Skip to content

Blog Posts

Currently Filtering by Category: Announcement

BlockView

The NACBS annual meeting is one month away! The Sheraton Downtown Denver has graciously extended the hotel conference room rate until November 4. For information about the conference and to register, please go to http://www.nacbs.org/conference.html.

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

CALL FOR PAPERS:
PCCBS ANNUAL MEETING, March 9th-11th, 2012
HUNTINGTON LIBRARY, PASADENA, CA

The Pacific Coast Conference on British Studies (PCCBS) invites paper and panel proposals for its thirty-ninth annual meeting, to be held at the Huntington Library, from March 9-11, 2012.  Located in the quiet enclave of San Marino and surrounded by its world-renowned botanical gardens, the Huntington offers one of North America’s most valuable research collections, particularly in the fields of history, literature, art, and
religion.

The Pasadena Hilton, located less than two miles from the Huntington Library, will serve as our conference hotel.  An attractive conference room rate of $119 (single or double occupancy) will be available through the Pasadena Hilton.  The closest airport to the Hilton is Bob Hope (Burbank) airport, 17 miles away.  Los Angeles International
Airport lies approximately 30 miles west of the conference hotel.

The PCCBS invites papers representing all fields of British Studies--broadly defined to include those who study the United Kingdom, its component parts and nationalities, as well as Britain’s imperial cultures.  We welcome proposals from scholars and doctoral candidates in a wide range of disciplines across the humanities, social sciences, and the arts, including History, Literature, Political Science, Philosophy, Religion, Gender Studies, Cultural Studies, Theater Studies, and Art History.

Proposals for individual papers, partial panels, or complete panels are all welcome, although complete panel proposals are preferred.  We encourage the submission of proposals dealing with interdisciplinary topics, as well as panels on new pedagogies and technologies associated with British Studies.

The deadline for submission of proposals/panels is NOVEMBER 15, 2011.  Proposals should include a 200-word abstract for each paper plus a 1-page c.v. for each participant.  Those submitting full or partial panel proposals should include a brief description of the panel plus a 1-page c.v. for the panel chair as well as for its commentator.  Please place the panel proposal, its constituent paper proposals, and all vitae in one file, making certain that your contact information, especially email addresses, are correct and current.  Proposals should be submitted via email attachment by November 15th, 2011, to:

Professor Lori Anne Ferrell, PCCBS Program Committee Chair
Department of English, Claremont Graduate University
lori.ferrell@cgu.edu

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

For many years, H-Albion Book Reviews has been an essential feature of our listserv.  Not only has it notified members of new books, but it has also provided top-notch critical reviews and surveys on the state of our field.  This month, we are introducing a new, add-on feature to H-Albion's review service: the H-Albion Bibliography of Publications in British and Irish Studies.

The H-Albion Bibliography of Publications in British and Irish Studies is meant to supplement H-Albion Book Reviews by providing a space for members to announce new books, articles, reviews, and digital resources of interest to the H-Albion community.  Using Zotero, members will be able to add new items to the H-Albion Bibliography as well as to add comments and links to book reviews.

For those of you who are unfamiliar with it, Zotero is a free tool developed by the Center for HIstory and New Media at George Mason University.  The software helps academics collect, organize, cite, and share research sources.  Citations and notes can be stored both locally and in a cloud.  They can be accessed  through the web, as a browser plugin, or as a standalone application.  For more information on Zotero and how to use it, please visit the Zotero website.  There is a great video introduction here: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq94aBrc0pY>.

The H-Albion Bibliography of Publications in British and Irish Studies is a crowd-sourced list, so it is up to the members who use the site to edit and update it.  To post, all you need to do is join the group.  When posting a new item, please be sure to put a summary in the abstract field, a link to the publisher's site, and any other information in the Notes field.  Members can update entries to make them more accurate, but if you would like to comment on the text, please insert the text as a new note.  For new announcements, please subscribe to the RSS feed at https://api.zotero.org/groups/58082/items/top.

Once you have uploaded the information for your new publication, please be sure to submit your book to H-Albion Book Reviews.  The contact information for our editors is below.

Ireland
Nick Wolf - Modern Ireland (1800 to present)
nmwolf@vcu.edu

Britain
Margaret McGlynn - Britain (medieval-1540)
mmcglyn@uwo.ca

Jeffrey Wigelsworth - Britain (1689-1830)
jeffrey.wigelsworth@rdc.ab.ca

Thomas Hajkowski - Modern Britain (1830- present)
thajkows@misericordia.edu

Best wishes,
Jason

--
Jason M. Kelly, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of British History, IUPUI

School of Liberal Arts
Indiana University
Department of History, IUPUI
Cavanaugh Hall 503N
425 University Boulevard
Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140

telephone: 317.274.1689
fax: 317.278.7800
email: jaskelly@iupui.edu

Twitter: @jason_m_kelly  https://twitter.com/#!/Jason_M_Kelly
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jason-kelly/18/531/6a9
Academia.edu: http://iupui.academia.edu/JasonMKelly
Google+: https://plus.google.com/109922202142849269369/about?hl=en

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

CALL FOR PAPERS
Ancients and Moderns:
81st Anglo-American Conference of Historians

