Advertisement

Introduction

  • Antje FlüchterEmail author
  • Jivanta Schöttli
Chapter
  • 569 Downloads
Part of the Transcultural Research – Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context book series (TRANSCULT)

Abstract

The overarching theme for the 2010 Annual Conference of the Cluster, Asia and Europe in a Global Context was dynamics of transculturality and the processes of transculturalisation through concepts and institutions in the field of politics and religion. In the last decade, transculturality has become an oft––perhaps too-often––used term, and has in the process arguably lost some of its heuristic value. This edited volume begins with a more precise concept of transculturality, but it also mirrors the discussions about transculturality and asymmetric flows that have taken place in the first 5 years of the Cluster. As a starting point, this introduction will examine the notion of transculturality as a theoretical perspective and heuristic instrument, it will then move on to present the main focus of this volume: the dynamics of transculturality in the realms of politics and religion. The third part of this introduction will consider a number of concepts that are available to a transcultural perspective and discuss those employed by the authors in this book.

Keywords

Comparative Approach Master Narrative Disciplinary Background Cultural Flow Cultural Transfer 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Bibliography

  1. 2005 (Multiple Authors) Symposium II: “Conceptualizing Concepts. Qualitative & Multi-Method Research.” Newsletter of the American Political Science Association Organized Section on Qualitative Methods no. 3 (2):19–35, Fall.Google Scholar
  2. Abrams, Ann U. 1999. The Pilgrims and Pocahontas. Rival Myths of American Origin. Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  3. Alam, Muzaffar, and Sanjay Subrahmanyam. 2007. Indo-Persian Travels in the Age of Discoveries, 1400–1800. 1. publ. ed. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. 1990. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  5. Appadurai, Arjun. 1990. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” Public Culture no. 1:1–24.Google Scholar
  6. Arni, Caroline. 2007. “Zeitlichkeit, Anachronismus und Anachronien. Gegenwart und Transformationen der Geschlechtergeschichte aus geschichtstheoretischer Perspektive.” L’Homme no. 18/2:53–76.Google Scholar
  7. Asad, Talal. 1986. “The Concept of Cultural Translation in British Social Anthropology.” In Writing Culture. The Poetics and Politics of Ethnography, edited by James Clifford, 151–164. Berkeley, CA: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
  8. Asad, Talal. 1993. Genealogies of Religion: Discipline and Reasons of Power in Christianity and Islam, A Johns Hopkins paperback. Baltimore [u.a.]: Johns Hopkins Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  9. Asad, Talal. 2003. Formations of the Secular: Christianity, Islam, Modernity, Cultural memory in the present. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  10. Bethencourt, Francisco. 2007. “European Expansion and the New Order of Knowledge.” In The Renaissance World, edited by John Jeffries Martin and Albert Russell Ascoli, 118–139. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  11. Bhabha, Homi K. 1994 (ND London 2010). The Location of Culture. London, u.a.,: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Botero, Giovanni. 1596. Theatrum, oder Schawspiegel: Darin[n] alle Fürsten der Welt, so Kräffte vnd [und] Reichthumb halben namhaffte seind, vorgestellt werden: Mit erzehlung, wieuiel Einkommens ein jeder habe: Was sie an Kräfften vermögen: Wie si Regieren: Was für benachparte Fürsten sie haben: Vnd wer den andern, mit Macht vnnd Reichthumb, oblige vnd vbertreffe; Vnnd ist dieses Theatrum, in vier Thiel vnderscheiden; Jm ersten Theil, werden erzehlet die Fürsten, so in Europa grosse Herrschaften haben …; Das ander theil, vermeldet die Herrn in Asia …; Jm dritten theil werden begriffen die Vornembste Herrn in Africa …; Das vierte theil, beschreibt die Herrschafft deß Groß Türcken. [S.l.].Google Scholar
