Write in brief about
Feminist History
Marxist History
Subaltern History
answers should be long at Least 10 points. no spams
Answers
Answer:
MARK ME AS BRAINLIST,
AND FOLLOW ME.
1) Faminist History
:- It is also not to be confused with the history of feminism, which recounts the history of the feminist movements. Feminist historians, instead, include “cultural and social investigations” in the job description. Feminist history came into being as women began writing accounts of their own and other women's lives.
2) Marxist History
:- Marxist historiography, or historical materialist historiography, is a school of historiography influenced by Marxism. ... Marxist history is sometimes criticized as deterministic: with some practitioners positing a direction of history: towards an end state of history as classless human society.
3) Subaltern History
:- The South-Asian history of colonialism told from the perspective of those who were not a part of the political and/or economic elite; in other words, a non-white and a non-Eurocentric historical narrative of colonialism - that is subaltern history.
Answer:
Explanation:
Marxist historiography, or historical materialist historiography, is a school of historiography influenced by Marxism. The chief tenets of Marxist historiography are the centrality of social class and economic constraints in determining historical outcomes. While Marxist historians all follow the tenets of dialectical and historical materialism, the way Marxist historiography has developed in different regional and political contexts has varied. In particular, Marxist historiography has had unique trajectories of development in the West, in the Soviet Union, and in India, as well as in the Pan-Africanist and African American traditions, adapting to these specific regional and political conditions in different ways.
Marxist historiography has made contributions to the history of the working class, oppressed nationalities, and the methodology of history from below. The chief problematic aspect of some aspects of Marxist historiography has been an argument on the nature of history as determined or dialectical; this can also be stated as the relative importance of subjective and objective factors in creating outcomes. Marxist historians have also made this critique, particularly social historians who emphasize the need for a more humanist, historically contingent, Marxism.
Marxist history is sometimes criticized as deterministic:[1][2][3] with some practitioners positing a direction of history: towards an end state of history as classless human society. Marxist historiography, that is, the writing of Marxist history in line with the given historiographical principles, is often seen as a tool. Its aim is to bring those oppressed by history to self-consciousness, and to arm them with tactics and strategies from history: it is both a historical and a liberatory project.
Historians who use Marxist methodology, but disagree with the mainstream of Marxism, often describe themselves as marxist historians (with a lowercase M). Methods from Marxist historiography, such as class analysis, can be divorced from the liberatory intent of Marxist historiography; such practitioners often refer to their work as marxian or Marxian.