5-6 July 2012
Senate House, London

With the Olympics upon us in the UK it seems an appropriate moment to think more broadly about the ways in which the classical world resonates in our own times, and how successive epochs of modernity since the Renaissance have situated themselves in relation to the various ancient civilisations. From political theory to aesthetics, across the arts of war and of peace, to concepts of education, family, gender, race and slavery, it is hard to think of a facet of the last millennium which has not been informed by the ancient past and through a range of media, including painting, poetry, film and the built environment. The Institute’s 81st Anglo-American conference seeks to represent the full extent of work on classical receptions, welcoming not only those scholars who work on Roman, Greek and Judaeo-Christian legacies and influences, but also historians of the ancient kingdoms and empires of Asia and pre-Colombian America. Our plenary lecturers include: Paul Cartledge (Cambridge), Constanze Güthenke (Princeton), Mark Lewis (Stanford), Sanjay Subrahmanyam (UCLA) and David Womersley (Oxford).

Proposals for individual papers, panels (of up to three papers and a session chair) and roundtables are invited. Please send a half-page abstract to the Events Officer, Institute of Historical Research at AncientsandModerns@lon.ac.uk by 1 December 2011. Acceptance of proposals will be confirmed by 31st December and the full conference programme published at the end of January. Registrations open on 1 March 2012. Further information on the conference can be found at www.history.ac.uk/aach12.

On behalf of the 2012 Anglo-American Conference Programme Committee:

Hugh Bowden, King’s College, London
Catherine Edwards, Birkbeck College, London
Mike Edwards, Institute of Classical Studies
Rosemary Sweet, University of Leicester
Miles Taylor, Institute of Historical Research
Giorgios Varouxakis, Queen Mary University of London

0 Comments Read full post »

September
20
2011

NACBS 2011 Election to Begin September 27

Posted by jaskelly under Announcement, NACBS | Tags: election, NACBS, officers | 0 Comments

Area

The annual NACBS election will begin on Tuesday, September 27, 2011. Current members will receive an electronic ballot again this year that will enable them to cast their votes via a secure, anonymous web site. No print ballots will be mailed. If you are a current member and have not received an electronic ballot by September 29, please contact Michael Cunningham at the University of Chicago Press (mec@press.uchicago.edu) if you would like to participate in the election.

Voting will remain open until Tuesday, October 25, 2011.

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

Dear H-Albion members,

I'm writing to you to let you know about an exciting new addition to this
year's North American Conference on British Studies.  As some of you
already know, Tim Hitchcock and I are working together on a digital space
that we are calling The History Working Papers Project (HWPP,
<https://libtool.ulib.iupui.edu/wordpress/>).  The HWPP is an online
space for scholars to share works-in-progress with their peers.  After uploading a conference paper, essay, or article manuscript to the HWPP website, authors can invite others to read their work and make comments in the
margins.  As more people respond, writers get more feedback.  But, unlike
traditional comments done on paper, HWPP allows commenters and authors to
interact with each other.  They can read each other's marginalia and
engage in dialogue about it.  In fact, entire threaded discussions can
take place in the margins.

NACBS has allowed us to offer HWPP to conference panels and participants
this year.  I am writing to encourage you to take advantage of the system.
Not only will it be able to help you generate some pre-conference buzz
for your panels, but it is a tool to help you create more informative and
useful panels.  Here is a short summary of what you can expect from HWPP:

HWPP will allow you and the people on your NACBS panel to post your
conference papers online (either individually or as a whole panel) several
weeks before the conference begins.  By posting papers ahead of time, HWPP
gives conference chairs, panelists, and participants the ability to
experiment with alternative approaches to your panels.  While panels and
individuals can simply use HWPP to pre-circulate papers and hold a
traditional conference panel, you have the opportunity to be creative and
do much more.  By integrating an online conversation both before and after
the conference, you will find that your panels are much more dynamic.

Here are some ideas on how you can take advantage of HWPP:

1. The most effective way to use HWPP is as a whole panel.  Chairs should
round up participants' papers several weeks before the conference begins
and send them to Jason M. Kelly at <jaskelly@iupui.edu>.  Within days,
they will be posted to HWPP under the heading for your panel.

2. Chairs should encourage the commentator and one or two other peers to
read the papers and put their comments in the margins.  They might also
consider sending out an announcement about the pre-circulated drafts to
H-Albion or NACBS's Facebook page in order get others to read and comment
as well.

3. Having a panel pre-meeting is a great way to meet each other and
discuss some of your papers' ideas.  Chairs, commentators, and panelists
can meet using Skype, Google+, Adobe Connect or any number of other video
conferencing tools.

4. Chairs might consider an alternative format for their NACBS panel.
There are a number of format options, from PechaKucha to five-minute
papers to short poster sessions.  We encourage you to keep talks to a
shorter length in order to allow more time for group discussion.  Doing
this is very effective, and you may be surprised at the improved dynamic
and the rich outcomes that emerge.  At a recent NACBS panel, for example,
the chairs adopted a modified PechaKucha model.  Even though there were
ten speakers, there was still enough time for an exciting one-hour
discussion.

5. Remember, that when the conference is over, HWPP will still be
available.  We encourage you to continue using it as you revise your
papers for submission to journals.

The History Working Papers Project is quite an exciting system, and Tim
Hitchcock and I are very happy that NACBS is letting us run a trial this
year.  Please visit the site and have a look around
(<https://libtool.ulib.iupui.edu/wordpress/>).
Watch the videos, read the papers, and make comments.  Tim and I have
posted sample papers online so that you can see what papers and comments
look like.  Be sure to send us any questions you have about the site.

