Journal Articles by Oded Y Steinberg
Journal of Modern Jewish Studies, 2023
This essay delves into the humanitarian response of British
Jews towards the suffering of the Arm... more This essay delves into the humanitarian response of British
Jews towards the suffering of the Armenians during the
Hamidian massacres (1894–7). The essay argues that this
humanitarian act is a very early and hardly known attempt
by Jews to aid members of other non-Jewish groups. This
“external” humanitarian act perhaps fits the scholarly
argument concerning the nineteenth century’s watershed
of humanitarianism: the transition from an earlier more
inward-looking based relief action, to aiding, in the name
of all humanity, other, distinct religious or ethnic groups.
Most importantly, as this essay argues, these Jewish
humanitarian activities mainly derived from rational,
practical reasons, primarily resulting from Jewish
vulnerability. Rational rather than sentimental
humanitarianism, hence, was the main cause for the
humanitarian response of British Jews. Indeed, the essay
argues, the endorsement of the Armenians was an
influential affair in Britain, moving the public as well as
British Jews into action. However, some British Jews, and
interestingly also German Jews objected to any formal or
even non-formal support that might endanger their Jewish
brethren in the Ottoman Empire. The support of the
Armenians, thus, was also controversial, arousing inner
conflicts within the community and even between British
Jews and German Jews.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Historical Journal, 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
GLOBAL INTELLECTUAL HISTORY, 2022
In this article, we locate a tendency to revert to ‘Western,’ ‘national,’ and/or ‘racial’ times d... more In this article, we locate a tendency to revert to ‘Western,’ ‘national,’ and/or ‘racial’ times during periods of intense uncertainty or ‘crisis’ when individuals and societies seek to make sense of the present through the past, drawing upon the concept of a ‘time-border.’ We suggest this tendency is a ‘conventional’ pull in temporal thinking that has recurred in modern time cultures. In our own present, this reversion appears to be occurring despite novel approaches to time and periodization in historical research over the past thirty years, prompting a radical reformulation of how historians study the past (in terms of the influence of the global turn or Deep Turn and big history on notions of historical time, or new periodizations of the Anthropocene and posthumanism). This innovative approach to time jostles uneasily against the pull towards ‘conservative,’ linear, and national/racialised time often found in public discourse — highlighting the tension, as well as the reciprocity, between linear and cyclical approaches to time in lived experience and historiography. Throughout the essay, the urgency to reconsider notions of historical time and periodization in view of the coronavirus pandemic is a key theme tying together an analysis of time, periodization, and historiography.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
History of European Ideas , 2021
The essay elucidates the intellectual and historiographical phenomenon of migration to the forefr... more The essay elucidates the intellectual and historiographical phenomenon of migration to the forefront by engaging with the perceptions of the Teutonic/Germanic migrations of the fifth century among a few major Victorian ethnologists and historians. It focuses particularly on the unique view of the ethnologist and philologist Robert Gordon Latham (1812-88). While many Victorian historians of the mid-nineteenth century became obsessed with the Teutonic narrative, arguing that these ancient tribes had conquered vast territories of Europe, Latham, in contrast, downplayed the impact of Teutonism, discounted the vastness of the Teutonic expansion in Europe and expressed his doubts regarding the alleged Teutonic purity of the English nation. Instead, Latham advocated for an ethnological investigation, drawing conclusions which were critical of the very influential Teutonic narrative that he considered misleading, since it was founded solely on superfluous ancient historical sources. Latham's challenge of the prevailing thesis, hence, reflected a heightened mid-nineteenth century debate between ethnology and history. Rather than delving into the historical migrations themselves, the study of the perception of Teutonic migrations contributes to the understanding of how these historians and ethnologists differentiated between 'ideal' and 'destructive' historical migrations while inserting different meanings to the concepts of 'race' and 'language'.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Études arméniennes contemporaines, 2018
The diplomat, jurist and historian, James Bryce (1838-1922), the “Byron” of Armenia, as one Armen... more The diplomat, jurist and historian, James Bryce (1838-1922), the “Byron” of Armenia, as one Armenian text referred to him, was the greatest advocate for the Armenian cause in Britain for over four decades. Although Bryce attempted to influence British policy from the late 1870s, he only enjoyed partial success. Following the massacre of Sasun (1894), a certain change occurred when Bryce’s unceasing pledge for the Armenian communities received greater support in Britain. During the 1894-1896, maybe for the first time since the “Bulgarian Horrors” of 1876, there were calls in Britain for a substantial action against the Sublime Porte due to its ill-treatment of the minorities living under its rule. Depending on vast archival material, this essay explores Bryce’s view of the internal British political, diplomatic and public spheres in the years preceding the massacres and especially between 1894-1896. During these three years, Bryce adopted a different course of action and began to turn his efforts to the American public. This new measure was taken, following Bryce’s hope that an American intervention will be far more effective than the ongoing futility of the European powers.
