"Global history" that leaves out half of the globe
One would think that a work that claims to be "global" in scope would cover the entire world. So what should we make of the new book, A Companion to Global Historical Thought , that leaves out half of the globe? Is this ignorance, oversight, condescension, or what? Here is the citation: A Companion to Global Historical Thought (2014, edited by Prasenjit Duara, Viren Murthy, and Andrew Sartori; Wiley Blackwell. I haven't seen the actual book, just the table of contents and one chapter that an author had posted online. The first section, "Premodern historical thought," reviews history and historical thought in a variety of early traditions, from India to China to the Ottoman empire. So where is the New World? I checked the publisher's website, and found this blurb. I had to add two and a half words to avoid lying (I wouldn't want to post something blatantly incorrect, would I?): A Companion to Global Historical Thought provides an in-depth overview of th...