I do hope that you consider using the system for your panel this year.  I
think it will be a great addition to the NACBS and the way scholars in the
humanities approach conference panels and scholarship more generally.

Best wishes,
Jason

--
Jason M. Kelly, Ph.D.
Associate Professor of British History, IUPUI

School of Liberal Arts
Indiana University
Department of History, IUPUI
Cavanaugh Hall 503N
425 University Boulevard
Indianapolis, IN 46202-5140

telephone: 317.274.1689
fax: 317.278.7800
email: jaskelly@iupui.edu

Twitter: @jason_m_kelly
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jason-kelly/18/531/6a9
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jasonmkelly/
Google+: https://plus.google.com/109922202142849269369/about?hl=en
Tumblr: http://jasonmkelly.tumblr.com/

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

2011 Anglo-American Conference: Health in History

29th June – 1st July 2011
Brunei Gallery, School of Oriental and African Studies, Thornhaugh Street, London WC1H 0XG
www.history.ac.uk/aac2011
Supported by the Wellcome Trust and the Royal Society of Medicine

This year, the Institute of Historical Research will be holding its flagship event, the Anglo-American Conference, on the subject of Health in History. The history of medicine and of human society in sickness and health is an ever widening window through which the present can view the past. The study of the ways in which societies over time and at war and in peace have defined and treated their ‘sick’, the changing content and status of medical expertise and ethics, and those episodic moments when the globe has been transformed by epidemic, panic and panacea is now an integral part of mainstream history.

The medical humanities are now critically placed in most cultures at the meeting point of research and social policy. The 80th Anglo-American Conference of Historians will feature papers and panels across all periods and areas of the history of medicine. Plenary lecturers include David Arnold, Joanna Bourke, Samuel Cohn, Mary Fissell, Monica Green, Helen King and Paul Starr. The conference will also feature a Publishers’ Fair featuring major international publishers such as Oxford University Press, I B Tauris and Wiley-Blackwell among many others. A Policy Forum organised by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine will also be taking place during the conference, with key academic and professional health experts discussing the role played by historians in the policy environment.

The 3-day conference will be taking place just around the corner from Senate House at the Brunei Gallery, part of the School of Oriental and African Studies on Thornhaugh Street, London. A wine and canapé reception will also be held on Friday evening at the Wellcome Collection (Euston Road, London) and will feature a private viewing of their latest exhibition, ‘Dirt’.

For programme and registration details, please visit http://www.history.ac.uk/aac2011 . For any queries, please contact the IHR Events Office at healthinhistory@sas.ac.uk or on 0207 862 8756.

0 Comments Read full post »

0 Comments Read full post »

April
7
2011

Reviews in History - New Reviews for March 2011

Posted by dannymillum under Announcement | Tags: Reviews in History | 0 Comments

Area

Hello all

See below for relevant new reviews from Reviews in History (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews) published in March.

First up this month is a review of Laura Beers' Your Britain: Media and the Making of the Labour Party. Adrian Bingham praises (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1046) a scrupulously researched and carefully argued book which offers an important new perspective.

Next William Jackson recommends (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1045) two new Oxford History of the British Empire publications (Migration and Empire by Marjory Harper and Stephen Constantine and Settlers and Expatriates: Britons over the Seas edited by Robert Bickers) to anyone interested in the history – and historiography – of empire overseas.

Then Jo McBride reviews (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1049) a new study of the shipbuilding industry, Alistair Reid’s The Tide of Democracy: Shipyard Workers and Social Relations in Britain 1870-1950.

Meraud Ferguson Hand enjoys (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1048) a varied, rewarding and wide-ranging collection, Tudor Books and Readers: Materiality and the Construction of Meaning edited by John N. King.

Our most controversial review this month is of The Year of Disappearances. Political Killings in Cork 1921-1922 by Gerard Murphy. Eugenio Biagini discusses (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1053, with response here - http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1053/response) this controversial new work of Irish history with the author.

Next up is a deeply interesting book on historians and the emergence of the modern Commonwealth. Andrew Ladley tackles (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1059) W. David McIntyre's The Britannic Vision – Historians and the Making of the British Commonwealth of Nations, 1907-48.

Following this, Aurora Barsalou enjoys a compelling reinterpretation of the stage as a site of female empowerment, as she reviews (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1058) Rival Queens: Actresses, Performance, and the Eighteenth-Century British Theater by Felicity Nussbaum.

Finally we have the latest book in Brill's Medieval and Renaissance Authors and Texts series. Christine Carpenter reviews (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1057, with response - http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1057/response) Wisdom and Chivalry: Chaucer's Knight's Tale and Medieval Political Theory by S. H. Rigby, which she finds a splendid book of interest to students of medieval literature and to medieval historians.

Hope these are of some interest - do get in touch (danny.millum@sas.ac.uk) with any suggestions for future reviews...