Le diplomate, juriste et historien James Bryce (1838-1922) a été le plus grand avocat de la cause arménienne en Grande-Bretagne pendant plusieurs décennies. Cet article retrace un itinéraire militant depuis les années 1870, mettant l’accent sur le tournant constitué par les années 1894-1896, lors desquelles ses appels en faveur des Arméniens et d’une intervention auprès de la Sublime Porte remportèrent un grand écho, non seulement en Grande-Bretagne mais aussi aux États-Unis.
Keywords: James Bryce; Armenian Massacres; Armenia; Realpolitik; Sasun
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The historical profession in Oxbridge underwent dramatic change during the 1860s and 1870s. From ... more The historical profession in Oxbridge underwent dramatic change during the 1860s and 1870s. From an amateur profession, lacking a substantial curriculum, it became an established profession with canonical figures and set-texts. Parallel to the emergence of a new academic history in the early 1870s, Alfred Marshall (1842–1924) a young Cambridge don and moral scientist (and later famous economist) was engaged in wide reading of historical literature. The essay identifies three stages in Marshall’s historical reading, as evidenced by the notes he took, an essay he wrote at this time, and the historical sections of his later published economic works. The three stages illuminate the emerging historical profession, especially in Cambridge.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Cambridge University Press
The Victorian historian E. A. Freeman (1823–92), following Thomas Arnold, promoted the innovative... more The Victorian historian E. A. Freeman (1823–92), following Thomas Arnold, promoted the innovative idea of the “unity of history,” according to which history was a linked, recurring cycle without the artificial boundary of periods. In recent research, however, it is little noticed, that along with this “unity” theory, Freeman also emphasized the ruptures and the divisions in history. It is even less noticed that Freeman devised a unique periodization, which abolished 476 AD as the date marking the fall of Rome. Thus, the very idea of the “unity of history” seems to contradict the use of periods. The former stressed historical continuum while the latter denoted historical ruptures. This article argues that Freeman’s notion of “race” could, in most cases, solve the apparent tension between these two “divergent” ideas (unity vs. periods). Nevertheless, it is also argued, that Freeman, in some exceptional cases, identified other factors, besides race (i.e. religion), as transforming the innate racial belonging and the predestined course of history
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
James Bryce became captivated with Armenia after reaching the summit of Mount
Ararat in his 1876 ... more James Bryce became captivated with Armenia after reaching the summit of Mount
Ararat in his 1876 expedition. Bryce’s association with Armenia became well known
from his (and Arnold Toynbee’s) famous Blue Book on the Armenian Genocide
(1916). However, only a handful of studies have been published about Bryce’s lifelong,
and especially about his “early,” Armenian engagements. As this article aims
to show, his Armenian mission from the 1870s until the massacres of 1894–1896
deserves greater attention. In these years Bryce attempted to stir up awareness of
the suffering of the Armenian communities in the Ottoman Empire. These efforts
were mainly aimed toward the internal British scene. Some followed Bryce’s lead
and supported his Armenian cause, while others doubted his reports and regarded
them as “exaggerations.” Bryce’s comprehension of the Armenian Question resulted
from his general assessment of the power struggle between the major European
powers. This struggle has in recent years become, as seen for instance in Donald
Bloxham’s 2005 book, a central theme in the study of the Armenian Question. In
the context of this power struggle, especially between Britain and Russia, Bryce had,
quite uniquely, grasped the ominous potential of the Armenian Question by the
end of the 1870s. As elaborated in the article, despite Bryce’s firm position about
the urgent need to intervene in Armenia, there was an almost unbridgeable gap
during these years between his moral or ideological stance and the actual abilities of
