The Omohundro Institute posted their Storify of the Region & Nation in Race & Slavery Conference twitterfeed: Continue reading
Toward an Intellectual History of Black Women: An International Conference
April 28-30, 2011
Location: Columbia University’s Faculty House
“This conference features emerging work on black women’s contributions to black thought, political mobilization, creative work and gender theory. Scholarly Panels, Roundtables, and Keynote delivered by Professor Elizabeth Alexander will focus on black women as intellectuals across a broad geography including Africa, the Caribbean, North and South America, and Europe. Over a period of three days we aim to piece together a history of black women’s thought and culture that maps the distinctive concerns and historical forces that have shaped black women’s ideas and intellectual activities.
The conference is sponsored by Columbia University’s Center for the Critical Analysis of Social Difference (CCASD), Institute for Research in African American Studies (IRAAS), Institute for Research on Women and Gender (IRWAG), Institute for Social and Economic Research Policy (ISERP), Office of the Provost, and History…
View original post 12 more words
“…In the race for digitality, we find ourselves struggling to understand the relationship between our deep investments in discourses like intersectional feminism or critical race theory and digital humanities. The burden of representation falls on us. Our acts of representation should not be bids for power but for what [Barbara] Christian would call the need to become empowered – “seeing oneself as capable and having the right to determine one’s life” (61). At stake for us is not power in the putative hierarchies of digital humanities, rather the empowerment that our work on the African diaspora can effect.
To empower – ourselves, a new generation of scholars, diasporic subjects – we need to embrace multiplicity and the specificities of diaspora. We must answer Christian’s question, “For whom are we doing what we are doing?” (61) to make legible all our scholarship has to offer. This is, in part, a question of method – which tools do we use? We may recall Audre Lorde’s statement “the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house,” which comes up often in critiques of digital humanities, but we must not mistake the master. It’s not digital humanities – it’s the effects of white supremacy on knowledge production. That’s where we are called to intervene. But how…”
via the website:
“Race and Nation in the Age of Emancipations: A Symposium on the Atlantic World” seeks to explore the complicated relationship of race, citizenship, and national identity during the tumultuous long nineteenth century. By examining this connection in particular contexts within a broad Atlantic perspective, this symposium will contribute to a better understand of if, how, and why enslaved and free blacks throughout the Americas came to understand themselves as citizens of a particular nation (or possibly multiple nations) during the era of emancipation. Along with several panels focusing on varying aspects of this topic, the symposium will also feature a roundtable on the Atlantic World as a field, analytical concept, and pedagogical tool. Race and Nation is set to take place in Houston, Texas, on Rice University’s campus from February 21-22, 2014. The symposium is made possible thanks to generous funding from Rice University’s School of Humanities, the Department of History, the Humanities Research Center, the Program for the Study of Ethnicity, Race, and Culture, and the Graduate Student Association.
The conference hashtag is #raceandnation.
For more and full conference schedule: Race and Nation in the Age of Emancipations | A Symposium on the Atlantic World #RaceAndNation
Livetweeting courtesy of African Diaspora, Ph.D. on Twitter (@afrxdiasporaphd)
For more information, see here CONF: Biographies: Atlantic Slave Database Conference at MSU | African Diaspora, Ph.D. http://bit.ly/HSdWHA
Biographies: Atlantic Slave Database Conference
Michigan State University
November 8th & 9th 2013
“In 2011, with the support of the National Endowment for the Humanities, MSU’s History Department and MATRIX initiated Biographies: The Atlantic Slave Data Network (ASDN). We seek to provide a platform for researchers to upload, analyze, visualize, and utilize data they have collected, and to link it to other databases which together will complement each other in ways to create a much richer resource than the individual databases alone. There is a significant need for such a collaborative research platform. During the past two decades, there has been a seismic change in perception about what we can know about African slaves and their descendants throughout the Atlantic World (Africa, Europe, North and South America). Scholars have realized that, far from being either non-existent or extremely rare, various types of rich documentation about African slaves abound in archives, courthouses, newspapers, prisons, churches, government offices, museums, ports, and private collections. Since the 1980s, a number of major databases were constructed in original digital format and used in major publications of their creators. But they have lacked a platform for preservation and therefore are at risk of being lost as their creators retire. A growing number of collections of original manuscript documents have been digitized and are beginning to be made accessible free of charge over the Web. However, our task as historians is more than to preserve images of primary sources, but to interpret those sources by finding new ways to organize, share, mine and analyze as well as to preserve original materials which might otherwise be discarded or lost…”
Conference program is here.