Best wishes

Danny

Danny Millum
Deputy Editor, Reviews in History / Editorial Assistant (Web)
Institute of Historical Research
University of London
Senate House
Malet Street
LONDON WC1E 7HU
t: +44 (0)20 7862 8812
f: +44 (0)20 7862 8754
e: danny.millum@sas.ac.uk

Web: www.history.ac.uk

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

The 2011 Annual Meeting of the NACBS will convene in Denver, Colorado, from November 18 to 20.  Paper and panel proposals are due on March 15.  You can find the link to the submissions system on the Conference Website at www.nacbs.org/conference.html http://www.nacbs.org/conference.html. Alternatively, you can go directly to http://nacbsproposal.fiu.edu

Thanks very much to those who have already submitted proposals for the 2011 NACBS Conference.  We look forward to considering all of the submissions.

Do not hesitate to contact me at nacbsprogram@gmail.com if questions arise in the process of submission.   Shortly after March 15, I will send an email confirming receipt of submissions to those who are listed as panel contacts and to those who have submitted individual papers.

With best wishes,
Lara Kriegel, Program Chair, on behalf of the NACBS Program Committee

0 Comments Read full post »

March
3
2011

Reviews in History - New Reviews for February 2011

Posted by dannymillum under Announcement | Tags: Reviews in History | 0 Comments

Area

The following reviews of possible interest to followers of The British and Irish Studies Intelligencer were published in December in the Institute of Historical Research's e-journal Reviews in History.

Firstly Pat Starkey welcomes an important addition to the growing literature on child migration, with her review (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1033) of Child, Nation, Race and Empire. Child Rescue Discourse, England, Canada and Australia, 1850-1915 by Shurlee Swain and Margot Hillel.

Next we have a review article by an old friend of the IHR, David Renton, who casts his eye (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1035) over two recent works on fascism and anti-fascism between the wars – Oswald Mosley and the New Party by Matthew Worley and Varieties of Anti-Fascism: Britain in the Inter-War Period edited by Nigel Copsey and Andrzej Olechnowicz.

Chris Berg surveys (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1039) the historiography of combat resilience in the First World War.

We then move to the 12th century, and Edmund King’s new biography King Stephen, which our reviewer David Crouch finds (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1038) judges Stephen the king harshly, even as it strives to be fair to Stephen the man.

Next, Mark Crowley believes (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1037) readers will understand significantly more about the struggle for female suffrage and its consequent impact after reading Pat Thane and Esther Breitenbach’s edited collection Women and Citizenship in Britain and Ireland in the Twentieth Century: What Difference did the Vote Make?

Matthew McKean reviews (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1036) ProQuest’s British Periodicals Collections I and II, which he welcomes as resources that both enhance history teaching and research, and allow researchers opportunities to do what would have been difficult, if not impossible, with traditional print resources.

Brian Harrison tackles (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1040) No Turning Back: The Peacetime Revolutions of Post-War Britain by Paul Addison – and suggests it may lack the sparkle of his previous books like The Road to 1945.

Finally Ariel Hessayon enjoys a superb inter-disciplinary collaboration, as he describes (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/1043) The Complete Works of Gerrard Winstanley, edited by Thomas N. Corns, Ann Hughes, David Loewenstein.

As always, all comments or suggestions should be sent to danny.millum@sas.ac.uk.

Danny Millum
Deputy Editor, Reviews in History / Editorial Assistant (Web) Institute of Historical Research University of London Senate House Malet Street LONDON WC1E 7HU
t: +44 (0)20 7862 8812
f: +44 (0)20 7862 8754
e: danny.millum@sas.ac.uk

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

Dear NACBS colleagues,

I am writing to you about the redevelopment of the Institute of Historical Research, which is scheduled to begin later this year.

As was announced before Christmas, the IHR will be moving this summer into a temporary location for two years, as the University continues with the refurbishment of Senate House. We will be rehoused in the 3rd floor of the South Block and in the Mezzanine. IHR staff have now been allocated new offices and we hope to finalise soon the relocation of the Common Room facilities as well.

We have now agreed with the Senate House Library which sections of the IHR Library will remain on open access during the temporary relocation, and full details of the new arrangements are now available on the IHR website: on the news page and on the Library pages. I have also attached this information to this email for your convenience.

I can also announce that the University has confirmed that it will be able to rehouse all of the IHR Events programme, that is our seminars, colloquia, conferences and Friends’ Events programme. It has also been agreed that external scholarly organisations which use IHR rooms and facilities will be charged the same rates during 2011-13 as they would in our usual premises. During 2011-13 our seminars and other events will run in the Ground Floor rooms of the South Block of Senate House, and on the Second Floor of Stewart House (also part of the Senate House complex).

The University will give final approval to these moves in the Spring, and we will continue to keep our members, users and visitors as fully informed as possible. Later in the year I will also be able to announce in more detail the planned modernisation of our current premises into which we shall move back in 2013. In the meantime, if you have any queries or concerns please do not hesitate to contact me.

I look forward to seeing you at the NACBS in Denver next November, when we will be inviting you to join our IHR 90th birthday celebrations. Whilst we face a huge logistical challenge in making this temporary move, we are all delighted and excited by the prospect of creating an IHR fit for the 21st century. I hope very much that you will join us in bringing that project to life.