the British government. In short, a breach existed between Bryce’s compulsion and
Britain’s realpolitik constraints.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Conferences by Oded Y Steinberg
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Books by Oded Y Steinberg
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Book Reviews by Oded Y Steinberg
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Papers by Oded Y Steinberg
The Historical Journal
Go to Armenia, and you will not find an Armenian. They, too, are an expatriated nation, like the ... more Go to Armenia, and you will not find an Armenian. They, too, are an expatriated nation, like the Hebrews…The Armenian has a proverb: ‘In every city of the East I find a home.’ They are everywhere; the rivals of my people, for they are one of the great races, and little degenerated: with all our industry, and much of our energy…Benjamin Disraeli, Tancred; or, The new crusade (1847)
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Global Intellectual History
In this article, we locate a tendency to revert to ‘Western,’ ‘national,’ and/or ‘racial’ times d... more In this article, we locate a tendency to revert to ‘Western,’ ‘national,’ and/or ‘racial’ times during periods of intense uncertainty or ‘crisis’ when individuals and societies seek to make sense of the present through the past, drawing upon the concept of a ‘time-border.’ We suggest this tendency is a ‘conventional’ pull in temporal thinking that has recurred in modern time cultures. In our own present, this reversion appears to be occurring despite novel approaches to time and periodization in historical research over the past thirty years, prompting a radical reformulation of how historians study the past (in terms of the influence of the global turn or Deep Turn and big history on notions of historical time, or new periodizations of the Anthropocene and posthumanism). This innovative approach to time jostles uneasily against the pull towards ‘conservative,’ linear, and national/racialised time often found in public discourse — highlighting the tension, as well as the reciprocity, between linear and cyclical approaches to time in lived experience and historiography. Throughout the essay, the urgency to reconsider notions of historical time and periodization in view of the coronavirus pandemic is a key theme tying together an analysis of time, periodization, and historiography.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
The English Historical Review, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Journal Articles by Oded Y Steinberg
Jews towards the suffering of the Armenians during the
Hamidian massacres (1894–7). The essay argues that this
humanitarian act is a very early and hardly known attempt
by Jews to aid members of other non-Jewish groups. This
“external” humanitarian act perhaps fits the scholarly
argument concerning the nineteenth century’s watershed
of humanitarianism: the transition from an earlier more
inward-looking based relief action, to aiding, in the name
of all humanity, other, distinct religious or ethnic groups.
Most importantly, as this essay argues, these Jewish
humanitarian activities mainly derived from rational,
practical reasons, primarily resulting from Jewish
vulnerability. Rational rather than sentimental
humanitarianism, hence, was the main cause for the
humanitarian response of British Jews. Indeed, the essay
argues, the endorsement of the Armenians was an
influential affair in Britain, moving the public as well as
British Jews into action. However, some British Jews, and
interestingly also German Jews objected to any formal or
even non-formal support that might endanger their Jewish
brethren in the Ottoman Empire. The support of the
Armenians, thus, was also controversial, arousing inner
conflicts within the community and even between British
Jews and German Jews.
Le diplomate, juriste et historien James Bryce (1838-1922) a été le plus grand avocat de la cause arménienne en Grande-Bretagne pendant plusieurs décennies. Cet article retrace un itinéraire militant depuis les années 1870, mettant l’accent sur le tournant constitué par les années 1894-1896, lors desquelles ses appels en faveur des Arméniens et d’une intervention auprès de la Sublime Porte remportèrent un grand écho, non seulement en Grande-Bretagne mais aussi aux États-Unis.