  13. Bourdieu, Pierre. 2010. Outline of a Theory of Practice. [Nachdr.] ed. Vol. 16, Cambridge studies in social and cultural anthropology 16. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  14. Brubaker, R. 1990. “Immigration, Citizenship and the Nation-State in France and Germany: A Comparative Historical Analysis.” International Sociology no. 5:379–407.Google Scholar
  15. Budick, Sanford, and Wolfgang Iser, eds. 1996. The Translatability of Cultures. Figurations of the Space between, Irvine Studies in the Humanities. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  16. Burke, Peter. 2005. “The Renaissance Translator as Go-Between.” In Renaissance Go-Betweens. Cultural Exchange in Early Modern Europe, edited by Andreas Höfele and Werner von Koppenfels, 17–31. Berlin; New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  17. Burke, Peter. 2007. “The Circulation of Knowledge.” In The Renaissance World, edited by John Jeffries Martin and Albert Russell Ascoli, 191–207. New York, NY: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
  18. Capoccia, G., and R.D. Kelemen. 2007. “The Study of Critical Junctures. Theory, Narratives and Counterfactuals in Historical Institutionalism.” World Politics no. 59:341–369.Google Scholar
  19. Certeau, Michel de. 2003. The Practice of Everyday Life. Berkeley, Calif. [u.a.]: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
  20. Chartier, Roger. 1984. “Culture as appropriation. Popular Culture Uses in Early Modern France.” In Understanding popular culture. Europe from the Middle Ages to the 19th century, edited by Steven L. Kaplan, 229–253. Berlin [u.a.]: Mouton.Google Scholar
  21. Chatterjee, Partha. 2006. “A Brief History of Subaltern Studies.” In Transnationale Geschichte. Themen, Tendenzen und Theorien, edited by Gunilla Budde, Sebastian Conrad and Oliver Janz, 94–104. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  22. Clarence-Smith, William G. 2004. “Middle Eastern Migrants in the Philippines. Entrepreneurs and Cultural Brokers.” Asian Journal of Social Science no. 32/2:425–457.Google Scholar
  23. Collier, David, and J.E. Mahon. 1993. “‘Conzeptual Stretching’ revisited: Adapting Categories in Comparative Analysis.” The American Political Science Review no. 87 (4):845–855.Google Scholar
  24. Collier, David, and S. Levitsky. 1997. “Democracy with Adjectives: Conceptual Innovation in Comparative Research.” World Politics no. 49:430–451.Google Scholar
  25. Collier, David, and S. Levitsky. 2011. “Understanding Process Tracing.” Political Science and Politics no. 44 (4):823–830.Google Scholar
  26. Courtney, Cecil P. 2006. “The Art of Compilation and the Communication of Knowledge. The Colonial World in Enlightenment Encyclopaedic Histories: The Example of Raynal’s Histoire Philosophiques des deux Indes.” In Das Europa der Aufklärung und die koloniale Welt, edited by Hans-Jürgen Lüsebrink, 39–50. Göttingen: Wallstein.Google Scholar
  27. Darnton, Robert. 2001. “First Steps Toward a History of Reading.” In Reception Study. From Literary Theory to Cultural Studies, edited by James L. Machor and Philipp Goldstein, 160–179. New York; London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Demel, Walter. 1992. Als Fremde in China. Das Reich der Mitte im Spiegel frühneuzeitlicher europäischer Reiseberichte. München: Oldenbourg.Google Scholar
  29. Derman, Joshua. 2012. Max Weber in Politics and Social Thought. From Charisma to Canonization, Ideas in Context. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Dirks, Nicholas B. 1993. “Colonial Histories and Native Informants: Biography of an Archive.” In Orientalism and the Postcolonial Predicament, edited by Carol A. Breckenridge and Peter van der Veer, 279–313. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  31. Douglass, C. North. 1991. “Institutions.” The Journal of Economic Perspectives no. 5 (1):97–112.Google Scholar
  32. Eibach, Joachim, Claudia Opitz-Belakhal, and Monica Juneja. 2012. “Kultur, Kulturtransfer und Grenzüberschreitungen. Joachim Eibach und Claudia Opitz im Gespräch mit Monica Juneja.” zeitenblicke 11, Nr. 1, [07.11.2012], URL: http://www.zeitenblicke.de/2012/1/Interview/index_html , URN: urn:nbn:de:0009-9-34709.