With best wishes,

Miles Taylor

Professor Miles Taylor
Director
Institute of Historical Research
University of London
Senate House
Malet Street
LONDON  WC1E 7HU
t: +44 (0)20 7862 8759
f: +44 (0)20 7862 8811
e: Miles.Taylor@sas.ac.uk

Web: www.history.ac.uk

______
Library arrangements during temporary relocation of the IHR

The IHR has now agreed with the University which sections of the Library collection should take priority for open access during the next phase of the refurbishment of Senate House.  As indicated in the Director’s statement in December, during the two year period of relocation to the 3rd floor of the South Block only one-third of the IHR Library will remain on open access.  The bulk of the remainder of the collection will be housed in the Senate House Library Tower and available through a dedicated fetch service.

In order to ensure the most effective use is made of the space available, a survey of collection usage has been running throughout this academic year.  The usage level of each collection has been the main criteria for retention on open access, amongst other considerations such as usage patterns, growth rate, the needs of Institute staff and students, ease of requesting and fetching, type of shelving available, the size of the individual books within the collections, online availability (mainly in the case of periodicals), and availability elsewhere in other local libraries. The outcomes have been discussed and approved by both the IHR Library Committee and the IHR Advisory Council.

The following collections are to remain on open access, with the exclusion of folio material and periodicals:

British History to c.1603 B.1-B.6 Excluding bibliography
British History from c.1603 B.7-B.8 Excluding Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates
Quick reference collection Q. Ref
British Local History BC.51**, BC.95**,

BC.25

English Counties and Poll Books only
Irish History BI.010-883 Excluding Dublin Gazette
London History BL.002-872
Scottish History BS.01-71 Main sequence only, excluding  local history
General Historiography E.10-149
French History EF
French Provincial History EFP
Italian History EI Excluding Italian Parliamentary Papers
Ecclesiastical History ER.01-89 Excluding Patrologia Latina
History of the Crusades EU
Current issues of all periodicals
Microfilm/fiche collections

Ordering and consultation arrangements for materials in the closed stacks

It has been agreed that the IHR library staff will administer a dedicated hourly fetch service from the 3rd floor temporary location.  Library staff will aim to ensure the service is as responsive to demand as possible, and requests for material can be made in person, or via telephone, email, or the website, where there will be a request form.  Please note that due to staffing restrictions it will not always be possible for material to be fetched outside the core hours of 9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday.  The Library would strongly encourage those wishing to request closed access material to contact the Library in advance of their visit wherever possible, so we can ensure material is waiting on arrival.  In addition, material can be kept out for readers who wish to consult closed access items over a longer period.  As is the case currently, library staff will work in an accessible enquiry office throughout library opening hours, ensuring continuity of service to readers.

Reader facilities
The current IHR photocopiers and microform reader/printer will be available in the temporary location, in addition to reader desks, catalogues terminals and PCs.

Opening hours
The IHR Library will maintain its current opening hours in the temporary location.  However, please be aware that there will definitely be a period of closure in August to enable the move to take place.  The moving schedule is yet to be agreed but closure dates will be publicised as soon as they are known.

If you have any queries about these proposed changes, please contact the IHR Librarian Jennifer Higham on jennifer.higham@london.ac.uk

0 Comments Read full post »

February
10
2011

Reviews in History - New Reviews for January

Posted by dannymillum under Announcement | Tags: Reviews in History | 0 Comments

Area

The following reviews of possible interest to followers of H-Albion were published in January on Reviews in History.

Firstly Malcolm Gaskill enjoys a fitting tribute to an outstanding contributor to the social and cultural history of early modern England, as he reviews The Extraordinary and the Everyday in Early Modern England: Essays in Celebration of the Work of Bernard Capp, edited by Garthine Walker and Angela McShane.

Next Alison Twells recommends a successful and stimulating set of essays focusing on women's agency in their encounter with Christian discourses – Women, Gender and Religious Cultures in Britain, 1800–1940, edited by Jacqueline deVries and Sue Morgan.

Moving to the 17th century, Stephen Roberts reviews a well-produced snapshot of current scholarship in this area, Royalists and Royalism during the Interregnum, edited by Jason McElligott and David L. Smith.

Arnold Horner then recommends John Rocque’s Dublin: A Guide to the Georgian City (the work of historian Colm Lennon and art historian John Montague), which he believes will be of interest not just to students of Dublin, but to a wider audience interested in city development and city planning.

Finally we have Liberal Intellectuals and Public Culture in Modern Britain, 1815-1914: Making Words Flesh by Bill Lubenow, which our reviewer Julia Stapleton finds a rich and tightly argued book showing conclusively how the values that emerged from the loosening of the shackles of confessionalism were instrumental in the reordering of both public and private space.

As always, all comments or suggestions should be sent to danny.millum@sas.ac.uk.

Best wishes

Danny

Danny Millum
Deputy Editor, Reviews in History

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

Thanks to all those who have shown interest in the NACBS 2011 Annual Meeting, to be held in Denver, Colorado, from November 18 to 20.  The Call
for Papers is available at http://www.nacbs.org/conference.htm.

The link to the electronic submissions site will soon be posted to the NACBS Website.  However, those who wish to access further instructions can consult the site beginning now.  For detailed submissions instructions and for access to the submissions system, please go to http://nacbsproposal.fiu.edu.

We look forward to considering your submissions for single papers, three-person panels, and four-person roundtables or panels.  If you have questions or if you wish to make a submission that deviates from these formats, please contact the Program Chair, Lara Kriegel, at nacbsprogram@gmail.com.

The deadline for submissions is Tuesday, March 15, 2011.

