Microhistory

The intensive investigation of a small unit of research (e.g. an event, community, or individual) to trace and reveal broader social/historical phenomena.

Emerged in the 1970s-80s, esp. in Italy, as a reaction against traditional historiography, which emphasised grand narratives and broad generalisations, and social history’s reliance on quantitative data.

Key works include Ginzburg’s The Cheese and the Worms (1976), about a 16th century Italian miller, and Levi’s Inheriting Power (1985), about a peasant uprising.

Privileging “ego documents” (first-hand accounts) to explore historical actor’s experiences, and tracking clues through multiple sources to discover hidden connections.

Emphasis on the “exceptional normal”; an event that seems unusual or anomolous, but which becomes a window into important everyday patterns, values or ideas.

Instead of focusing on the “genius” of an individual inventor, a microhistorian might reconstruct the social networks, material practices, and cultural assumptions that shaped a particular development or breakthrough.

Influenced by Geertzian ideas of thick description.

• [?] What specific limitations in social history and Annales School approaches were the microhistorians reacting against?
• [⎈] Provide concrete examples of how microhistorians use specific practices like tracking clues across sources, reconstructing social networks, and experimenting with narrative form.
• [⎈] Reflect on the critique that microhistory is merely anecdotal or antiquarian. How have microhistorians responded to charges that their work lacks representativeness, or fails to speak to larger historical questions?

Backlinks

: Prosopography