O interesse pelos antecedentes hispânicos estadunidenses foi uma das causas que deram origem à historiografia norte americana sobre a América Latina; no início, muito dedicada às regiões de fronteira. A posterior ampliação dos estudos e do enfoque para temas de todos os países guarda relação com motivações vindas, muitas vezes, das preocupações da política exterior estadunidense para a área. Imersos nesse grupo, os primeiros estudos sobre o Brasil ganharam vida nos Estados Unidos perto de 1930 e um grande vigor a partir de 1959, em virtude da Revolução Cubana. O objetivo do presente trabalho é analisar o desenvolvimento das pesquisas sobre a história brasileira produzidas nos Estados Unidos, aqui conhecidas pelo termo brasilianismo, buscando, principalmente, refletir sobre a sua posição em relação à dos demais países latino-americanos e, ao mesmo tempo, entender a obra sobre o Brasil de maior repercussão de um importante membro do grupo: o historiador Thomas Elliot Skidmore. Tal estudo se justifica na medida em que o mencionado autor foi um dos elementos fundamentais no processo de consolidação dos estudos brasileiros nos Estados Unidos. Representante mais conhecido dos brasilianistas que vieram para o Brasil após o impulso dado pela Revolução Cubana, Thomas E. Skidmore escreveu, em 1967, sua primeira obra sobre a política brasileira de 1930 a 1964. A importância do seu livro para a historiografia e o público leitor brasileiro, assim como de outras obras brasilianistas, está relacionada ao seu ineditismo no que se refere à abordagem do passado republicano a partir de 1930, mas sua análise interna permite captar seus posicionamentos em relação às várias correntes presentes no campo como a teoria da modernização. / The interest in North American Hispanic antecedents was one of the reasons that originated the North American historiography about Latin America, at the beginning, very dedicated to regions of frontier. The subsequent extension of studies and approach in themes of all countries keep in touch with motivations, many times, derivated from worries about foreign policies with the area. Immersed in this group, the firsts studies about Brazil came to life in the United States about 1930 and had a great vigor from 1959 due to Cuban Revolution. The aim of this current work is to analyze the development of researches about the Brazilian history produced in the United States, here known as \"brasilianismo\", trying to reflect, mainly, about its position in relation to the others Latin American countries and, at the same time, to understand the work on Brazil of larger repercussion of an important member of the group: the historian Thomas Elliot Skidmore. Such study justifies itself in proportion to the mentioned author was one of the fundamental elements at the consolidation process of the Brazilian studies in the United States. He was the representative more known among the brazilianists who came to Brazil after the Cuban Revolution impulse, Thomas E. Skidmore wrote, in 1967, his first work about Brazilian policy from 1930 to 1964. The importance of his book to the historiography and the Brazilian reader, as other brazilianists books, is related to his unpublished work in that it refers to the approach of the republican past starting from 1930, but its internal analysis allows to capture its positionings in relation to the several present currents in the field as the modernization theory.

Esta tese investiga a recepção, entre 1982 e 2002, da obra de Edward Palmer Thompson (1924-1993) na produção discente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em História da Unicamp (PPGHU), instituição que se destacou, no período, pela elevada frequência, em teses e dissertações, de referências a textos thompsonianos e pelo envolvimento de discentes/docentes na produção de edições brasileiras de escritos do historiador inglês. Apontada, desde os anos 1980, como uma das principais influências na historiografia brasileira, a obra de E. P. Thompson tem recebido, mais recentemente, estudos sistemáticos sobre sua recepção no Brasil. Nesta pesquisa, apoiando-nos em considerações teórico-metodológicas de, especialmente, Roger Chartier (leitura e apropriação) e de Michel de Certeau (operação historiográfica) e em variada documentação (dissertações e teses, entrevistas, artigos e resenhas, balanços bibliográficos e documentos institucionais diversos do PPGHU), exploramos relações do mencionado processo de recepção com as transformações pelas quais passavam as instituições universitárias de produção historiográfica nacionais (salientando aspectos específicos da dinâmica institucional do PPGHU) e com as conjunturas sócio-político-culturais brasileiras do período (enfatizando seus impactos sobre importantes concepções vigentes entre os historiadores). Investigamos, também, a circulação, no Brasil, das edições (nacionais e estrangeiras) de obras de E. P. Thompson, destacando