Two Decades of Anglophone Historical Writing on Colonial Mexico: Continuity and Change since 1980
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on colonial Mexico continues to be one of the most important sub- fields in the history of Latin America in the United States, but also enjoys considerable attention in Canada and Britain. Over the last twenty-five years or so the approach of English-speaking scholars to colonial Mexican history has changed perceptibly. The rise of cultural history, ethnohistory, and subaltern history, for example, are all fairly obvious trends, even if they were already on the horizon by 1980 or so. On the other hand, more traditional styles of work such as economic history have continued strong. The article traces these changes, both in general terms and by looking at a number of monographs and clusters of works. One conclusion of the essay is that the rise of cultural history, ethnohistory, and the search for “subaltern agency”in more recent historical writings, by de-emphasizing the scalar measurement of Mexican underdevelopment so characteristic of older types of writing, have made for a less grim and monochromatic image of colonial Mexican society. La investigación sobre el México colonial sigue siendo uno de los sub-campos más importantes de los estudios de la historia de América Latina en Estados Unidos; también disfruta de una atención notable en Canadá e Inglaterra. No obstante, durante los últimos veinticinco años los métodos y planteamientos de los historiadores anglófonos frente a la historia del México colonial han cambiado notablemente. El ascenso de la historia cultural, la etnohistoria, y la historia de grupos subalternos, por ejemplo, son tendencias bastante obvias, a pesar de que ya se vieran en el horizonte historiográfico desde 1980. Por supuesto, los trabajos tradicionales, como los que versan sobre historia económica, han seguido fuertes también. Este articulo esboza estos cambios, en términos generales como también a través del examen de varias obras monográficas y grupos de obras. Una conclusión del ensayo es que el ascenso de la historia cultural, la etnohistoria, y la búsqueda de la “agencia subalterna”en las obras históricas más recientes, ha pintado una imagen menos sombría y monocromática de la sociedad mexicana de la época colonial, al desenfatizar la medición del desarrollo mexicano como si existiera en una escala lineal (una característica del estilo de los trabajos más tradicionales).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".