  33. Espagne, Michel. 1997. “Die Rolle der Mittler im Kulturtransfer.” In Kulturtransfer im Epochenumbruch Frankreich–Deutschland 1770–1815, edited by Hans Jürgen Lüsebrink and Rolf Reichardt, 309–330. Leipzig: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  34. Espagne, Michel. 2003. “Der theoretische Stand der Kulturtransferforschung.” In Kulturtransfer. Kulturelle Praxis im 16. Jahrhundert, edited by Wolfgang Schmale, 63–75. Innsbruck [u.a.]: Studien-Verlag.Google Scholar
  35. Espagne, Michel. 2006. “Jenseits der Komparatistik. Zur Methode der Erforschung von Kulturtransfer.” In Europäische Kulturzeitschriften um 1900 als Medien transnationaler und transdisziplinärer Wahrnehmung, edited by Ulrich Mölk, 13–32. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  36. Ferguson, Niall. 2007. Empire. How Britain Made the Modern World. London [u.a.]: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  37. Feuchter, Jörg. 2011. “Cultural Transfers in Dispute: An Introduction.” In Cultural Transfers in Dispute. Representations in Asia, Europe and the Arab World Since the Middle Ages, edited by Jörg Feuchter, Friedhelm Hoffmann and Bee Yun, 15–37. Frankfurt, u.a.: Campus.Google Scholar
  38. Fitzgerald, Timothy. 2007. “Encompassing Religion, Privatized Religions and the Invention of Modern Politics.” In Religion and the secular: historical and colonial formations, edited by Timothy Fitzgerald, 211–240. London [u.a.]: Equinox.Google Scholar
  39. Flüchter, Antje, and Susan Richter, eds. 2012. Structures on the Move: Technologies of Governance in Transcultural Encounter, Transcultural Research––Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  40. Flüchter, Antje. 2012. “Structure on the Move. Appropriating Technologies of Governance in a Transcultural Encounter.” In Structures on the move: technologies of governance in transcultural encounter. Transcultural research––Heidelberg studies on Asia and Europe in a global context, edited by Antje Flüchter and Susan Richter, 1–27. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  41. Flüchter, Antje. 2014 (forthcomming). Die Vielfalt der Bilder und die eine Wahrheit. Die Staatlichkeit Indiens in der deutschsprachigen Wahrnehmung (1500–1700).Google Scholar
  42. Flüchter, Antje. 2014. “Den Herrscher grüßen? Grußpraktiken bei Audienzen am Mogulhof im europäischen Diskurs der Frühen Neuzeit.” In Die Audienz. Ritualisierter Kulturkontakt in der Frühen Neuzeit edited by Peter Burschel and Christiane Vogel, 125–164. Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar
  43. Francisci, Erasmus. 1670. Ausländischer Kunst- und Sittenspiegel. Frankfurt: Endter.Google Scholar
  44. Franck, Sebastian. 1534. Weltbuch. Spiegel vn bildtnisz des gantzen erdbodens (…) in vier bücher/nemlich in Asiam/Aphricam/Europam/vnd Americam/gestelt vnd abteilt (…). Tübingen: Morhart.Google Scholar
  45. Frank, André G. 2008. ReOrient. Global Economy in the Asian Age. 8 ed. Berkeley, u.a.,: Univ. of California Press.Google Scholar
  46. Freeden, M. 2005. “What should the “Political” in Political Theory Explore?” Journal of Political Philosophy no. 13:113–134.Google Scholar
  47. Fukuyama, Francis. 2012. The Origins of Political Order: From Prehuman Times to the French Revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
  48. Füssel, Marian. 2003. “Die Rückkehr des ‘Subjekts’ in der Kulturgeschichte. Beobachtungen aus praxeologischer Perspektive.” In Historisierte Subjekte––Subjektivierte Historie. Zur Verfügbarkeit und Unverfügbarkeit von Geschichte edited by Stefan Deines, Stephan Jaeger and Ansgar Nünning, 141–159. New York: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  49. Füssel, Marian. 2006. “Die Kunst der Schwachen. Zum Begriff der ‘Aneignung’ in der Geschichtswissenschaft.” Sozial.Geschichte. Zeitschrift für historische Analyse des 20. und 21. Jahrhunderts (3):7–28.Google Scholar