as variadas formas de participação, em publicações brasileiras de textos do historiador inglês, de docentes e de discentes do PPGHU e, finalmente, analisamos as opções de leitura da obra thompsoniana que os últimos realizaram, as apropriações que empreenderam e os resultados destas nos trabalhos que produziram, sempre considerando como estes dialogaram com debates historiográficos e referências teórico-metodológicas que então hegemonizavam a produção dos (sub)campos disciplinares em que se inseriam. Em nossa pesquisa, fica evidente o caráter criativo/produtor do processo de apropriação empreendido pelo historiadores nacionais aqui enfocados, os quais se mostraram capazes de levar conceitos e noções de E. P. Thompson a terrenos e limites que, dificilmente, ele poderia imaginar. / This thesis investigates the reception, between 1982 and 2002, of the works of Edward Palmer Thompson (1924-1993) in student productions of the Postgraduate Programme in History of the University of Campinas, also known as Unicamp, (PPGHU). The institution stood out during this period for the significant number of references to Thompsonian texts, both in theses and dissertations, and the involvement of students and academics in the production of Brazilian editions of the writings of the English historian. Since the 1980s, E.P. Thompsons work has been indicated as one of the main influences on Brazilian historiography, being the object of recent systematic studies on its reception in the country. Based on theoretical and methodological considerations, especially from Roger Chartier (reading and appropriation) and Michel de Certeau (historiographical operation), and varied documentation (dissertations and theses, interviews, articles and reviews, bibliographic assessments and diverse institutional documents from PPGHU), we explore the relationship between the reception process previously mentioned and the changes experienced by university institutions of national historiographic production (accentuating specific aspects of PPGHU institutional dynamics), while additionally considering the social, political and cultural conjuncture of Brazil in the period (emphasising its impact on important current concepts among historians). We also investigate the circulation of national and foreign editions of E. P. Thompsons works, underlining the different forms of participation, in Brazilian editions, of both academics and students from PPGHU. Finally, we analyse the reading options of the Thompsonian work chosen by the latter, their appropriation, and the results in the work produced, taking into account how students developed a dialogue with historiographic debates and theoretical-methodological references that dominated the disciplinary (sub)fields to which they belonged. It is evident from our research that there are both creative and productive characteristics in the process of appropriation performed by the national historians here analysed, who were capable of bringing E.P. Thompsons concepts to territories he could hardly have imagined.

A tirania é um dos elementos mais marcantes das Histórias e da escrita da história das Histórias. Dentre as várias vertentes de estudo que debatem este aspecto da obra do autor de Halicarnasso, há uma querela específica que discute se ele tinha uma visão pejorativa ou neutra em relação à tirania. A partir, em especial, de meados do século XX, as novas tendências da historiografia passaram a valorizar aspectos marginalizados da história até então, e os estudos herodotianos passaram a ser (re)vistos em conformidade com essas mudanças. À luz desta tendência atual, que entende o texto herodotiano como unidade textual, proponho uma leitura desta controvérsia pelo viés da ambigüidade e da tragédia. Dentro desta perspectiva, reis e tiranos têm um importante papel na narrativa ao compor a forma através da qual Heródoto expressa seu pensamento político na obra, pensamento este relacionado com suas preocupações em torno do exercício do poder. / Tyranny is one of the most remarkable elements of the Histories and of Histories\' historiography. Among many academic approaches which discuss this aspect concerning the narrative of this Halicarnassos author, there is a specific discussion about the possibility of a pejorative or a neutral vision of tyranny. From the middle of the twentieth century on, the new historiographical tendencies have valued marginal aspects of history, so, the herodotean studies started to be reviewed according to these changes. In the light of this current tendency, that understands the herodotean text as a textual unity, I propose a reading of this controversy through the perspective of ambiguity and tragedy. In this perspective, kings and tyrants have an important role in the narrative by composing the form through which Herodotus expresses his political thought in his work, a thought related to his concerns with the exercise of power.

