Subject: RE: Empires Re-done
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 09:16:44 -0400


Mrembo,

Your question is excellent and I have thought in the vicinity of it for some
time.  It is virtually impossible, however, to answer it succinctly and I
wouldn't claim to be competent to answer it at length.  There are huge
differences in economic structures and technologies in general not to
mention that the Roman Empire changed substantially over its course as did
the British Empire--so the endeavour of synthesizing each side in
preparation for a comparative also presents substantial problems.

Pretty much a non-answer, eh?  But it leads me to the question of
post-colonial theory and the practice of history.  I am interested in
looking at the Roman Empire (in, say, its first three centuries) through the
lens of post-colonial theory, or perhaps utilizing the fruits of
post-colonial analysis of the British Empire.  So, what would list members
offer as the most compelling examples of where post-colonial theory has
transformed social historical research?  That is to say, where are these
fruits most obvious so that a scholar of religion in the Roman Empire can
see the benefit of post-colonial theory improving historical research?

Mrembo, if you want to formulate things more specifically, I'll take another
run at it.

 --jwm
_____________________________________________________________________
John W. Marshall                     Assistant Professor
                                     Department for the Study of Religion
                                     University of Toronto
john.marshall-AT-utoronto.ca




     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---