Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10267002
Lisa Sousa
{"title":"Indigenous Life after the Conquest: The De la Cruz Family Papers of Colonial Mexico","authors":"Lisa Sousa","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10267002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10267002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49487325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10266839
Miranda Johnson
The making of the bicultural state of Aotearoa New Zealand is the product of a distinctive postcolonial and neoliberal late twentieth-century history. In this context, a predominantly anglophone settler state finally responded to decades-long claims about Indigenous dispossession by creating the Treaty of Waitangi Tribunal in 1975, an institution that a decade later took a wide-ranging approach to the investigation of historical grievances. The tribunal produced an alternative historiography that imagined a partnership between Māori and the Crown, not only in the service of evaluating past actions but also with the aim of creating better relations for the future. This article offers a brief account of biculturalism and “treaty partnership” in three overlapping modes: as an emergent and then hegemonic political discourse; as generating a new historiography; and in terms of the reframing and bureaucratization of research practices in Aotearoa New Zealand. In this milieu, research ethics is not simply a matter of interpersonal politics but, in fact, has become a matter of governmentality—that is, of regulating the conduct of researchers as subjects of particular forms of state power.
{"title":"Biculturalism and Historiography in the Era of Neoliberalism: A View from Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"Miranda Johnson","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10266839","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10266839","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 The making of the bicultural state of Aotearoa New Zealand is the product of a distinctive postcolonial and neoliberal late twentieth-century history. In this context, a predominantly anglophone settler state finally responded to decades-long claims about Indigenous dispossession by creating the Treaty of Waitangi Tribunal in 1975, an institution that a decade later took a wide-ranging approach to the investigation of historical grievances. The tribunal produced an alternative historiography that imagined a partnership between Māori and the Crown, not only in the service of evaluating past actions but also with the aim of creating better relations for the future. This article offers a brief account of biculturalism and “treaty partnership” in three overlapping modes: as an emergent and then hegemonic political discourse; as generating a new historiography; and in terms of the reframing and bureaucratization of research practices in Aotearoa New Zealand. In this milieu, research ethics is not simply a matter of interpersonal politics but, in fact, has become a matter of governmentality—that is, of regulating the conduct of researchers as subjects of particular forms of state power.","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49311093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10266803
Yanna P. Yannakakis
This article addresses the opportunities and challenges for researching the history of Indigenous custom during a period in which constitutional and legal reform have led to the recognition of customary law as an official framework for local governance and the administration of justice in Oaxaca, Mexico. The article begins by situating Oaxaca’s laws within the context of broader neoliberal reforms in Latin America characterized by the promulgation of multicultural constitutions recognizing the legal jurisdiction and cultural autonomy of Indigenous communities. Some Indigenous intellectuals, activists, and NGOs working in Oaxaca have declared this new administrative arrangement a victory for Indigenous rights to self-determination, arguing that customary law serves as a defensive wall against state and corporate incursions of many kinds. Other local Indigenous scholars have nuanced the custom-law and community-state oppositions, situating customary law—currently referred to as “Indigenous normative systems”—as historical and contested, and in dynamic interplay with relationships of power within and beyond the community. The article’s author considers these debates about custom’s ambiguous meanings and effects and reflects on how the recent context of legal reform nourishes the author’s own scholarship on the colonial period by providing a broad temporal, cultural, and political framework with which to understand its stakes. The author also explores how historians researching Oaxaca’s deep past can meet the interpretive demands of their discipline while being attentive to historical justice and engaging the communities whose ancestors occupy center stage in our histories.