O estudo a seguir investiga as origens e o contexto histórico de um conceito historiográfico, a saber, a chamada tese do conflito entre a ciência e a religião. Segundo esta tese, a prática científica possuiria uma indisposição natural e recíproca para com as práticas religiosas, levando-as a um conflito inevitável e historicamente verificável. Os próceres dessa interpretação foram John William Draper (1811-1882), James Young Simpson (1811-1870) e Andrew Dickson White (1832-1918), sobre o qual este trabalho se debruça. White foi, dentre os três, o único que ocupou cadeiras universitárias de ensino de História, sendo considerado um dos primeiros historiadores profissionais dos Estados Unidos da América. Ao longo de décadas elaborou uma série de artigos que, compilados, lhe renderam sua Magnum opus em dois volumes, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. A pesquisa se concentra em três eixos fundamentais: a) o contexto biográfico religioso de Andrew White, sua maturação filosófica e sua atuação como professor universitário, bem como o contexto histórico mundial e local no qual a obra foi produzida, rebuscando especialmente sua relação com a Universidade de Cornell; b) uma verticalização analítica dos conceitos históricos e epistemológicos empregados por White, procurando esquadrinhar as especificidades dos termos religião, ciência e teologia, bem como a retórica discursiva do autor; e finalmente c) uma apreciação histórica do desenvolvimento da Crítica Bíblica na Europa e nos Estados Unidos da América e de sua influência na obra de A. D. White. O trabalho revela de que forma o contexto político e mental do século XIX propiciou o surgimento de metáforas bélicas em diversos âmbitos, oferece razões históricas e sociais que explicam a origem do suposto conflito entre a ciência e a religião, apresenta um mapeamento conceitual da obra de White e a relevância da ascensão da Crítica Bíblica como um caminho para assegurar a secularização da prática científica. / The following study investigates the origins and the historical context of a historiographical concept, namely, the so called conflict thesis between science and religion. According to this thesis, scientific practice is endowed with a natural and mutual indisposition regarding religious practices, bringing them to an inevitable and historically verifiable conflict. The champions of this interpretation were John William Draper (1811-1882), James Young Simpson (1811-1870) and Andrew Dickson White (1838-1918), this work dwelling upon the latter. White was, among the three, the only one to occupy university chairs of History teaching, and is considered one of the first professional historians of the United States of America. Throughout decades he elaborated a series of articles that, after compilation, rendered his Magnum opus in two volumes, A History of the Warfare of Science with Theology in Christendom. This research focuses in three fundamental axis: a) the religious biographical context of Andrew White, his philosophical maturation and his procedure as university professor, as well as the world and local historical context under which the work was yield, rummaging specially its relation to Cornell University; b) an analytical and vertical exposition of the historical and epistemological concepts employed by White, so as to scan the specificities of the terms religion, science and theology, as well as the discursive rhetoric of the author; and finally c) a historical appreciation of the development of Biblical Criticism in Europe and United States of America and its influence upon the work of A. D. White. The work reveals in which way the political and mental context of the 19th century propitiated the emergence of martial metaphors in diverse spheres, offers historical and social reasons that explain the origin of the supposed conflict between science and religion, presents a conceptual mapping of Whites work and the relevance of Biblical Criticism as a way to secure the secularization of the scientific practice.

This thesis is a study of the oldest Islamic chronological history still extant: the Tārīkh (‘Chronicle’) of the Basran ḥadīth scholar and historian Khalīfa b. Khayyāṭ al-ʿUṣfurī (d. 240/854), which covers the political and administrative history of the Muslim polity between year 1/622 and 232/847. Despite its early date, Khalīfa’s Tārīkh has received little attention in modern scholarship and its value for understanding the development of early Islamic historiography has generally been disregarded. The purpose of this study is, therefore, to reassess the Tārīkh by analysing both the text and its context of compilation. After outlining Khalīfa’s biography (Ch. 1) and his social and intellectual context (Ch. 2), the thesis examines different aspects of Khalīfa’s Tārīkh in comparison to the wider Islamic historical tradition: his sources (Ch. 3), methods (Ch. 4), arrangement of material (Ch. 5) and narrative treatment of key themes in the early tradition (Chs. 6–7). The thesis thereby provides an in-depth study of one of the earliest Muslim historians and his methods of compilation, which is important for both the study of Islamic historiography and the usage of such sources in historical scholarship on early Islam. It is argued that Khalīfa’s role as a ḥadīth scholar and his early Sunnī outlook is reflected throughout the content of the Tārīkh. This is particularly evident in Khalīfa’s selection of sources, which consist of mainly Basran transmitters including numerous major ḥadīth scholars, and in his narration of controversial events such as the early civil wars, which displays an early Sunnī perspective. It is also suggested that Khalīfa’s particular selection and arrangement of material was largely determined by his aim to compile a critical and concise chronology of the political and administrative history of the Muslim community. Moreover, the thesis shows that, while the Tārīkh differs from many other early histories, it bears some resemblance to other chronographies compiled by early ḥadīth scholars—such as the works of al-Fasawī (d. 277/890), Ibn Abī Khaythama (d. 279/892) and Abū Zurʿa al- Dimashqī (d. 282/895) as well as the sections on post-Prophetic history in some ḥadīth collections such as Ibn Abī Shayba’s (d. 235/849) Muṣannaf. By comparing Khalīfa’s Tārīkh with these works, the thesis draws attention to this type of historical writing among some early ḥadīth scholars, which has so far been neglected in modern studies on early Islamic historiography.

