活動報告

2019.10.19

GHC Summer School 2019 (2/2)

/ 6

報告3

2019年度のGHCサマースクール3日目は、シェルドン・ギャロン教授(プリンストン大学)の進行で、学生の研究発表から始まりました。このセッションは、東京大学本郷キャンパスの伊藤国際学術研究センター中教室(3階)で行われました。

午前に3人の大学院生から発表がありました。それぞれが自分の研究の主たる目的と概要を5分で話し、その後55分は発表者と他の参加者全員による質疑応答とディスカッションという形で進められました。

最初に、内田力氏(東京大学)が”History-Writing and Engagement in the Early Cold War Era: Communist Influences on Japan”と題する論文について発表しました。博士論文の一部をベースに、共産主義が日本の歴史家に及ぼした影響を跡づけ、歴史学者・網野善彦を例に挙げて日本共産党と歴史家の関係を考察しました。参加者からは、網野個人の言説を、その当時の共産主義の影響に関するグローバルな比較研究の文脈でどうとらえるのかというコメントが複数ありました。また、網野のそうした言説を論文の中でもっと強調する手法についても発言がありました。

次に、Oscar Broughton氏(ベルリン・フンボルト大学)が”Redefining Reconstruction”と題する論文について発表しました。研究テーマは、第1次世界大戦後のナショナル・ギルド連盟(1915~23年)の活動と、同連盟がイギリスにおける戦後復興の意味をどう再定義し、他国に拡散させたかということで、5分間の論文紹介後、他の参加者がコメントや質問をしました。「ギルド社会主義」という現象を国際的またグローバルな文脈でより的確にとらえるにはどのような方法が可能かについて質問が集中しました。この現象はイギリスに定着しなかったのに、なぜ、いかにして他の国に広がったのか。国際的なアクターは誰だったのか。ナラティブの方向を、ギルド社会主義がイギリスから他の国にいかにして広がったのかという視点から、この国際的な、グローバルな現象が、論文で取り上げられた他の事象とともに、なぜイギリスで生起したのかという視点へと、構成し直してはどうかという問題提起もありました。

Ael Thery氏(フランス国立社会科学高等研究院)は、”Food Safety, Hygiene Rules and “Moral Qualities” (Suzhi) in Professional Kitchens in Contemporary China: “Cleaning Bad Practices.”“と題する論文について発表しました。この論文は中国における料理人という職業を取り上げ、厨房における食の安全、衛生、倫理問題に関して外国から課されるルールや規範と、国内で定められたルールや規範との相互関係を明らかにしようとしました。論文の組み立て方について、また、ナラティブや詳細な実証的分析によって中国の料理や厨房に関するさまざまなステレオタイプをいかに脱構築しうるかなどについて、質問や意見が出ました。さらに、この研究は厨房における「正式なルール」に焦点を当てているが、ルールだけでなく、日々の慣行や暗黙知、それらの相互関係に関するナラティブも可能ではないかという提起がありました。参加者は、研究テーマに関するローカルな考察をいかに国際的な文脈へ展開させていくかについても意見を交わしました。

(文責:Bee Yun Jo)


報告4

2019年9月4日(水)午後に、東京カレッジ・シンポジウム「アイデンティティのグローバルヒストリー」が開催されました。池亀彩氏(東京大学)が司会を務め、パネリストとしてアンドレアス・エッカート教授(ベルリン・フンボルト大学)、シルヴィア・セバスティアーニ教授(フランス国立社会科学高等研究院)、フィリップ・ノード教授(プリンストン大学)、羽田正教授(東京カレッジ)が登壇しました。

最初に、羽田教授によるシンポジウムの趣旨説明があり、羽田教授は政治や社会問題を論じる際によく使われるアイデンティティについて、グローバルな文脈で共同研究を行うことを提案しました。司会の池亀氏によるパネリストの紹介に続き、4人のパネリストがアイデンティティについて議論しました。

まず、世界史、グローバルヒストリーについて研究を進めている羽田教授は、従来の研究では、アイデンティティが世界のどこでも普遍的な概念として用いられてきたことを問題視し、例えば英語と日本語、スペイン語と日本語の間でもアイデンティティが指すものには違いがあるのではないかと述べました。さらに、アイデンティティという言葉が1960年代に日本に導入された経緯とその後の展開を紹介しました。