{"title":"Interpreting the History of Native Custom in Oaxaca, Mexico","authors":"Yanna P. Yannakakis","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10266803","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10266803","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article addresses the opportunities and challenges for researching the history of Indigenous custom during a period in which constitutional and legal reform have led to the recognition of customary law as an official framework for local governance and the administration of justice in Oaxaca, Mexico. The article begins by situating Oaxaca’s laws within the context of broader neoliberal reforms in Latin America characterized by the promulgation of multicultural constitutions recognizing the legal jurisdiction and cultural autonomy of Indigenous communities. Some Indigenous intellectuals, activists, and NGOs working in Oaxaca have declared this new administrative arrangement a victory for Indigenous rights to self-determination, arguing that customary law serves as a defensive wall against state and corporate incursions of many kinds. Other local Indigenous scholars have nuanced the custom-law and community-state oppositions, situating customary law—currently referred to as “Indigenous normative systems”—as historical and contested, and in dynamic interplay with relationships of power within and beyond the community. The article’s author considers these debates about custom’s ambiguous meanings and effects and reflects on how the recent context of legal reform nourishes the author’s own scholarship on the colonial period by providing a broad temporal, cultural, and political framework with which to understand its stakes. The author also explores how historians researching Oaxaca’s deep past can meet the interpretive demands of their discipline while being attentive to historical justice and engaging the communities whose ancestors occupy center stage in our histories.","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48653621","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10266858
Bonny Ibhawoh
Human rights doctrine is founded on a notion of universality and inalienability. However, critics of the dominant formulation of “universal” human rights claim that it privileges Western epistemology and does not adequately reflect the histories and lived experiences of Indigenous communities. This has prompted calls for a more inclusive conceptualization and theorization of human rights that takes equal account of Indigenous histories and rights traditions. This article makes a case for reconceptualizing universal human rights to reflect the epistemologies of historically marginalized communities. Drawing on debates in African history, it calls for a counterhegemonic approach to human rights that goes beyond possessive individualism and the neoliberal, state-centered rights model. To be truly universal, international human rights must take equal account of the communal and collectivist ethos that underpins Indigenous notions of human dignity.
{"title":"Inalienable Dignity: Writing Counterhegemonic Universal Human Rights Histories","authors":"Bonny Ibhawoh","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10266858","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10266858","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Human rights doctrine is founded on a notion of universality and inalienability. However, critics of the dominant formulation of “universal” human rights claim that it privileges Western epistemology and does not adequately reflect the histories and lived experiences of Indigenous communities. This has prompted calls for a more inclusive conceptualization and theorization of human rights that takes equal account of Indigenous histories and rights traditions. This article makes a case for reconceptualizing universal human rights to reflect the epistemologies of historically marginalized communities. Drawing on debates in African history, it calls for a counterhegemonic approach to human rights that goes beyond possessive individualism and the neoliberal, state-centered rights model. To be truly universal, international human rights must take equal account of the communal and collectivist ethos that underpins Indigenous notions of human dignity.","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44145533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10117390
J. Stair
{"title":"Trail of Footprints: A History of Indigenous Maps from Viceregal Mexico","authors":"J. Stair","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10117390","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10117390","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48994537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10117246
Jonathan Quint
This article reveals how Lake St. Clair Ojibwe communities limited newcomer encroachment and maintained territorial sovereignty by strategically absorbing and then expelling a community of Moravian missionaries and Christian Lenape. In 1782 the Ojibwe allowed Moravians to settle in a liminal Ojibwe hunting territory on the Clinton River. Over five years the settlement expanded, with conflict and cooperation defining Moravian engagement with Ojibwe land tenure and interactions with surrounding communities. Through oratory and formal and informal social practices like verbal warnings, threats, and intimidation, the Ojibwe mediated disputes, regulated Moravian use of land and resources, and attempted to curtail environmental destruction. This article reveals how the Moravian community encountered and experienced Ojibwe land tenure practices, the consequences of transgressing Ojibwe law, and how Ojibwe communities resisted encroachment on traditional lands and territories.
