The Diffusion of Urban Medieval Representation: The Dominican Order as an Engine of Regime Change

Doucette, Jonathan Stavnskær

doi:10.1017/s1537592720002121

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 72 publications

(80 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on historical sources, we know much about when monarchs took over the throne and when they died or were deposed; therefore, this type of data can be coded with relatively high accuracy. Another example is recent research that uses the geographic location of ecclesiastical institutions (e.g., monasteries) to score theoretically relevant explanatory variables, which also can be accomplished with high precision based on extant sources (Doucette 2021).…”

Section: Three Particular Guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of History

Møller

2022

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The ongoing “historical turn” in political science makes it more important than ever that we, as a profession, have open conversations about the nature of the evidence we enlist from trained historians. This article emphasizes that “history” should be recognized as an—often speculative and incomplete—interpretation of bygone times and places that we no longer can know for sure. Much of what we commonly believe about the past depends on narrative sources written long after the fact and influenced by later circumstances and points of view, on outdated historical research, or on singular and often biased contemporary sources. Discussing how to respond to this “problem of history,” the article calls for a shift of cognitive style: that is, treating the work of historians in a more self-conscious and critical way and clearly signaling this when we present our research. Three more particular guidelines—be up-to-date, be specific, and be cautious—exemplify this approach.

show abstract

Section: Three Particular Guidelinesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Problem of History

Møller

2022

APSC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

When Is Old Too Old? The Problem of Leaning on Outdated Historical Work and a Simple Distinction between Two Kinds of Evidence to Address This

Møller

2024

International Studies Perspectives

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While international relations and comparative politics scholars are often hesitant to lean on old empirical findings in their own discipline, they have no similar qualms when it comes to the work of historians. This is sometimes problematic and sometimes not. To help political scientists who are going historical address this issue, I revisit prior methodological work by Cameron Thies, published in these pages, to introduce a distinction between two kinds of historical evidence: (i) “factual evidence,” which is relatively specific descriptive evidence that ages well and where there is often no alternative to enlisting older work, and (ii) “inferential evidence,” which is broader historical interpretations that tend to become outdated much more quickly. This distinction provides a shortcut for political scientists going historical who do not have the resources to systematically review historiography to document whether a certain piece of historical evidence has stood the test of time or not.

show abstract

Autocratic Succession and Urban Regime Change

Doucette

2022

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Diffusion of Urban Medieval Representation: The Dominican Order as an Engine of Regime Change

Cited by 4 publications

References 72 publications

The Problem of History

The Problem of History

When Is Old Too Old? The Problem of Leaning on Outdated Historical Work and a Simple Distinction between Two Kinds of Evidence to Address This

Autocratic Succession and Urban Regime Change

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About