Compare and contrast the set of books.. How do their respective methodologies distinguish the stories they tell about the same phenomenon?
In response to this question, give content to the following points: 1) the research question the historian has posed to their topic; 2) the answer, or argument, the historian mounts in their text; 3) the sources the historian uses to substantiate that argument; and, in particular, 4) the methodological approach the historian takes to the analysis of their sources, and how that approach shapes their interpretation of their sources, narrative, and conclusion. Put somewhat differently, the paper should examine how each historians approach, or methodology, has informed, if not determined, their selection, and exclusion, of voices, ideas, cultural norms and practices, institutions, (systemic) processes, material things and events for the purview of their narrative, as well as the conclusions the historian reaches about their topic and the contribution they (purportedly) make to the larger historiography. The paper will also compare and contrast the books considered, to give the reader a sense of the different positions they represent within the historiographical debate and to highlight the contribution that each has historian has made.
//
The books/readings used should be chapters 1 and 2 of the book “Negotiating Transcultural Relations in the Early Modern Mediterranean” by Stephen Ortega as well as chapters 2 and 5 of “Trans-imperial Subjects between Venice and Istanbul” by Natalie E Rothman.
I have attached the chapters by Rothman but I do not have the chapters by Ortega. If you do not have access to the chapters by Ortega please inform me.
The paper should show how both authors approached the topics with the same question in mind but came to different outcomes when answering the question.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]