次に、スコットランドの啓蒙主義が専門のセバスティアーニ教授は、18世紀の後半のスコットランドにおいて、ラテン語のidemが語源となるアイデンティティは「同じでない」という意味でつかわれ、「多様性(diversity)」もアイデンティティとして考えられている近代とは反対の意味で使われていたと強調しました。ヨーロッパの国々が共通の道のりの中でどのように特異性を持つようになったのか、何がわれわれを結びつけ、何がわれわれを区別するのかという問題、普遍主義と特異性の緊張関係は今もなお続いていると述べました。

続いて、近現代フランス政治、文化史を専門とするノード教授は、エリック・エリクソンによる『Identity, Youth, and Crisis(アイデンティティ-青年と危機)』(1968年)、フェルナン・ブローデルによる『L’identité de la France(フランスのアイデンティティ)』(1986年)、ピエール・ノラによる『Les lieux de mémoire:La République(記憶の場)』(1984年)等の書籍を挙げ、アイデンティティという概念が精神分析学で個人に当てはめられたものから歴史的な分析で集団に転用されるようになったことを指摘し、これによって何が得られ、何が失われたのか分析しました。

最後に、アフリカ史を起点にグローバルヒストリー研究を展開するエッカート教授は、アフリカにおけるアイデンティティの事例を二つ紹介しました。一つ目の例として、1994年4月6日ルワンダの首都において起こった暗殺を発端とする民族的大量殺人が、文化的差異の衝突にとどまらない政府という現代的な制度が準備した虐殺であったこと、より強固になった民族的なアイデンティティを示すものであったことを説明しました。二つ目の例として、1957年に独立したガーナの多民族ナショナリズムのモデルを挙げ、ナショナルアイデンティティに曖昧さがあると述べました。

シンポジウム後半では、フロアからの質問を交えて討論が行われました。司会の池亀氏は、アイデンティティをめぐる現在の政治的な状況をどう考えるかについて質問を投げかけました。パネリストらは、アイデンティティが歴史を通して構成されるものであると同時に、歴史を通して現実となり実態を持つようになり、人々がそれをベースに行動すると指摘しました。グローバルヒストリーの方法論を使うことで地球の住民としてのアイデンティティを強化することは可能なのかという議論に続き、学術界におけるアイデンティティとアクティビストのアイデンティティは区別するべきではないか、という意見や、日本のナショナリズム、スコットランドの啓蒙主義、ルワンダの大量殺戮といった多種多様なテーマをアイデンティティの問題と一括りにしてよいのか、よりふさわしい表現はあるのか等、様々な質問が挙がりました。

(文責:寺田悠紀)


報告5

4日目午後のセッションでは、18世紀後半から19世紀を対象とする二つの報告が行われた。司会は、Andreas Eckert教授(ベルリン・フンボルト大学)が務めた。

最初は、Megan Armknecht氏(プリンストン大学)が、”Diplomatic Households and the Foundation of U.S. Diplomacy, 1789-1870”というタイトルで報告を行った。19世紀中葉まで、アメリカの外交システムは十分専門職化されておらず、しばしば外交官の家庭/家族(households)が重要な役割を果たしていた。本報告は、合衆国の外交システム形成期に家庭が果たした役割を、19世紀のさまざまな時期・地域の事例研究を積み重ねて描く試みであった。ハイポリティクスとして捉えられがちな外交史に、ジェンダー・家族の視点を導入することで、権力や権威、帝国に関する理解を変えるとともに、19世紀アメリカの外交の実態に迫ることが意図されている。質疑応答では、家族の世代交代をどのように評価するか、その後の外交官の専門職化に家族がどのような影響を与えたか、アメリカ例外主義を超えてグローバル・ヒストリーのなかに本研究を位置付けるならば、どのような可能性があるかなどについて、議論が行われた。

続いて、森井一真(大阪大学)が “Changing Attitudes of MPs Opposing the Abolition of the British Slave Trade 1787-1807” というタイトルで報告を行った。本報告では、イギリス議会内で展開した奴隷貿易廃止法案をめぐる攻防に注目し、奴隷貿易廃止に反対した議員の投票行動と彼らの背景の関係が分析された。分析の結果、スコットランド選出議員と奴隷貿易廃止反対の関係を指摘するなど、西インド利害関係者だけでない奴隷貿易廃止反対の実態を検討する試みであった。質疑応答では、西インド/東インドといった語がはらむイメージに注意する必要があること、議論がイギリス本国の視点に偏っており、カリブ側から見た視点を導入する必要があること、奴隷に関する問題を扱うには人種の問題を取り上げる必要があることなどが提起された。また、スコットランドと奴隷制に関する近年の研究成果と本研究がどのような関係にあるのか、奴隷貿易廃止反対派の研究がどのような枠組みのなかに位置付けられるのか、グローバル・ヒストリーの文脈に置くとすれば、どのような意義があるのかなどが、議論された。

(文責・森井一真)

Report 3

<Day 3 Morning Presentation: Uchida, Broughton, Thery>
On the Day 3 of the 2019 GHC Summer School, Professor Sheldon Garon from Princeton University kicked off the day’s regular session on student presentations on their research. It was held at the Ito International Research Center, third floor, seminar room, on the University of Tokyo’s Hongo campus.

We had three paper presentations in the morning. Each speaker presented the main motivation, background for their research for five minutes, followed by fifty-five minutes of questions and discussions between the speaker and all other participants.

The first presentation was delivered by Uchida Chikara from the University of Tokyo on his paper entitled “History-Writing and Engagement in the Early Cold War Era: Communist Influences on Japan.” It was based on part of his doctoral dissertation, which focuses on connecting the communist influences on Japanese historians, looking at the relationship between the Japanese Communist Party and historians through the case of one historian, Yoshihiko Amino. Main comments have focused on how to connect the individual account of Amino to the global comparative context of communist influences of the time. Also, participants gave comments on how this Amino account can be more highlighted in the article.

Oscar Broughton from Berlin Humboldt University presented his paper, entitled “Redefining Reconstruction.” The topic of the research focused on the behavior of the National Guilds League (1915-23) after the end of the First World War and the way it redefined the meaning of post-war reconstruction in Britain and also spread to other places overseas. After five minutes of introduction of his paper, other participants joined for comments and questions. Big chunks of questions have focused on how to make this phenomenon of ‘guild socialism’ can be more contextualized in the international/global context. Why and how was the phenomenon not contained within Britain but spread out to other places of the globe. Who were the international actors? Participants also made propositions to kind of restructure the direction of narrative - from how the guild socialism spreads from Britain to other places, but how this international, global phenomenon comes to the Britain along with other cases addressed in the article.

Ael Thery from EHESS presented her paper, entitled “Food Safety, Hygiene Rules and “Moral Qualities” (Suzhi) in Professional Kitchens in Contemporary China: “Cleaning Bad Practices.” The main topic/focus of the paper has been on the profession of cook in China, which reveals the interrelationship between externally-imposed and internally-constructed rules and norms on food security, hygiene, and moral issues in the kitchens. Main questions and remarks raised included how to organize the structure of the paper, how the narrative and in-depth empirical can deconstruct many stereotypes about China’s cuisine, kitchens. Also, the study’s focus on ‘formal rules’ in the kitchens, the narrative can add on not only rules but daily practices or tacit knowledge and how they are interrelated. Participants also shared their thoughts on how paper’s more local account of the topic of the research to the international.

(Bee Yun Jo)

<Day 4 Morning Presentation: Jo, Tremblay>
On the Day 4 of the 2019 GHC Summer School, Professor Marc Elie from EHESS moderated the session on student presentations on their research. It was held at the Ito International Research Center, third floor, seminar room, on the University of Tokyo’s Hongo campus. We had two paper presentations in the morning. Each speaker presented the main motivation, background for their research for five minutes, followed by fifty-five minutes of questions and discussions between the speaker and all other participants. The first presentation was delivered by Bee Yun Jo from Seoul National University on her paper entitled “Two Divergent Paths in Arming against Asymmetric Threats in Northeast Asia: Comparing Japan and South Korea’s Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) and Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance (ISR) Capabilities.” It was based on one of comparative case study she did for her PhD dissertation, juxtaposing South Korea to Japan’s armaments in the BMD and ISR. Main comments and questions raised included how the research can be connected to the transnational project from a comparative framework of the project, empirical sources and choices for analysis, variables used. Sebastien Tremblay from Freie Universitat Berlin delivered five minutes on his overall PhD dissertation, and also overview on his paper, entitled “Transatlantic Holocaust Memories and Queer Identities: The Case of the HIV/AIDS Crisis,” focusing on the case of Pink Triangle to look at how the case reflects gay and lesbian transnational networks from the 1970s to the 2000s. Main comments included how transatlantic connections of the research could be strengthened, discussions on linguistic tags, and structure of the paper.

(Bee Yun Jo)


Report 4

On the afternoon of Wednesday, September 4, 2019, a Tokyo College Symposium was held on the topic, “Global History of Identity.” The event was moderated by Aya Ikegame (University of Tokyo) and included Andreas Eckert (University Humboldt Berlin), Silvia Sebastiani (Sociales Sciences en Etudes Hautes des Ecole), Philip Nord (Princeton University), and Masashi Haneda (University of Tokyo) as panelists.

Masashi Haneda (Tokyo College) opened the session with a review of the symposium’s objectives, noting that the concept of identity is often used in discussing political and social issues and that there is a need for joint research with a global context. This was followed by an introduction to the four panelists by Aya Ikegame after which the panelists launched into a discussion on the concept of identity.

The discussion began with Masashi Haneda, whose research is on world history and global history, pointing out that in conventional studies around the world the tendency has been to treat identity as a universal concept, but actually identity means different things, for example, between English and Japanese, and between Spanish and Japanese. As background, Haneda explained how the term identity was first introduced into Japan in the 1960s and how it developed thereafter.

Next, Silvia Sebastiani, whose field of specialty is the Scottish enlightenment, explained that in Scotland in the latter half of the eighteenth century, “identity,” from the Latin idem, meant “not the same,” whereas today identity is considered to include the concept of diversity. She went on to talk about how the countries of Europe were able to develop as individual entities while following a common path of development, and how there continues to be a tug-of-war between our individual singularities and universal traits, between that which ties us together and that which distinguishes each of us.

Philip Nord, who specializes in modern French politics and cultural history, referred to three writings on identity—Identity, Youth and Crisis (1968) by Erik H. Erikson, L’identité de la France (The Identity of France; 1986) by Fernand Braudel, and Les lieux de mémoire (Between Memory and History; 1984) by Pierre Nora —to explain how identity has evolved from a term used in the psychoanalysis of individual persons to a concept applied to historical analyses of groups, and what has been gained—and lost—by this evolution.

Finally, Andreas Eckert, whose research encompasses global history originating from African history, presented two case studies of identity in Africa. The first was the Rwanda genocide which followed the assassination of Rwandan president Juvénal Habyarimana on April 6, 1994, an extreme example of ethnic identity demonstrating how a modern system of government can go beyond cultural conflict to prepare a massacre. The second case study involved the multiethnic nationalism of Ghana which won its independence in 1957. Eckert used these two examples to demonstrate the ambiguities of national identity.

The second half of the symposium was given over to questions from the floor and discussion. Moderator Ikegame opened the session by asking how identity in the current political situation might be interpreted. The panelists responded that identity is something that takes shape through history, becoming in the process a reality with substance on which people base their actions. Discussion then moved on to a wide range of topics including whether the methodology of global history could be used to fortify peoples’ identity as residents of the planet earth, whether a differentiation should be made between identity as used in academics and the identity of activists, and whether it was right to apply the same concept of identity to such diverse contexts as Japanese nationalism, Scottish enlightenment, and Rwanda genocide when there might be a more appropriate term.

(TERADA Yuki)


Report 5

<Day 4 Afternoon Presentation: Amknecht, Morii>
Two reports on the period spanning the late eighteenth to nineteenth century were presented in the afternoon session moderated by Andreas Eckert (University Humboldt Berlin).

The first report, titled “Diplomatic Households and the Foundation of U.S. Diplomacy, 1789-1870,” was presented by Megan Armknecht (Princeton University). In the middle of the nineteenth century, American diplomacy was not yet so professionally organized and the families and households of diplomats often played a major role in the United States’ diplomatic relations with other countries. In this report, an attempt was made to portray the role diplomatic families played at various times and places in the nineteenth century when US diplomacy was still in its formative stages. The history of diplomacy tends to be perceived as a part of “high politics,” but by interjecting perspectives of gender and family, this paper attempts to change our understanding of power, authority, and empire so as to give a better picture of the reality of nineteenth-century American diplomacy. In the Q&A session that followed, there was much discussion of how generational changes in a family should be perceived, how diplomatic families influenced the later development of “professional” diplomacy, and the possibilities of this research going beyond American exceptionalism within the context of global history.

Next, Morii Kazuma (Osaka University) presented a report on “Changing Attitudes of MPs Opposing the Abolition of the British Slave Trade, 1787-1807.” In his report, Morii focused on the struggles in the British Parliament related to the proposed Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade of 1807 by analyzing the voting behavior of the MPs who were against the act and the background to their behavior. This analysis reveals a connection between Scottish MPs and the movement against the abolition of slave trade that suggests that it was not only West India stakeholders who opposed the abolition of slavery. In the Q&A session, it was pointed out that there was an inherent danger in the imagery created by using the terms “East India” and “West India,” that the paper seemed to have a heavy UK bias and that a Caribbean perspective should be introduced as well, and also that any discussion of slavery should include the issue of race. There was also discussion as to how this particular study relates to recent research on Scotland and slavery, what the framework is for this research on the resistance to the abolition of slave trade, and what the significance of this research is within the context of global history.

<Day 5 Morning Presentation: Krautvald and Börgerding>
The last session of presentations took place in the morning of the fifth day of the summer school program. Two reports were presented and discussed with Silvia Sebastiani (EHESS) serving as the moderator.

First, Fabian Krautvald (Princeton University) presented a report titled, “‘Little Difference?’ - Genocide and Global Entanglements in Herero Memories of German Colonialism, c. 1915-1966.” Between 1904 and 1908, there occurred a series of wars known as the Herero Wars between Germany and the Herero and Namaqua peoples of German South West Africa (now Namibia) which have been perceived by some as a preview to the genocide of the later Holocaust. Krautvald reported on how he attempted an empirical review by tracing the transmission of the memories of this genocide in Germany and in Africa through historical documents in Germany as well as oral histories in Africa gathered through on-site fieldwork. He went further in his report to show how these memories were put to use, such as when, after the German withdrawal and the subsequent unification of South Africa, the Herero people negotiated with the government officials of South Africa to have a record left of their memories, and also when the Herero people appealed to the memory of colonial rule under the Germans to call for better education and the building of basic infrastructure. In the Q&A session there was vigorous discussion of the following kinds of questions: How does the genocide of the Herero and Namaqua peoples link to memories of the Holocaust; what generational differences can be found in the memories; how did the people in Africa secure access to the various European languages; what reactions were observed in Germany to these memories; what is the rationale for using the term “holocaust” to describe an event taking place before the term was coined; how should the connection between German imperialism and the Nazis be interpreted; and what is the significance of this research within the context of global history.

This was followed with a presentation by Lea Börgerding (Free University of Berlin) on “A School for Cooperation? - Second and Third World Women’s Coalitions at the 1975 World Congress of Women in East Berlin.” This paper focuses on an aspect of the worldwide women’s and feminism movements that has not always been widely recognized, the activities of women in the second-world countries of Eastern Europe and the third-world countries of Asia and Africa. Specifically, the author interviewed the Vietnam delegation to the 1975 East Berlin World Congress of Women to glean insights into the restructuring of the Congress and its effects as perceived by women from second and third-world countries. In the Q&A session, there was discussion on the international relations that formed the backdrop for the study, and whether there were discrepancies between local contexts and the context of the Congress itself. In the latter half of the discussion, Masashi Haneda questioned the appropriateness of the paper’s key concept of a “Global South,” asking how it meshed with concepts commonly shared in Europe and the United States today. This led to even more vigorous discussion, demonstrating how global history may be applied to refute Eurocentric views.

(MORII Kazuma)

ページのトップへ