  50. Georgopopoulou, Maria. 1996. “Mapping Religious and Ethnic Identities in the Venetian Colonial Empire.” The Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies no. 26:467–496.Google Scholar
  51. Giddens, Anthony. 1986 (ND 2009). The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Cambridge [u.a.]: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  52. Goldmann, Stefan. 1985. “Die Südsee als Spiegel Europas. Reisen in die versunkene Kindheit.” In Wir und die Wilden. Einblicke in eine kannibalische Beziehung, edited by Thomas Theye, 208–245. Hamburg: Rowohlt.Google Scholar
  53. Goody, Jack. 2008. The Theft of History. Cambridge [u.a.]: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  54. Gründer, Horst. 1992. Welteroberung und Christentum. Ein Handbuch zur Geschichte der Neuzeit. Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlagshaus Mohn.Google Scholar
  55. Grüner, Frank, and Prodöhl, Ines, eds. 2011. “Ethnic Ghettos and Transcultural Processes in a Globalised City––New Research on Harbin.” Special Issue, Itinerario. International Journal on the History of European Expansion and Global Interaction vol. 35, 3. Google Scholar
  56. Günergun, Feza, and Dhruv Raina. 2011. “Introduction.” In Science between Europe and Asia: Historical studies on the transmission, adoption and adaptation of knowledge, edited by Feza Günergun, 1–9. Heidelberg [u.a.]: Springer.Google Scholar
  57. Gunnell., John G. 1998. “Time and Interpretation: Understanding Concepts and Conceptual Change.” History of Political Thought no. 19:641–658.Google Scholar
  58. Guzzini, Stefano, and Anna Leander. 2005. Constructivism and International Relations Alexander Wendt and his Critics. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Hall, Stuart. 1999. “Kulturelle Identität und Globalisierung.” In Widerspenstige Kulturen. Cultural Studies als Herausforderung, edited by Karl H. Hörning and Rainer Winter, 393–441. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  60. Hannerz, Ulf. 2000. “Flows, boundaries and hybrids: Keywords in transnational anthropology.” http://www.transcomm.ox.ac.uk/working%20papers/hannerz.pdf [2.9.2010].
  61. Harbsmeier, Michael. 1982. “Reisebeschreibungen als mentalitätsgeschichtliche Quellen. Überlegungen zu einer historisch-anthropologischen Untersuchung frühneuzeitlicher deutscher Reisebeschreibungen.” In Reiseberichte als Quellen europäischer Kulturgeschichte. Aufgaben und Möglichkeiten der historischen Reiseforschung, edited by Antoni Maczak and Hans J. Teuteberg, 1–31. Wolfenbüttel: Herzog August Bibliothek.Google Scholar
  62. Hellmuth, Eckhart, and Christoph v. Ehrenstein. 2001. “Intellectual History Made in Britain: Die > Cambridge School < und ihre Kritiker.” Geschichte und Gesellschaft, no. 27: 149172.Google Scholar
  63. Herren, Madeleine, Martin Rüesch, and Christiane Sibille. 2012. Transcultural History: Theories, Methods, Sources Transcultural Research - Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  64. Hey, Barbara. 2000. “Sexualität im Spiegel des Anderen. 'Exotische Sexualität' im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert.” In Neue Geschichte der Sexualität. Beispiele aus Ostasien und Zentraleuropa 1700–2000, edited by Franz X. Eder and Sabine Frühstück, 93–116. Vienna: Turia and Kant.Google Scholar
  65. Höh, Marc von der, Nicolas Jaspert, and Jenny Rahel Oesterle. 2013. Cultural Brokers at Mediterranean Courts in the Middle Ages. Paderborn: Schoeningh.Google Scholar
  66. Holenstein, André. 2009. “Empowering Interactions. Looking at Statebuilding from Below.” In Empowering Interactions. Political Cultures and the Emergence of the State in Europe, 1300–1900, edited by André Holenstein, Wim Blockmans, Jon Mathieu and Daniel Schläppi, 1–31. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  67. Hühn, Melanie, Dörte Lerp, Knut Petzoold, and Miriam Stock. 2010. “In neuen Dimensionen denken? Einführende Überlegungen zu Transkulturalität, Transnationalität, Transstaatlichkeit und Translokalität.” In Transkulturalität, Transnationalität, Transstaatlichkeit, Translokalität: theoretische und empirische Begriffsbestimmungen, edited by Melanie Hühn, 11–46. Münster: LIT.Google Scholar