Keywords: James Bryce; Armenian Massacres; Armenia; Realpolitik; Sasun
Ararat in his 1876 expedition. Bryce’s association with Armenia became well known
from his (and Arnold Toynbee’s) famous Blue Book on the Armenian Genocide
(1916). However, only a handful of studies have been published about Bryce’s lifelong,
and especially about his “early,” Armenian engagements. As this article aims
to show, his Armenian mission from the 1870s until the massacres of 1894–1896
deserves greater attention. In these years Bryce attempted to stir up awareness of
the suffering of the Armenian communities in the Ottoman Empire. These efforts
were mainly aimed toward the internal British scene. Some followed Bryce’s lead
and supported his Armenian cause, while others doubted his reports and regarded
them as “exaggerations.” Bryce’s comprehension of the Armenian Question resulted
from his general assessment of the power struggle between the major European
powers. This struggle has in recent years become, as seen for instance in Donald
Bloxham’s 2005 book, a central theme in the study of the Armenian Question. In
the context of this power struggle, especially between Britain and Russia, Bryce had,
quite uniquely, grasped the ominous potential of the Armenian Question by the
end of the 1870s. As elaborated in the article, despite Bryce’s firm position about
the urgent need to intervene in Armenia, there was an almost unbridgeable gap
during these years between his moral or ideological stance and the actual abilities of
the British government. In short, a breach existed between Bryce’s compulsion and
Britain’s realpolitik constraints.
Conferences by Oded Y Steinberg
Books by Oded Y Steinberg
Book Reviews by Oded Y Steinberg
Papers by Oded Y Steinberg
Jews towards the suffering of the Armenians during the
Hamidian massacres (1894–7). The essay argues that this
humanitarian act is a very early and hardly known attempt
by Jews to aid members of other non-Jewish groups. This
“external” humanitarian act perhaps fits the scholarly
argument concerning the nineteenth century’s watershed
of humanitarianism: the transition from an earlier more
inward-looking based relief action, to aiding, in the name
of all humanity, other, distinct religious or ethnic groups.
Most importantly, as this essay argues, these Jewish
humanitarian activities mainly derived from rational,
practical reasons, primarily resulting from Jewish
vulnerability. Rational rather than sentimental
humanitarianism, hence, was the main cause for the
humanitarian response of British Jews. Indeed, the essay
argues, the endorsement of the Armenians was an
influential affair in Britain, moving the public as well as
British Jews into action. However, some British Jews, and
interestingly also German Jews objected to any formal or
even non-formal support that might endanger their Jewish
brethren in the Ottoman Empire. The support of the
Armenians, thus, was also controversial, arousing inner
conflicts within the community and even between British
Jews and German Jews.
Le diplomate, juriste et historien James Bryce (1838-1922) a été le plus grand avocat de la cause arménienne en Grande-Bretagne pendant plusieurs décennies. Cet article retrace un itinéraire militant depuis les années 1870, mettant l’accent sur le tournant constitué par les années 1894-1896, lors desquelles ses appels en faveur des Arméniens et d’une intervention auprès de la Sublime Porte remportèrent un grand écho, non seulement en Grande-Bretagne mais aussi aux États-Unis.
Keywords: James Bryce; Armenian Massacres; Armenia; Realpolitik; Sasun
Ararat in his 1876 expedition. Bryce’s association with Armenia became well known
from his (and Arnold Toynbee’s) famous Blue Book on the Armenian Genocide
(1916). However, only a handful of studies have been published about Bryce’s lifelong,
and especially about his “early,” Armenian engagements. As this article aims
to show, his Armenian mission from the 1870s until the massacres of 1894–1896
deserves greater attention. In these years Bryce attempted to stir up awareness of
the suffering of the Armenian communities in the Ottoman Empire. These efforts
were mainly aimed toward the internal British scene. Some followed Bryce’s lead
and supported his Armenian cause, while others doubted his reports and regarded
them as “exaggerations.” Bryce’s comprehension of the Armenian Question resulted
from his general assessment of the power struggle between the major European
powers. This struggle has in recent years become, as seen for instance in Donald
Bloxham’s 2005 book, a central theme in the study of the Armenian Question. In
the context of this power struggle, especially between Britain and Russia, Bryce had,
quite uniquely, grasped the ominous potential of the Armenian Question by the
end of the 1870s. As elaborated in the article, despite Bryce’s firm position about
the urgent need to intervene in Armenia, there was an almost unbridgeable gap
during these years between his moral or ideological stance and the actual abilities of
the British government. In short, a breach existed between Bryce’s compulsion and
Britain’s realpolitik constraints.