In "The Age Of Extremes: 1914-1994 " Hobsbawm describes those years as "short" as opposed to the long 19th century. Is there any historiographic source that criticized this kind of distinction?
Has the paradigm of interpretation of the 20th century as "short" been criticized in historiography?
Modified 1 year, 9 months ago
Viewed 102 times
2Since cinema was invented in the late 1880's, and the fall of the twin towers can be compared to that of the Berlin wall, one can speak of a long twentieth century, lasting from the Lumiere age to the Iraq war, for instance; or, conversely, one might speak of a long twenty-first century, starting with the Perestroika; etc.– LucianAug 29, 2021 at 15:17
3History doesn't nicely align with centuries. It makes sense to pick important dates near the beginning and ending to characterize the century. 1914-1994 is a nice range because it mostly contains the battles between the fascist, communist and capitalistic ideologies for control. But it really depends on what story you are telling.– Gort the RobotAug 29, 2021 at 17:59
This is more a matter of organising book chapters than rigorous historical scholarship, I don't think it's really a paradigm or a subject of historiography.– Semaphore ♦Aug 31, 2021 at 6:03
Add a comment |