{"title":"New Gnadenhutten, Moravian Missionaries, and Ojibwe Land Tenure on the Clinton River, 1781–1787","authors":"Jonathan Quint","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10117246","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10117246","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article reveals how Lake St. Clair Ojibwe communities limited newcomer encroachment and maintained territorial sovereignty by strategically absorbing and then expelling a community of Moravian missionaries and Christian Lenape. In 1782 the Ojibwe allowed Moravians to settle in a liminal Ojibwe hunting territory on the Clinton River. Over five years the settlement expanded, with conflict and cooperation defining Moravian engagement with Ojibwe land tenure and interactions with surrounding communities. Through oratory and formal and informal social practices like verbal warnings, threats, and intimidation, the Ojibwe mediated disputes, regulated Moravian use of land and resources, and attempted to curtail environmental destruction. This article reveals how the Moravian community encountered and experienced Ojibwe land tenure practices, the consequences of transgressing Ojibwe law, and how Ojibwe communities resisted encroachment on traditional lands and territories.","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43906660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10117336
Sarah Quick
S P R I N G & F A L L 2 0 2 0 W I C A Z O S A R E V I E W Hungry Listening is a disciplinary reckoning. The book argues that settlers listen to Indigenous music and sounds through settler colonial musical logics. This book has two primary audiences: Indigenous and nonIndigenous. Some of the moments directed to Indigenous readers are open to nonIndigenous readers like myself to witness and learn. Others contain unexplained knowledge or exist in spaces where I am not invited. Robinson also directly asks nonIndigenous readers to name and reject settler logics of listening, composing, performing, and writing. Robinson hopes for transformative intersectional work between Indigenous and nonIndigenous scholars. He models this intersectional work in Hungry Listening by drawing on multiple disciplines and speaking to multiple positionalities. The book title is a concept developed by Robinson, which he explains in the introduction. It is an English translation of two Halq’eméylem words: (1) shxwelítemelh (“the adjective for settler or white person’s methods/things” [p. 2]), which is based on the word Stó:l ̄ o people (xwélmexw) used for starving White settlers in the midnineteenthcentury gold rush; and (2) xwélalà:m (listening). Robinson also provides an overview of his critique of “inclusionary music” and “inclusionary performance” as musical contexts in which Indigenous content is mined for aesthetic interest and “fit”— or assimilated— into Hungry Listening: Resonant Theory for Indigenous Sound Studies by Dylan Robinson University of Minnesota Press, 2020
你的听力是一种纪律的清算。你的听力是一种纪律的清算。这本书认为，定居者通过定居者的殖民音乐逻辑来聆听土著音乐和声音。这本书有两个主要的读者:土著和非土著。一些针对土著读者的时刻也对像我这样的非土著读者开放，可以见证和学习。还有一些包含无法解释的知识，或者存在于我不被邀请的地方。罗宾逊还直接要求非土著读者说出并拒绝定居者关于听、作曲、表演和写作的逻辑。罗宾逊希望在土著和非土著学者之间进行变革性的交叉研究。他在《饥饿的倾听》中模仿了这种交叉的工作，利用了多个学科和多个立场。书名是罗宾逊提出的一个概念，他在前言中对此进行了解释。它是两个Halq ' emsamylem单词的英文翻译:(1)shxwelítemelh(“定居者或白人的方法/事物的形容词”[p. 1]。[2])，它基于Stó这个词:l ā o people (xw录影带)，用于19世纪中期淘金热中饥饿的白人定居者;(2) xw lalacom:m(听)。罗宾逊还概述了他对“包容性音乐”和“包容性表演”的批评，将其作为音乐背景，在这些音乐背景中，土著内容被挖掘用于审美兴趣，并“适合”或同化于明尼苏达大学迪伦·罗宾逊出版社2020年出版的《饥饿倾听:土著声音研究的共振理论》
{"title":"Hungry Listening: Resonant Theory for Indigenous Sound Studies","authors":"Sarah Quick","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10117336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10117336","url":null,"abstract":"S P R I N G & F A L L 2 0 2 0 W I C A Z O S A R E V I E W Hungry Listening is a disciplinary reckoning. The book argues that settlers listen to Indigenous music and sounds through settler colonial musical logics. This book has two primary audiences: Indigenous and nonIndigenous. Some of the moments directed to Indigenous readers are open to nonIndigenous readers like myself to witness and learn. Others contain unexplained knowledge or exist in spaces where I am not invited. Robinson also directly asks nonIndigenous readers to name and reject settler logics of listening, composing, performing, and writing. Robinson hopes for transformative intersectional work between Indigenous and nonIndigenous scholars. He models this intersectional work in Hungry Listening by drawing on multiple disciplines and speaking to multiple positionalities. The book title is a concept developed by Robinson, which he explains in the introduction. It is an English translation of two Halq’eméylem words: (1) shxwelítemelh (“the adjective for settler or white person’s methods/things” [p. 2]), which is based on the word Stó:l ̄ o people (xwélmexw) used for starving White settlers in the midnineteenthcentury gold rush; and (2) xwélalà:m (listening). Robinson also provides an overview of his critique of “inclusionary music” and “inclusionary performance” as musical contexts in which Indigenous content is mined for aesthetic interest and “fit”— or assimilated— into Hungry Listening: Resonant Theory for Indigenous Sound Studies by Dylan Robinson University of Minnesota Press, 2020","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44928093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-01DOI: 10.1215/00141801-10117354
I. Tonat
{"title":"Doodem and Council Fire: Anishinaabe Governance through Alliance","authors":"I. Tonat","doi":"10.1215/00141801-10117354","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1215/00141801-10117354","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51776,"journal":{"name":"Ethnohistory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43370957","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：