Esta tese estuda a produção de história local por historiadores amadores e historiadores profissionais. As principais fontes para este estudo foram os anais dos eventos Raízes e Marcas do tempo, que ocorreram entre 1990 e 2010 no Litoral Norte do Rio Grande do Sul. Inicialmente será apresentada a criação dos encontros de história local, sua organização, os diversos tipos de autores que participaram destes projetos e suas vinculações com os poderes públicos municipais. A partir desta contextualização será abordada a organização dos intelectuais locais em redes de sociabilidades que se empenharam na produção de história e cultura locais no Litoral Norte/RS. Serão apresentadas as mediações culturais constituídas entre os intelectuais locais e suas estratégias de legitimação internas e externas. Por fim, através da análise das “marcas de historicidade” presentes nos textos publicados pelos intelectuais locais nos anais do Raízes e Marcas do tempo, iremos estabelecer uma discussão sobre a produção de História fora do ambiente universitário e as relações entre História, Memória e Identidade apresentadas nestas produções. Com isso pretendemos contribuir para as reflexões sobre o Ofício do Historiador. / This thesis’ goal is study the production of local History by amateur historians and professional historians. The main sources of this study were the annals of the event called Raízes and Marcas do Tempo which occurred from 1990 to 2010 at the North Coast of Rio Grande do Sul. Firstly it will be introduced how these local History meetings were created, its organization, the diversification of authors that participated in these projects and their links with Municipality Public Power. Within this contextualization, the thesis will approach the organization of these local intellectuals in sociability networks that put their efforts into producing local History and Culture at the North Coast of Rio Grande do Sul. Cultural mediation built among local intellectuals and the strategies of internal and external legitimating will be shown. Finally, by analyzing the "marks of historicity" present in published texts by the local intellectuals on the annals of Raízes e Marcas do Tempo, we will establish a discussion on the production of History outside of the academic environment as well as the relation between History, Memory and Identidy introduced in these works. Therefore, we intend to contribute to reflections concerning the Historian's Occupation.

A construção do passado do Cariri cearense, a partir da produção historiográfica de J. de Figueiredo Filho (1904-1973), é o objeto de investigação desta dissertação. Nascido na cidade do Crato, filho de um farmacêutico que fora referência na cidade, Figueiredo Filho seguiu a carreira do pai, cultivando o desejo de ver melhorias em sua terra. Imbuído do desejo de dar à sua terra natal um lugar digno perante as narrativas produzidas sobre o passado nacional, juntou-se a outros intelectuais da região e fundou o Instituto Cultural do Cariri (ICC). Com o objetivo de realizar a defesa intransigente da região sul do Ceará, esses sujeitos realizaram diversas ações para horar o passado regional: solenidades, construção de calendários cívicos, panteão de heróis, fundação de um museu. Associando-se a diversas agremiações intelectuais, como a Academia Cearense de Letras (ACL), o Instituto do Ceará (IC), a Associação Nacional dos Professores Universitários de História (Anpuh), Figueiredo Filho foi construindo sua imagem de intelectual comprometido com a causa regional e legitimando sua vasta produção sobre o Cariri. Do romance ao folclore, passando por autobiografia, estudos econômicos e a própria escrita da história, seu projeto girava em torno do espaço em que nasceu e viveu boa parte de sua vida. Nesse sentido, este trabalho procura compreender de que forma a historiografia de Figueiredo Filho construiu um passado para o Cariri. As fontes utilizadas foram a revista Itaytera, as publicações da ACL, do IC e da Anpuh, e o principal foco de análise foram os escritos de história produzidos por Figueiredo Filho, ou seja, História do Cariri (4 volumes) e Cidade do Crato. / The research subject of this thesis is the construction of the past of the Cariri region of Ceará from J. Figueiredo Filho’s historiographical production (1904-1973). Born in Crato, in the state of Ceará, son of a pharmacist well known in the city, Figueiredo Filho followed his father’s career, fostering the desire of seeing improvements in his land. Imbued by the desire of giving his fatherland its righteous place before the narratives produced about the national past, he joined other intellectuals from the region and founded the Instituto Cultural do Cariri (ICC). Aiming to achieve the uncompromising defence of the southern region of Ceará, these subjects performed several actions to honour the regional past: solemnities, the elaboration of civic calendars, a Heroes Pantheon, and the foundation of a museum. Partnering with several intellectual bodies, like the Academia Cearense de Letras (ACL), the Instituto do Ceará (IC), and the Associação Nacional dos Professores Universitários de História (Anpuh), Figueiredo Filho has built up his image as an intellectual committed with the regional cause and legitimising his own works on the Cariri region. From novel to folklore, to autobiography, to economic studies and his own writing of history, his project revolved around the space in which he was born and lived for the most part of his life. In this sense, this work aims to comprehend how Figueiredo Filho’s historiography built a past for Cariri. The historical sources used were the periodical Itaytera and the publications of the following institutions: ACL, IC and Anpuh, and the main focus of analysis was the history writings produced by Figueiredo Filho, that is to say, História do Cariri (4 volumes) and Cidade do Crato.

