The first session of the second day was moderated by Dr. Joël Glasman (Humboldt University of Berlin). The first speaker was Mr. Oury Goldman (EHESS), who spoke on “Grasping the World: Printers, Booksellers, and Translators as Agents of Global Knowledge in Sixteenth Century France.” He explored how knowledge circulated throughout Paris and Lyon in the 16th century by various actors from the perspective of translation studies. A uniqueness of his argument was that he contextualized 16th century France not in the history of knowledge production but rather by means of an account of history circulation. In other words, he used not only texts of philosophers and thinkers but also works of publishers, booksellers, and translators. His talk attracted the audience’s attention and drew many questions and comments (e.g., Did the government control French publishers for the use of propaganda? How does the topic relate to the scholarship of “Global Renaissance”? Could the discussion fall into French exceptionalism? How are publishing cultures in Paris and Lyon different from other French cities such as Montpelier?)

The second speaker, Benjamin Sacks (Princeton University), read a paper entitled “The Highest Form of Flattery:
Borrowing, Copying, and Reproducing Atlantic Communities, 1704–1731.” He started with a simple question: Why were colonial cities similar? In order to answer this question, he connected the perspective of global history with urban studies, which scarcely covered the international exchange of knowledge on urban planning. He pointed out that British governors learned the technique of fortress construction from France when Britain took over the French territory of St. Kitts Island after the signing of the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713. The floor posed many questions and comments (e.g., Why was the term “spy” used instead of “steal” to describe the action of the British governors? How did the local people react to the new city plans? Is it appropriate to call new communities cities, not settlements?)

The second session was chaired by Professor Ines Zupanov (EHESS) and consisted of two papers. The presentation by Ms. Merisa Harada (University of Tokyo) was entitled “Modern Sino-French Diplomacy over the Interests in South China in Relation to the Formation of French Indochina.” She pointed out that scholars have tended to concentrate on the relationship between China and Britain, overlooking the Sino-French relationship when they worked on the diplomatic history of 19th century China. She aimed to disentangle the complicated relationships between France, China, and Japan around the turn of the 20th century. Ms. Harada also analyzed the diplomatic conflicts in Guangzhouwan, Fuzhou, and French Indochina by using various archives of multiple languages. Questions from the participants included the following: Did Macao or Portugal influence diplomacy in Guangzhouwan? What was the terminological difference between China and the Qin Dynasty? How can her work connect to Japanese scholarships?

The second lecturer was Ms. Natalie Pashkeeva (EHESS); her presentation was entitled  “Writing of ‘Global’ and ‘National’ Histories of Young Men’s Christian Associations from the Third Quarter of the Nineteenth Century and the Twentieth Century.” Her initial interest was to clarify the possibilities and limits of the narratives of national history and global history. She described how the American YMCA tried to define itself as a global movement from the second half of the 19th century until the first half of the 20th century. The questions and comments covered her work’s contributions to gender studies, including her coverage of the American YWCA. It was also brought up that it is not necessary to use the word “global” from the perspective of global history. Someone also inquired about responses by Woodrow Wilson and John Mott to the Russian Revolution in 1917.

In the method session, Professor Jeremy Adelman (Princeton University) delivered a lecture entitled “Are World Systems Helpful for Global History?” He aimed to suggest an alternative view of world systems based on his article, “Mimesis and Rivalry: European Empires and Global Regimes,” published in the Journal of Global History in 2015. He discussed the possibilities of a polycentric narrative by refusing the core/periphery narrative.

The participants discussed many topics. For example, they examined how closely globalization and media were connected. Though Professor Adelman focused on the relationship between globalization and publishing technology in the 15th and 16th centuries, a student pointed out the importance of the impact of visual media in the 20th century. Furthermore, students argued that scholars should reconsider the works of Herbert Marshall McLuhan and Susan Sontag in the context of writings regarding global history. Another student indicated that information circulated in “the West and the Rest,” but the relationships between empires and colonies were always asymmetrical in terms of scientific knowledge production.

After the sessions, participants traveled to the historical district of Trenton with local volunteer guides. Princeton University is located in New Jersey; the state capital is Trenton. The city used to be populated, but its current population decreased to 80,000. The city has taken some measures to restore historical buildings. Students and professors visited the Old Barracks Museum (erected between 1758 and 1759 as a New Jersey colony and restored in the 1990s), Petty’s Run Archaeological Site (remains of industries from the 1730s to 1870s), and the Masonic Temple (founded in 1927). They had an opportunity to talk to the architect in charge of Trenton’s urban planning.

(Hiro Fujimoto)