The theme of the 2019 annual meeting of the American Historical Association will be “Loyalties”Historians in the News
tags: AHA, American Historical Association
Loyalty and disloyalty are forms of human attachment often associated with the history of politics. Yet loyalties function on multiple levels. Individually, or in groups, humans commit themselves to communities, loved ones, principles, a leader, a nation, a religion, an ideology, or an identity. Loyalties stabilize human society, undergird political and social hierarchies, promote courage and cowardice, disguise ethical lapses, and generate revolutions. The determination to maintain old loyalties or devise new ones can become a foundation for building nations, waging war, transforming and imagining new forms of human community, or defending institutions that maintain traditional ways of life.
Loyalties require communication, ritual, and imagery. They can be hegemonic or the outcome of powerful shifts in popular consciousness. Loyalties can also be disseminated through the propagation of ideas, or take the form of nostalgia, distracting from contemporary problems or complexities. Whether social, cultural, religious, economic, or political, loyalties can conceive a path to a utopian future, identifying those who are an impediment to that future as disloyal or as permanently loyal to an outsider group. Divided loyalties might also pose a problem: At what point, for example, can loyalty to party, faith, or community overwhelm loyalty to the nation?
We are interested in proposals that compare questions of conflicting or changing loyalties across time, space, and human experience—whether religious, ethnic, gendered, national, or otherwise—and how they have shaped trajectories of change. After a revolution, opponents of the new regime are often faced with a choice between swearing allegiance—thus betraying the values and leaders to whom they had promised loyalty—and imprisonment, exile, or execution. In contrast to such formal public dilemmas, loyalties that regulate private life can involve forms of expectation and obedience that are often unspoken, generationally specific, or resisted as archaic.
2019 Program Committee
Claire Bond Potter, The New School, 2019 chair
Brian W. Ogilvie, Univ. of Massachusetts Amherst, 2019 co-chair
Emily Clark, Tulane Univ.
Evan N. Dawley, Goucher Coll.
Ada Ferrer, New York Univ.
Durba Ghosh, Cornell Univ.
Julie A. Golia, Brooklyn Historical Society
David N. Myers, Univ. of California, Los Angeles
Kenneth A. Osgood, Colorado Sch. of Mines
Amy Godfrey Powers, Waubonsee Community Coll.
Liz Robbins, Chicago Public Schools
Mark D. Sheftall, Bucknell Univ.
Timothy J. Smit, Eastern Kentucky Univ.
Thabiti Willis, Carleton Coll.
Loyalties can encompass a wide range of human attachments that might be based on politics, family, ethnicity, race, religion, class, clan, culture, partisanship, economics, nation, region, ties to the military, marriage, sex, and gender. Proposed panels might address the relationship among loyalties, and between loyalty and disloyalty. Disloyalty might take many forms: for example, revolution, treason, promise breaking, rejection of faith or national language, outmigration, or sexual infidelity. Furthermore, the determination to live outside of, or break from, family, religion, race, country, and community, while often raising questions of law, also inevitably positions these acts as simultaneously loyal and disloyal. Loyalty to self or principle might trigger fulfillment, and at the same time, accusations of disloyalty may result in shame, ostracism, or even death. Disloyalty to one’s own principles might be a necessary compromise to acting on loyalty to something larger than the self: beloved others, country, or co-religionists.
We look forward to a rich and varied set of proposals that will explore these issues. Proposals will be neither advantaged nor disadvantaged, however, by their relationship to the theme. The Program Committee will evaluate all proposals based on their individual strengths.
comments powered by Disqus
- Waitman Wade Beorn: Historians can and should draw parallels between the 1930s and today
- "Never underestimate human stupidity," says historian Yuval Harari whose fans include Bill Gates and Barack Obama
- Oxford professor counts 93 penises in Bayeux Tapestry
- Medieval Scholars Call for Transparency and Anti-Racism at Conference
- Robert Dallek's FDR Book Invites Comparisons To Trump's Presidency