  68. Juneja, Monica. 2010. “Religious Conversion as a Transcultural Category.” In The Medieval History Journal: Theme Issue: Religious Conversion in medieval and pre-modern societies, edited by Monica Juneja and Kim Siebenhüner. New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
  69. Juneja, Monica. 2013. “Monica Juneja interviewd by Christian Kravagna.” In Transcultural Modernism, edited by Christina Kravagna. New York: Sternberg Press.Google Scholar
  70. Kaelble, H, and J Schriewer, eds. 2003. Vergleich und Transfer: Komparatistik in den Sozial-, Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaften. Frankfurt am Main: Campus.Google Scholar
  71. Kaviraj, Sudipta. 2010. The Trajectories of the Indian State: Politics and Ideas. Bangalore, Permanent Black.Google Scholar
  72. Keohane, Robert O., and Joseph S. Nye, eds. 1972. Transnational Relations and World Politics. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Landes, David S. 2007. The wealth and poverty of nations: why some are so rich and some so poor. Repr. ed. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  74. Laouisset, Djamel Eddin. 2010. “Complex Interdependence and Globalization.” In 21st Century Political Science: A Reference Handbook, edited by John Ishiyama and Marijke Breuning.401 -406, : Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  75. Lefèvre, Corinne. 2012. “Europe-Mughal India-Muslim Asia: Circulation of Political Ideas and Instruments in Early Modern Times.” In Structures on the Move: Technologies of Governance in Transcultural Encounter, edited by Antje Flüchter and Susan Richter, 127–145. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  76. Leitner, Claudia. 2009. Der Malinche-Komplex. Conquista, Genus, Genealogien. München: Fink.Google Scholar
  77. Lüdtke, Alf. 1991. “Einleitung: Herrschaft als soziale Praxis.” In Herrschaft als soziale Praxis. Historische und sozial-anthropologische Studien, edited by Alf Lüdtke, 9–63. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  78. Lüsebrink, Hans-Jürgen. 2004. “Wissen und außereuropäische Erfahrung im 18. Jahrhundert.” In Macht des Wissens. Die Entstehung der modernen Wissensgesellschaft, edited by Richard van Dülmen and Sina Rauschenbach, 629–654. Weimar: Böhlau.Google Scholar
  79. MacLean, Gerald M., and Nabil I Matar. 2011. Britain and the Islamic world, 1558–1713. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Madeira, Mary Anne, and James A. Caporaso. 2011. “Regional Integration (Supranational).” In International Encyclopedia of Political Science, edited by Bertrand Badie, Dirk Berg-Schlosser and Leonardo Morlino. 22392244, Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
  81. Markovits, Claude, Jacques Pouchepadass, and Sanjay Subrahmanyam. 2003. “Introduction. Circulation and Society under Colonial Rule.” In Society and Circulation: Mobile People and Itinerant Cultures in South Asia, 1750–1950, edited by Claude Markovits, Jacques Pouchepadass and Sanjay Subrahmanyam, 1–22. Delhi: Permanent Black.Google Scholar
  82. Masuzawa, Tomoko. 2005. The Invention of World Religions, or: How European Universalism Was Preserved in the Language of Pluralism. Chicago [u.a.]: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  83. Middell, Matthias. 2000. “Kulturtransfer und Historische Komparatistik––Thesen zu ihrem Verhältnis.” Comparativ no. 10:7–41.Google Scholar
  84. Middell, Matthias. 2001. “Von der Wechselseitigkeit der Kulturen im Austausch. Das Konzept des Kulturtransfers in verschiedenen Forschungskontexten.” In Metropolen und Kulturtransfer im 15./16.Jahrhundert. Prag - Krakau - Danzig - Wien, edited by Andrea Langer and Georg Michels, 15–51. Stuttgart: Steiner.Google Scholar