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

While much time and attention has been devoted recently to scrutinizing the government’s proposals on fees and teaching funding, important changes have already been implemented to the way in which our research funding is spent – and although some science blogs and spokespeople have raised the alarm, humanities scholars have almost totally overlooked this issue.

As we know, arts and humanities research funding has been ring-fenced – or at least ‘flat-cashed’ – along with science research funding, and this achievement has been hailed by the leaderships of the AHRC and the British Academy as a vindication of their canny strategy of piggybacking onto public support for science research.  However, there are costs as well as benefits of this strategy.  In a recent statement by the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) on ‘The Allocation of Science and Research Funding, 2011/12-2014/15’ (December 2010), BIS now tells us how this ring-fenced research funding is to be spent.  That’s right, it tells us how it is to be spent.

One of the highlights of the BIS statement is its ‘clarification’ – i.e. its re-writing, or some would say its neutering – of the ‘Haldane Principle’, the convention accepted by government since 1918 that (to quote the BIS statement’s version) ‘decisions on individual research proposals are best taken by researchers themselves through peer review’.  Now, as the historian of science David Edgerton has argued, it was never as simple as that, and the Haldane Principle has been shown to be highly flexible for some time.  The last government, for example, found it easy to bribe the AHRC and the British Academy with extra funds if these bodies responded to the government agenda by themselves reserving some of their research funds for government priorities.  In this way we have had a growing number of ‘directed programmes’ in which the funders channelled research money to intellectual priorities that obviously originated with government, such as ‘social cohesion’ and ‘social inclusion’;  we have also had the ‘impact agenda’ by which funders agreed to require from funding recipients demonstrations of economic (and, if we were lucky, social and cultural) impact again on criteria originating from government.

But it did still matter that the Haldane Principle was there to be respected.  Successive leaderships of the AHRC have told us repeatedly that the directed programmes were just icing on the cake, releasing more funding for ‘responsive’ programmes, where the choice of projects to be funded was determined purely by peer review.

As of now, this is no longer the case.  In its latest document BIS restates its support for the Haldane Principle but also offers a ‘further clarification’, based on consultation with ‘senior figures’.  This clarification establishes the new principle – perhaps it should be the Cable Principle? – that government can and should set ‘key national strategic priorities’ which should guide the research funders ‘without crowding out other areas of their missions’.  Peer review remains supreme in deciding which specific proposals best address these priorities, but the priorities now can and will come from government.

What does this mean in practice?  The BIS document specifies this in certain cases with devastating clarity.  The AHRC for example ‘will direct’ – is this a prediction or an order? – ‘a significant part of its funding into six strategic areas…communities and big society;  civic values and active citizenship, including ethics in public life;  creative and digital economy;  cultural heritage;  language-based disciplines;  and interdisciplinary collaborations with a range of STEM subjects’.  Those are, says BIS, ‘the highest priorities in arts and humanities’.  Thanks for letting us know.  In certain respects instructions to the British Academy have been still more specific.  The Academy’s support for individuals is supposed to complement the research councils’ support for team projects, but the Academy has been told summarily to abandon its small research grants (which have probably been the best value-for-money grants government has ever funded for humanities research, but – obviously their fatal flaw –  purely ‘responsive’ to individuals’ own choice of research topics).  Instead, the Academy has been told to focus on postdoctoral awards, both early and mid-career, ‘that contribute to national priorities’.  In another piece of fancy prosaic footwork, BIS tells us that ‘The Academy expects a majority of Postdoctoral Fellowship awards to be linked to challenges such as these.’  I don’t think the Academy’s ‘expectation’ was a spontaneous one.  And what happened to the stipulation that national priorities should not crowd out other missions?

Now of course in a democracy we want government to have powers to direct research according to priorities chosen by the electorate.  As the BIS document says, lots of important research decisions necessarily involve government input – they decide how much money is allocated overall, and some allocations are so large (e.g. for the most expensive scientific research establishments) that surely government must have some say in them.  As the document further says, government departments can and do commission their own research.  But in a democracy we also want our universities to be insulated from undue government pressure – we want universities to be centres of free enquiry, diverse, critical and independent.  The Haldane Principle did establish some crucial arm’s-length independence for academic research which has been in part responsible for the extraordinary degree of freedom fostered in British academic culture in the postwar period – which has made it the global competitor that it still is, just about, today, and also has been the source of much novelty and creativity that no government department can plan for (as one would expect Conservative governments to recognize).  We ought not to give it up without a fight.

One reason why there has been no fight is also made clear in the BIS document.  The only spokespeople we have had for the humanities – the British Academy and the AHRC – are now so completely enmeshed in the government apparatus that they no longer have any independent voice.  So far as I can tell, no-one in either of these bodies has consulted or spoken out on the issue of the Haldane Principle;  presumably some must have been among the ‘senior figures’ consulted, but all of this consultation now takes place behind closed doors, and is deeply compromised by the carrots and sticks at the government’s disposal.  Similarly, although the BIS document says that ‘in making strategic decisions on the funding of research’ it is important that government ‘take account of advice from a wide variety of expert sources, including academia and industry, both nationally and internationally’ – if this happened in making the strategic decisions now laid out for us for the next 5 years, I missed it, and I certainly missed any public discussion emanating from the British Academy on what these national priorities should be.  The BIS document calls the British Academy ‘an important source of authoritative, impartial advice’.  Does anyone believe this description any longer?  Clearly we need a truly independent voice for the humanities that is not beholden to government in any way.

