, some changes happened in the concept of history. I can say that annals school and the idea of Marxism are the important pieces of these changes, and these new history areas emerged in the 19th and 20th century. In the 20th century, different methods were developed for historical investigation. One of them is micro-history. Macro-history is the science of history that new ideas such as annals and Marxism have labored. This method has taken its name from the content. Because, Macro-history deals with the general, unified or major history. It is the method that deals with a majority, not a minority in society. Oppositely, micro-history is a way of reading past through individual or minority.

This essay, published in 2015, examines the twists and turns of twentieth-century attitudes to long-term history, after Einstein's dethronement of absolute Time. Micro-history and in-depth analysis became prominent. In the 1990s, there was even a brief 'postmodernist' moment of anti-history. But long-term studies are now back on the map. Adieu to Time nihilism and atemporality. Back to history in an integral Space-Time (or Time-Space, which is my preferred alternative).

The essay ends with a speculative assessment of Temporality as something akin to a unique and dynamic form of super-energy, holding and unfolding everything together in Time-Space. Perhaps too speculative from a mere historian!?

This paper will answer three questions.  First, in what way are they different. Second, in what way are they connected. Moreover, finally, do the three streams of history complement each other or do they conflict with one another, and if so, in what way and to what degree.
This paper will examine all three levels of historical studies and will argue that they are all, in fact, necessary in order to give a complete picture and definition of historical events which, in turn, have defined history more holistically.
In this paper the argument that no single level of historical study should be a “stand alone.” solution, but instead, all three levels are incomplete until and unless they work together to form a genuinely composite picture of the event or era under consideration. In order to do this, each method will need a general definition of their approach to history, which will be identified and elucidated.

This essay, first published in 2010, reconsiders an important theme for historical studies. In-depth analysis of short periods of micro-history is surely valuable. Yet micro-history means little without understanding the long-term frameworks of macro-history. Old models of inevitable progress or eternal class struggles are no longer convincing. Nor can theories of unremitting chaos or pure accident explain linked developments through time. New approaches, paying attention to both long-term changes and long-term continuities, are needed.

This article is devoted to a few aspects of Tărnovo’s fall, in the year 1393. These problems in the author’s opinion have not lived to witness a satisfactory solution until now. In the first part of the article the author rejected an opinion, according to which patriarch Euthymius was the commander of the Bulgarian capital’s defence. In the second part he answered the question, who, from the ottoman side, commanded the siege of Tărnovo? The analysis of the sources leads to conclusion, that Bayezid I, the then ottoman ruler, was at the head of the Turkish army, by the walls of the town. In the third part author expresses criticism of J. Andreev’s theses, concerning the reasons for the offence and circumstances, in which Turkish expedition against Tărnovo came into effect. He formulates the thesis according to which the purpose of this expedition was to subjugate John Šišman and to prevent him from joining the coalition, which had been created by Zigmond of Luxembourg. In the fourth part the author confronts different information from the sources and different views of the scholars, concerning the number of the ottoman army, which besieged the town. Next, he arrives at a conclusion, that, there were probably around 30-40 thousands warriors. In the fifth part he refers to a question of a possible participation of the tsar of Vidin, John Sracimir, and the ruler of Velbužd, Konstantin Dragaš, in the ottoman expedition against Tărnovo. The sources don’t allow to determine this issue unambiguously, although it’s possible, that the armies of these rulers didn’t take participation in the siege. The last part of this article refers to the problem of a possible relief for Tărnovo, organized by John Šišman. Author draws a conclusion, that contemporaneously existing sources don’t allow to produce a thesis, in light of which the Bulgarian tsar really organized a military help for his capital, during the ottoman siege.

This contribution analyzes the international trade fairs of Tel Aviv during the 1930s, the so-called 'Levant Fairs,' as a Zionist means to defend Jewish pre-state presence in Mandatory Palestine. To do so, it is concerned with the Levant Fairs' international and regional context. It is shown that first, the Levant Fairs promoted the Zionist state-building endeavours to an international audience; and second, the Levant Fairs revealed the declining support of the British, and an increasing struggle with the Palestinian Arabs. The arguments are supported by press articles concerning the fairs themselves.