ANTHROPOLOGY AND HISTORY LM – 2025-2026

File:Bandiera italiana foto.svg   File:Flag of the United Kingdom (3-5).svg

Teacher: Prof. Giulia Casentini
E-mail: giulia.casentini@uniroma2.it
CFU: 6
Course code: 804002389
Degree: Master’s Degree “Scienze della Storia e del documento”
SSD: SDEA-01/A (ex M-DEA/01)		 Course delivery modalities: In-presence
Language: Italian
Pre-requisites: None
Attendance: Optional
Assessment method: Oral examination
Period: 1st term
Starting day: Monday, 10 November 2025
Class hours
Monday, 4.00 p.m. – 6.00 p.m., Classroom P2
Tuesday, 11.00 a..m. – 1.00 p.m., Classroom T18
Wednesday, 11.00 a..m. – 1.00 p.m., Classroom T28
Program:

The module will follow different phases:
– Fieldwork, critical ethnocentrism, the concept of culture, the interpretation: the instruments of anthropology.
– Archive, time, use of the sources: critical perspective of historiography.
– The study and understanding of the encounter between disciplines: making ‘culture’ entering history, making ‘time’ entering anthropology; analysis of the international debate.
– Ibn Khaldun, anthropology or history? Locating the debate outside the Western world.
– The use of the two disciplines in the methodology of the research in Italy: Ernesto De Martino, Carlo Ginzburg, Alessandro Portelli.
– The colonial experience, the postcolonial phase, and their narratives: case studies to analyse the encounter between history and anthropology.
Text books:
  1. C. Ginzburg, Il formaggio e i vermi, Milano, Adelphi, 2019 (ed. or. 1976).
  2. E. De Martino, Sud e Magia, Torino, Einaudi, 2024 (ed. or. 1959) (exstracts).
  3. A. Portelli, L’ordine è già stato eseguito. Roma, le Fosse Ardeatine, la memoria, Milano, Feltrinelli, 2012 (ed. or. 1999) (exstracts).
Bibliography:
  • Bloch, M., Apologia della storia, o il mestiere di storico, Einaudi, 2009 (ed. or. 1949).
  • Geertz, C., Interpretazione di culture, Il Mulino, 2019 (ed. or. 1973).
  • Sahlins, M., Le dimensioni atemporali della storia nell’antico regno del Congo, per esempio. In D. Graeber e M. Sahlins, Il potere dei re, Raffaello Cortina 2019 (ed. or. 2017).
  • Cohn, B.S., History and Anthropology: The State of the Play, in «Comparative Studies in Society and History» 22, 2 (1980): 198-221.
  • Wolf, E. R., L’Europa e i popoli senza storia, Il Mulino, 1990.
  • Said, E., Orientalismo, Feltrinelli, 2008 (ed. or. 1978).
  • Stoler, A., Along the archival grain: epistemic anxieties and colonial common sense, Princeton University Press, 2010.
  • Dore, G., Antropologia e colonialismo italiano: rassegna di studi di questo dopoguerra, in La Ricerca Folklorica, No.1, Apr. 1980.
  • Khaldun, I., Muqadimmah (ed. or. 1377).
  • Signorelli, A. e Sanga, G., De Martino: Etnografia e Storia, in «La Ricerca Folklorica», Vol. 76-77, 2014.
  • Portelli, A., Un lavoro di relazioni. Osservazioni sulla storia orale, 2000
  • