This article aims to explore the consequences of including Ottoman studies in the larger field of imperial studies. It strives to combine a close reading of the Ottoman imperial epithets with considerations of how the Ottomans may contribute to theorizing empire as a model. In particular, the article engages in a discussion of whether the "sublime sultanate" developed into a colonial pattern of empire over its final century of existence. As it turns out, the Ottoman practice of administration did not come down to a simulacrum of European colonialism; the article points instead to a semiotics of empire that took its cue from a multidimensional logic of governmentality. Accordingly, archival idiosyncrasies are taken to imply the contrary of an Ottoman exceptionalism. They serve rather to highlight that concepts carry with them a vast repertoire of meanings to be activated in practice.
The Ottomans' Leverage with Imperial Studies
Leonid Mikhailovich Goryushkin (1927–1999)
After a long and serious illness, the celebrated Russian historian of Siberia, Leonid Mikhailovich Goryushkin, died on 26 September 1999 at the age of 71 in Novosibirsk. At the time of his death, he was the first Director of the newlyformed Institute of History at the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences (SO RAN), previously part of the Institute of History, Philology and Philosophy of the Soviet Academy of Sciences (SO AN SSSR) where he had worked for thirty-six years.
Shift , Spread, and Disjunction in a Conceptual Trajectory
Jörg Thomas Richter
Hugo de Vries’s Mutation Theory (1901–1903) fell on fertile ground in the evolutionary sciences around the year 1900. Aside from the impact it had on biology, the concept of mutation also spread into a variety of non-biological discourses, including philosophy, sociology, historiography, and philology. The article follows the trajectory of de Vries’s concept through the discursive landscapes of the early 1900s and the 1960s. From its inception in the 1900s, the cultural imagination of mutation marks a field of conceptual crossing over rather than a mere takeover from biology.
Kipling and Conrad's 'The Man who would be King'
When James Brooke (1803–68), a former soldier of the East Indian Company, sailed for Borneo in 1838 as an adventurer and merchant, he was inspired by contemporary works of ethnology and geography, especially Thomas Stamford Raffles’s History of Java. Upon his arrival, he eagerly inquired after the languages and customs of native inhabitants. His interviews often took the form of inquiries into their religious beliefs, especially as to whether they had a concept of a supreme God, and if so, by which name he was known. Brooke religiously recorded in his journals the details of such interviews, and even the unease of his native informants, who occasionally had difficulty understanding what Brooke wanted when he insistently asked who and what their god was. Brooke’s inquiry was along the lines of comparative philology, which was at that time regarded as a vital methodology for the new human sciences.
This article reports on contemporary debates in Germany on the extensive use of English in Germans' use of German. In particular, it focuses on the debate held at the University of Birmingham between Professor Jürgen Schiewe and Thomas Paulwitz on the question: “The influence of English on German today: Grounds for concern?” The rise of a nationalist discourse on language since the mid-1990s is traced with particular reference to the Verein Deutsche Sprache and the quarterly publication Deutsche Sprachwelt. The purist position represented by Paulwitz, editor of Deutsche Sprachwelt, and opposed by Schiewe, Professor of German Philology at the University of Greifswald, is found to represent a discourse on national identity that fails to engage with modern linguistic science.
Maria Bucur, Alexandra Ghit, Ayşe Durakbaşa, Ivana Pantelić, Rochelle Goldberg Ruthchild, Elizabeth A. Wood, Anna Müller, Galina Goncharova, Zorana Antonijević, Katarzyna Sierakowska, Andrea Feldman, Maria Kokkinou, Alexandra Zavos, Marija M. Bulatović, Siobhán Hearne, and Rayna Gavrilova
and 2000s), Belgrade: Faculty of Philology, University of Belgrade, 2018, 370 pp., price not listed (paperback), ISBN: 978-86-6153-515-4. Book review by Ivana Pantelić Institute of Contemporary History, Belgrade, Serbia The collection
Edited by Graham Holderness and Bryan Loughrey
In October 2016, to mark the 400th anniversary of Shakespeare’s death, the Department of Philology, Literature, Linguistics of the University of Pisa organized a conference on the topic of ‘Shakespeare and Money’. This issue of Critical Survey
Raphael de Kadt
doctorate. But he wanted to read Kant, Hegel, Marx and Adorno (among many others), in the original German. So every Friday evening he and Foszia came for German lessons from my wife, a specialist in German philology, with a doctorate from the University of
A Reconstruction of Russian Narratives
(students of a Master's program in German-Russian Philology at Russian State University for the Humanities, translated from German). Quotations taken from interviews and focus groups are partly shortened or grammatically corrected in order to increase
Marija Bulatović and Višnja Krstić
2012 at the Faculty of Philology at the University of Belgrade on the topic “Traditional and Modern Elements in the Work of Jelena Dimitrijević.” 2 Kruševac is a city in central Serbia.