  85. Mitra, Subrata Kumar, ed. 1990. The Post-Colonial State in Asia. Dialectics of Politics and Culture. London: Harvester.Google Scholar
  86. Nederman, Carry Y. 2009. Lineages of European Political Thought: Explorations along the Medieval/Modern Divide from John of Salisbury to Hegel. Washington DC: Catholic Univ. of America Press.Google Scholar
  87. Nolde, Dorothea. 2006. “Religion und narrative Identität in Reiseberichten der Frühen Neuzeit.” In Historische Diskursanalysen. Genealogie, Theorie, Anwendungen, edited by Franz X. Eder, 271–289. Wiesbaden: Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften.Google Scholar
  88. Nützenadel, Alexander. 2005. “Globalisierung und transnationale Geschichte.” Globalisierung und transnationale Geschichte, 23.02.2005, URL: http://geschichte-transnational.clio-online.net/forum/id= 583&type = artikel (16.01.2012).
  89. Oakley, Francis. 1996. “‘Anxieties of Influence’: Skinner, Figgis, Conciliarism and Early Modern Constitutionalism.” Past and Present no. 151:60–110.Google Scholar
  90. O'Brien, Patrick K. 2006. “The Divergence Debate. Europe and China 1368–1846.” In Transnationale Geschichte. Themen, Tendenzen und Theorien, edited by Gunilla Budde, Sebastian Conrad and Oliver Janz, 68–82. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  91. Ong, Aihwa, 1999. Flexible Citizenship: The Cultural Logic of Transnationality. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Ortiz, Fernando. 1978. Contrapunteo del tabaco y el azucar. Caracas: Biblioteca Ayacucho.Google Scholar
  93. Perreau-Saussine, Emile. 2007. “Quentin Skinner in Context.” The Review of Politics no. 69:106–122.Google Scholar
  94. Pomeranz, Kenneth. 2000. The Great Divergence. China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy. The Princeton Economic History of the Western World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  95. Raj, Kapil. 2007. Relocating Modern Science. Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe 1650–1900. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  96. Reinhard, Wolfgang. 1983. “Zwang zur Konfessionalisierung. Prolegomena zu einer Theorie des konfessionellen Zeitalters.” Zeitschrift für Historische Forschung no. 10:257–277.Google Scholar
  97. Reinhard, Wolfgang. 1992. “Das Wachstum der Staatsgewalt. Historische Reflexionen.” Der Staat no. 31:59–75.Google Scholar
  98. Richter, Susan. 2012. “Pater patriae sinensis. The Discovery of Patriarchal Rule in China and Its Significance for German Theories of State in the Eighteenth Century.” In Structures on the move: technologies of governance in transcultural encounter. Transcultural research––Heidelberg studies on Asia and Europe in a global context, edited by Antje Flüchter and Susan Richter, 61–86. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  99. Robinson, William I. 1998. “Beyond Nation-State Paradigms: Globalization, Sociology, and the Challenge of Transnational Studies.” Sociological Forum no. 13 (4):561–594.Google Scholar
  100. Rubiés, Joan-Pau. 2005. “Oriental Despotism and European Orientalism. Botero to Montesquieu.” Journal of Early Modern History no. 9 (2):109–180.Google Scholar
  101. Said, Edward W. 1996. “Kultur und Identität––Europas Selbstfindung aus der Einverleibung der Welt.” Lettre International no. 34:21–25.Google Scholar
  102. Sartori, G. 1984. “Guidelines for Concept Analysis.” In Social Science Concepts: A Systematic Analysis, edited by G. Sartori. 15 – 85, Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  103. Schalenberg, Marc. 1998. “Die Rezeption des Deutschen Universiätsmodells in Oxford. 1850–1914.” In Aneignung und Abwehr,. Interkultureller Transfer zwischen Deutschland und Großbritanien, edited by Rudolf Muhs, Johannes Paulmann and Willibald Steinmetz, 198–226. Bodenheim: Philo-Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  104. Schöttli, Jivanta. 2013. “From T.H. Marshall to Jawaharlal Nehru: Citizenship as Vision and Strategy.” In Citizenship as Cultural Flow: Structure, Agency and Power, edited by Subrata K. Mitra. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  105. Sen, Amartya K. 2006. The Argumentative Indian. Writings on Indian History, Culture and Identity. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  106. Sewell, William, H. 1992. “A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency and Transformation.” American Journal of Sociology no. 98:1–29.Google Scholar
