Is There a Place for Anthropology in Social Science History

Bibliographic Data

ID9286124
AuthorsAlice Bee Kasakoff (corresponding author)
Year1999
Volume23
Issue4
Pages535-559
Publication date1999-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Science History (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0145-5532 • E-ISSN: 1527-8034
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/s0145553200021866
OpenAlexW219906543
LanguageEN
Citations received2
References cited50

Imagine a fourfold table in which one dimension is “present versus past” and the other “exotic versus home.” Traditionally, social and cultural anthropology’s domain has been the exotic’s present and history’s domain the home’s past. A third box, the home’s present, has been occupied by sociology, while the fourth, the exotic’s past, has usually been the province of anthropologists too because other disciplines—with the exception, perhaps, of ethnohistorians—are usually even less interested in exotic peoples’ past than in their present. These domains are now in flux. I argue, in what follows, that only when the oversimplified ideas about time and space that have created them are seriously questioned will anthropology find a secure “place” in social science history

Cultural anthropology · Dimension (graph theory · Domain (mathematical analysis · History of anthropology · Social anthropology · Sociology · Space (punctuation) · Anthropological Studies and Insights · Anthropology · Philosophy · Southeast Asian Sociopolitical Studies · Vietnamese History and Culture Studies

Tools

Open DOI