One of the central challenges in modern British historiography is the reconciliation of narratives about the nature and meaning of the British Empire with older themes of class and hierarchy. The historiographical shift to empire and away from class since the 1980s and 1990s coincided with a fundamental shift in Britain's social structure and composition, which itself demands historical explanation. The history of the British honours system - an institution that has blended ideas of class hierarchy with meritocracy and service - can reveal much about social change in twentieth century Britain and its empire. Using a mixture of official and unofficial sources and organized chronologically, my dissertation charts the history of the honours system from the creation of the Order of the British Empire in 1917 to a major set of reforms at the end of the twentieth century and the beginning of the twenty-first. Honours were an active tool of policy and social distinction. Government decisions about who should receive honours and what honours they should receive reveal the importance of different kinds of service and the social class of the individual to be honored. Applied across the whole empire, the system had a double edge: it produced loyalty and kept different social groups in their place. The ever-presence of the institution means that it gives us a consistent benchmark across the twentieth century for what kinds of service was seen as most in need of recognition at different times by the state. The creation of the Order of the British Empire in 1917 opened up the honours system to non-elites, women and a much larger proportion of imperial subjects for the first time, and vastly expanded the number of people who received honours. I argue that change in the honours system during the twentieth century was not a simple matter of linear `democratization', as it is usually portrayed in the British media and by the modern British monarchy and government. Instead, it reflected different priorities at different times. In the empire, the state used honours to buy loyalty from subjects in exchange for social and cultural distinction; however, its symbolism was also appropriated positively and negatively by different groups to make political claims on or against the imperial state. Changes in who got what honours almost always had a specific purpose, and were often rapid. Initially conceived as a way of rewarding voluntary war work, in peacetime the Order of the British Empire was reworked to become an honour where the majority of awards went to paid central state servants. In the aftermath of the Second World War, in which government experts were well-rewarded with honours, politicians and bureaucrats made an effort to distribute honours more widely around the community. Teachers, health workers and other providers of local services benefitted from this change, as the honours system within Britain expanded almost in direct correlation to its shrinking global influence as the British Empire fragmented. At the end of the century, John Major's Conservative government made a deliberate decision to focus once again on voluntary service to the state. This uncontroversial shift in focus helped to bring together two of the functions of the modern British monarchy: its role since the nineteenth century as the official leader of the voluntary sector, and its function as the authenticator of public recognition through the honours system. This theoretically `classless' reform to the honours system reinforced existing divisions in British society by distinguishing between lower-ranked voluntary work and high-ranked professional, philanthropic and celebrity service. There was no clear-cut distinction between merit and hierarchy in the honours system. As a result, in periods of major social change in twentieth-century Britain, honours had an active role in reshaping social hierarchies in Britain and in parts of the empire/former empire. Honours obfuscated the meaning of distinction in modern Britain through the system's connection to the monarchy and its broad use as a political, imperial and social tool. A complicated and entangled combination of personality, status, merit, peer review and luck determined who received what honours. As a result, Britain's premier system for publicly recognizing service and distinguishing status could never fully differentiate between these two functions. In part this was because those who ran it did not desire to separate hierarchy from distinguished service, and because such separation was effectively impossible within existing frameworks. Citizens, subjects, interest groups and post-colonial governments used honours to challenge political and social structures, but it was difficult to break out of the fundamental framework in which honours gave distinction and status in exchange for a performance of loyalty to the Crown. The only escape was the complete rejection of the system, which was a rare choice except in certain parts of the former empire.