  107. Shapiro, Susan P. 2005. “Agency Theory.” Annual Review of Sociology no. 31:263–284.Google Scholar
  108. Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia, and China. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  109. Skinner, Quentin. 1966. “The Limits of Historical Explanations.” Philosoph no. 41/157:199–215.Google Scholar
  110. Skinner, Quentin. 1978. The Foundations of Modern Political Thought. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  111. Skinner, Quentin. 1988. “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas (1969).” In The Pen is a Mighty Sword. Quentin Skinner and his Critics, edited by J. Tully, 29–67. Cambridge: Camebridge University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Skinner, Quentin. 2002. Visions of Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Stokes, Eric. 1990. The English Utilitarians and India. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  114. Stollberg-Rilinger, Barbara. 2010. “Einleitung. Was heisst Ideengeschichte?” In Ideengeschichte edited by Barbara Stollberg-Rilinger, 7–43. Stuttgart: Frank Steiner.Google Scholar
  115. Strauss and Quinn. 1997. A Cognitive Theory of Cultural Meaning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  116. Szasz, Margaret C., ed. 2001. Between Indian and White Worlds. The Cultural Broker, Red river books. Norman [u.a.]: Univ. of Oklahoma Press.Google Scholar
  117. Thelen, Kathleen, 2004. How Institutions Evolve: The Political Economy of Skills in Germany, Britain, the United States, and Japan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Udehn, Lars. 2001. Methodological Individualism. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  119. Vries, Peer. 2009. “Editorial. Global History.” Österreichische Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft no. 22 (2):5–18Google Scholar
  120. Wagner, Rudolf G. 2011. “China “Asleep” and “Awakening.” A Study in Conceptualizing Asymmetry and Coping with It.” Transcultural Studies, North America, 0, mar. 2011. Available at: < http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/ojs/index.php/transcultural/article/view/7315 >. Date accessed: 28 Mar. 2012. no. 2/1.
  121. Wehler, Hans-Ulrich. 1994. “Nationalismus als fremdenfeindliche Integrationsideologie.” In Das Gewalt-Dilemma. Gesellschaftliche Reaktionen auf fremdenfeindliche Gewalt und Rechtsextremismus, edited by Wilhelm Heitmeyer, 73–90. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  122. Wehler, Hans-Ulrich, ed. 2000. Aspekte des Nationalismus, Geschichte und Gesellschaft 26,3. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
  123. Welsch, Wolfgang. 1995. “Transkulturalität. Zwischen Globalisierung und Partikularisierung” Zeitschrift für Kulturaustausch: no 45 (1) 39–44.Google Scholar
  124. Wendt, Alexander. 1992. “Anarchy is what States Make of it: The Social Construction of Power Politics.” International Organization no. 46 (2):391–425.Google Scholar
  125. Werner, Michael. 2009. “Zum theoretischern Rahmen und historischen Ort der Kulturtransferforschung.” In Kultureller Austausch. Bilanz und Perspektiven der Frühneuzeitforschung, edited by Michael North, 15–23. Vienna: Böhlau.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.IKOS, University of OsloOsloNorway
  2. 2.Research Center for Distributional Conflict and GlobalisationHeidelberg UniversityHeidelbergGermany

Personalised recommendations