Postscript:  the BIS document also notes, with some evident regret, that HEFCE (and thus the QR funding it distributes via the RAE/REF) is not subject to its ‘national priorities’ because the 1992 Further and Higher Education Act prohibits government from attaching ‘terms and conditions on grants to HEFCE’ with reference to particular programmes of research.  Should we expect in pending legislation reorganizing HEFCE a ‘clarification’ of that prohibition too?

Peter Mandler
Dr. Mandler is Professor of Modern Cultural History at Gonville and Caius College at Cambridge University.  He is the Vice President of the Royal Historical Society.

0 Comments Read full post »

January
13
2011

Reviews in History - New Reviews for December

Posted by dannymillum under Announcement | Tags: Reviews in History | 0 Comments

Area

The following reviews of possible interest to readers were published in December in the Institute of Historical Research's e-journal Reviews in History (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews).

Firstly, Gary Magee and Andrew Thompson’s ‘Empire and Globalisation: Networks of People, Goods and Capital in the British World’, c.1850–1914, is reviewed by Stuart Ward.

Elizabeth Tilley’s discusses ‘The Punch Brotherhood: Table Talk and Print Culture in Mid-Victorian London’ by Patrick Leary.

Two major new digital resources, ‘The Illustrated London News Historical Archive, 1842–2003’  and ‘London Lives 1690–1800’, are also reviewed, by Peter Sinnema and Ben Heller respectively.

From the field of medieval history we have a review by Mark Hagger of an accessible and engaging book on the Anglo-Saxon aristocracy, Ann Williams’ ‘The World Before Domesday: The English Aristocracy 900–1066’.

‘Arthur Tudor, Prince of Wales: Life, Death and Commemoration’, an edited collection produced by Steven Gunn and Linda Monckton, is recommended as a richly detailed monograph by Simon Lambe.

Turning to the Victorian era, we have Richard Gaunt’s ‘Sir Robert Peel: the Life and Legacy’. Our reviewer Robert Saunders believes that this book will serve as a useful introduction to one of Britain’s most enigmatic political figures.

Elsewhere Daniel Spence recommends a work which uses individual testimonies to bring out the broader issues surrounding Africans in the Second World War, ‘Fighting for Britain: African Soldiers in the Second World War’ by David Killingray.

And finally, the IHR’s very own Matt Phillpott praises an important addition to the debate concerning early modernity and modernity, in his review of Phil Withington’s ‘Society in Early Modern England: The Vernacular Origins of Some Powerful Ideas’.

As always, all comments or suggestions should be sent to danny.millum@sas.ac.uk.

0 Comments Read full post »

January
6
2011

NACBS Reception at AHA, 8 January 2011

Posted by jaskelly under Announcement, Conferences, NACBS | 0 Comments

Area

I am writing to remind members of the North American Conference on British Studies that the organization will host a reception at this weekend's Annual Meeting of the AHA in Boston.

The reception will occur from 5:30-7:00 p.m. on Saturday, January 8th in the Provincetown Room at the Marriott Boston Copley Place.

If you are attending the AHA, please do make an effort to come by the NACBS reception. I look forward to seeing many of you there.

Best wishes,
Paul Deslandes
Associate Executive Secretary, NACBS

--
Paul Deslandes
Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies
Department of History
University of Vermont
Wheeler House
133 South Prospect St.
Burlington, VT 05405

e-mail: paul.deslandes@uvm.edu
Phone: (802)656-3535
Fax: (802)656-8794

0 Comments Read full post »

Area

CALL FOR PAPERS
Midwest Conference on British Studies 57th Annual Meeting
November 4-6, 2011, Terre Haute, IN

The Midwest Conference on British Studies is proud to announce that its fifty-seventh annual meeting will be hosted by Indiana State University in Terre Haute, IN.

The MWCBS seeks papers from scholars in all fields of British Studies, broadly defined to include those who study England, Scotland, Wales, Ireland, and Britain's empire. We welcome scholars from the broad spectrum of disciplines, including but not limited to history, literature, political science, gender studies and art history. Proposals for complete sessions are preferred, although proposals for individual papers will be considered. Especially welcome are roundtables and panels that:

  • offer cross-disciplinary perspectives on topics in British Studies
  • discuss collaborative or innovative learning techniques in the British Studies classroom
  • situate the arts, letters, and sciences in a British cultural context
  • examine representations of British and imperial/Commonwealth national identities
  • consider Anglo-American relations, past and present
  • examine new trends in British Studies
  • assess a major work or body of work by a scholar

The MWCBS welcomes papers presented by advanced graduate students and will award the Walter L. Arnstein Prize at its plenary luncheon for the best graduate student paper(s) given at the conference.

Proposals should include a 200-word abstract for each paper and a brief, 1-page c.v. for each participant, including chairs and commentators. For full panels, please include a brief 200-word preview of the panel as a whole. Please place the panel proposal, and its accompanying paper proposals and vitas in one file. Please make certain that all contact information, particularly email addresses are correct and current. All proposals should be submitted online by April 15, 2011, to the Program Committee Chair, Lia Paradis at lia.paradis@sru.edu.

Visit the MWCBS website at http://mwcbs.edublogs.org/.