The website is live and available here.
NOTE: African Diaspora, Ph.D. will be livetweeting a number of the panels. Follow @afrxdiasporaphd or the hashtag #ASBDmsu for more!
Hosted by University of California-Irvine:
While the transatlantic slave trade lasted nearly four centuries, over one quarter, or 2.9 million enslaved Africans, disembarked in the Americas-and to a lesser extent in Africa- after 1807. About 174,000 of this 2.9 million were “re-captured” by naval vessels, mainly British, charged with suppressing this traffic. These were the “Liberated Africans”. As this population crossed the boundaries of slavery and freedom many times, they reshaped their identities as their faced various systems of race and ethnic classification across imperial boundaries. The locally bounded and trans-nationally-linked meanings of slavery and freedom, as well as race and ethnicity in the nineteenth century will be the focus of this meeting. By gathering scholars experienced on digital research, the first goal of this conference is examining the use of databases, Geographical Information Systems, sound recordings, online storage, and other digital tools to maximize collaborative research, education, and outreach for African Diaspora Studies. The conference organizers gratefully acknowledge the generous co-sponsorship of the University of California Humanities Research Institute (UCHRI), the UC Irvine Humanities Collective, the Huntington Library, the UC-Cuba Academic Initiative, the Spatial History Project (Stanford University), the UCLA Department of History, the UC Berkeley Department of African American Studies, the UC Irvine Department of African American Studies, and the UC Irvine Department of History.
All sessions are free and open to public. For further information, please contact the UCI Department of History at (949) 824-6521 or email@example.com.
October 1-2, 2013
(H/T Jessica Millward on FB)
Esmé R. Cleall. “Emancipation, Slave-Ownership and the Remaking of The British Imperial World, University College London, 29–31 March 2012.” History Workshop Journal 75, no. 1 (April 1, 2013): 307–310.
This conference came out of the ESRC-funded Legacies of British Slave-Ownership Project (LBS) at University College London. Since April 2009 the LBS group has been investigating the legacies of British slavery, and in particular, the afterlife of the £20 million paid to slave-owners in compensation for the loss of their ‘property’ on the abolition of slavery in the British Empire in 1833. Nick Draper has been exploring the financial and economic legacies of the £20 million, including its reinvestment in the railways and the financial City of London. Catherine Hall has been tracing the cultural memory of slave-ownership and the rewriting of histories of Britain’s involvement in slavery over the course of the nineteenth century, particularly in the writings of the descendants of slave-owners. Keith McClelland has been tracing the political legacies of the slave-owners, including the enduring power of those who had received compensation money in the British Parliament, their representation of themselves as victims of abolition, the rewriting of their history to align themselves with anti-slavery and their search for new forms of labour and work discipline. With Rachel Lang and Ben Mechan the group have also constructed an online public database of slave-owners at the point of abolition; held six public-engagement workshops across Britain to bring together academic, community and family historians of slavery; and curated an exhibition on the ‘Slave-owners of Bloomsbury’. Katie Donnington’s forthcoming PhD on the Hibbert Family is also a valuable part of this project as is the Encyclopaedia of British Slave-ownership, based on the group’s findings, which will be published shortly. The conference was thoughtfully constructed to share, discuss and extend some of the core questions raised by the LBS research group – What was the character of the British imperial state? What happened to the planters and slave economy after slavery had been abolished? What free forms of labour were established? And how can historians connect with the public, museums and artists to explore these issues?
In the Winter 2013 issue of Emory Magazine, Emory University President James Wagner suggested the ‘3/5ths compromise’ was “a way to temper ideology and continue working toward the highest aspiration,” move beyond “polarization,” and “facilitated the achievement of what both sides of the debate really aspired to—a new nation.”
Excerpt from original column:
“…One instance of constitutional compromise was the agreement to count three-fifths of the slave population for purposes of state representation in Congress. Southern delegates wanted to count the whole slave population, which would have given the South greater influence over national policy. Northern delegates argued that slaves should not be counted at all, because they had no vote. As the price for achieving the ultimate aim of the Constitution—“to form a more perfect union”—the two sides compromised on this immediate issue of how to count slaves in the new nation. Pragmatic half-victories kept in view the higher aspiration of drawing the country more closely together…”