Na epopéia homérica, a ágora, a assembléia do povo, constitui espaço privilegiado de interação social, servindo de cenário para a figuração de eventos importantes para a condução da trama, tanto da Ilíada quanto da Odisséia. No âmbito dos estudos homéricos, aqueles que se dedicam à análise histórica dos poemas têm feito largo uso desses episódios, na busca de chegar a explicações coerentes a respeito dos modos de operação da sociedade retratada na narrativa. Qual seria o papel das assembléias na sociedade homérica? Qual seria a constituição social do povo presente nessas reuniões? Seria ela conformada aos moldes de uma sociedade de caráter patriarcal ou refletiria as instituições das nascentes póleis arcaicas? Ou seria pura ficção, um amálgama de elementos contraditórios, não retratando uma sociedade que tivesse tido existência fora dos textos? O principal obstáculo para o encaminhamento dessas questões encontra-se na própria natureza dos textos homéricos. Elas são caras à nossa forma de perceber o mundo, mas não encontram eco no texto. Os poemas não apresentam registros que possibilitem respostas precisas para elas. Quando as questões que animam a interpretação buscam a clara delimitação das instâncias organizacionais da sociedade figurada na Ilíada e na Odisséia, a memória preservada, no registro épico da ágora homérica, apresenta-se para nós permeada de ambigüidade e indefinições, que, para serem rompidas, necessitam de esquemas de referências que possibilitem contextos a partir dos quais se possa empreender a análise. No presente trabalho, apresentam-se reflexão sobre a forma como a crítica especializada tem contornado tais problemas de interpretação e proposta de hermenêutica das cenas de assembléia na épica, tendo como fio condutor as questões da conformação da ágora como elemento definidor do estatuto da vida civilizada; da oposição entre assunto público e privado; e da natureza social do povo presente nas assembléias / In Homeric epic poems, the ágora, the assembly of the people, constitutes a privileged space of social interaction. It serves as stage set for portraying important events for plot conduction, both in the Iliad and the Odissey. In scope of Homeric studies, those engaged in historical analysis of the epic poems have made wide use of these episodes in search of coherent explanations, regarding the operational ways of the society portrayed throughout the narrative. Which would be the role of the assemblies in the Homeric society? Which would be the social constitution of the people present in these meetings? Would it be conformed to the moulds of a society of patriarchal character or would it reflect the institutions of the rising archaic pólis? Or would it be pure fiction, an amalgam of contradictory elements, not portraying a society that had had existence out of the texts? The main obstacle for the guiding of these questions meets in the proper nature of the Homeric texts. They are so dear to the way we perceive the world, but they don\'t find any echo in the text. The poems do not present registers that make possible accurate answers for the asked questions. When the questions that liven up the interpretation search the clear delimitation of the organizational instances of the society depicted in the Iliad and in the Odyssey, the memory preserved in the epic register of the Homeric ágora comes out pervaded by ambiguity and unclear settings, that, to be breached, need design of references that make possible contexts from which the analysis can be undertaken. This work presents a reflection on the form as the specialized critic has contoured such problems of interpretation and a proposal of hermeneutics of the assembly scenes in the epic, having as conducting wire the questions related to the conformation of the ágora as defining element of civilized life; the opposition between public and private subject; and the social nature of people present in the assemblies

This study examines the socioeconomics of state formation in medieval Afghanistan in historical and historiographic terms. It outlines the thousand year history of Ghaznavid historiography by treating primary and secondary sources as a continuum of perspectives, demonstrating the persistent problems of dynastic and political thinking across periods and cultures. It conceptualizes the geography of Ghaznavid origins by framing their rise within specific landscapes and histories of state formation, favoring time over space as much as possible and reintegrating their experience with the general histories of Iran, Central Asia, and India. Once the grand narrative is illustrated, the scope narrows to the dual process of monetization and urbanization in Samanid territory in order to approach Ghaznavid obstacles to state formation. The socioeconomic narrative then shifts to political and military specifics to demythologize the rise of the Ghaznavids in terms of the framing contexts described in the previous chapters. Finally, the study specifies the exact combination of culture and history which the Ghaznavids exemplified to show their particular and universal character and suggest future paths for research.