MWCBS Program Committee:  Lia Paradis, Chair, Slippery Rock University of Pennsylvania; Gene Beiriger, DePaul University; Lori Campbell, University of Pittsburgh; Essaka Joshua, University of Notre Dame; Chris Otter, Ohio State University; Anne Rodrick, Wofford College.

0 Comments Read full post »

November
19
2010

CFP: NACBS 2011

Posted by jaskelly under Announcement, Conferences | Tags: cfp, Conferences, NACBS, nacbs 2011, North American Conference on British Studies, wcbs | 0 Comments

Area

NACBS/WCBS 2011CALL FOR PAPERS
NORTH AMERICAN CONFERENCE ON BRITISH STUDIES

ANNUAL MEETING
DENVER, COLORADO
NOVEMBER 18-20, 2011

The NACBS and its Western affiliate, the WCBS, seek participation by scholars in all areas of British Studies for the 2011 meeting. We solicit proposals for panels on Britain, the British Empire and the British world. Our interests range from the medieval to the modern. We welcome participation by scholars across the humanities and social sciences.

We invite panel proposals addressing selected themes, methodology, and pedagogy, as well as roundtable discussions of topical and thematic interest, including conversations among authors of recent books and reflections on landmark scholarship. North American scholars, international scholars and Ph.D. students are all encouraged to submit proposals for consideration.

Strong preference will be given to complete panel or roundtable proposals that consider a common theme. Panels typically include three papers and a comment; roundtables customarily have four presentations. Individual paper proposals will also be considered in rare cases. We urge those with single paper submissions to search for additional panelists on lists such as H-Albion or at venues such as the NACBS Facebook page. Applicants may also write to the Program Chair for suggestions (nacbsprogram@gmail.com).

All scholars working in the field of British Studies are encouraged to apply for the 2011 conference, though we especially welcome papers from those who did not appear on the 2010 program. Panels that include both emerging and established scholars are especially encouraged, as are submissions with broad chronological focus and interdisciplinary breadth. We welcome the participation of junior scholars and Ph.D. candidates beyond the qualifying stage. To enable intellectual interchange, we ask applicants to compose panels that feature participation from a range of institutions. No participant will be permitted to take part in more than one session except in exceptional circumstances cleared by the Program Committee, and no more than one proposal will be considered from each applicant.

All submissions must be received by March 15, 2011.
For details, directions and online submission procedures, see www.nacbs.org/conference.html.

Please send questions about panel requirements
and suggestions about program development to
Lara Kriegel, NACBS Program Chair
History and English Departments, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405
nacbsprogram@gmail.com

0 Comments Read full post »

November
9
2010

Reviews in History - New Reviews for October

Posted by dannymillum under Announcement | Tags: Reviews in History | 0 Comments

Area

The following reviews of possible interest to followers of the Intelligencer were published in October in the Institute of Historical Research’s e-journal Reviews in History (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews).

Our featured review (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/971) this month is Leonard Schwarz’s take on Julie Flavell’s 'When London Was Capital of America', set at a time when people on both sides of the Atlantic viewed the city as their capital.

A very different London is the setting for Frank Mort’s 'Capital Affairs: London and the Making of the Permissive Society', in which the city serves as an urban prism bringing into focus changes in personal and sexual lives taking place in this period. Read Nigel Rapport’s review here (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/968).

Then we have two very different books on injury and woundedness. The first, 'Containing Trauma: Nursing Work in the First World War' by Christine Hallett, deals with this from the perspective of nurses in the Great War (the review by Anne Crowther can be found here (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/972)).Meanwhile the second, Sarah Covington’s 'Wounds, Flesh, and Metaphor in Seventeenth-Century England', set three hundred years earlier, is concerned instead with wounds as metaphors. It’s reviewed for us (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/974) by Victoria Sparey.

We also have a discussion (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/976) between Greg Smith and Drew Gray of the latter’s 'Crime, Prosecution and Social Relations: The Summary Courts of the City of London in the Late Eighteenth Century', which our reviewer found a fresh and welcome contribution to our understanding of the role of law in 18th-century London.

Then Joseph Monteyne takes on (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/978) 'Printed Images in Early Modern Britain: Essays in Interpretation', an impressive new edited volume which ranges across a number of disciplinary boundaries.

Next Sally Sokoloff finds a new book on POW families casts light on a hitherto neglected field, as she reviews (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/981) 'War and Welfare: British Prisoner of War Families, 1939-45' by Barbara Hately-Broad.

Lastly this month on the book front Vic Gammon is slightly disappointed (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/980) by a new book on the historical and cultural study of popular song, Robin Ganev’s 'Songs of Protest, Songs of Love: Popular Ballads in Eighteenth-Century Britain'.

The first of two digital resources covered this month is the online appearance of that venerable institution 'Mass Observation, and Mass Observation Online' is both enjoyed and recommended (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/969) by our reviewer Nick Hubble. Then we have the 'London Transport Museum Film Collection Online', which our reviewer Barbara Schmucki (http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/982) recommends as a collection of films which is both an invaluable source and immensely entertaining.

A list of all our British and Irish history reviews can be found here: http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/subject/geographical-area/britain-and-ireland

As always, all comments or suggestions should be sent to danny.millum@sas.ac.uk.

0 Comments Read full post »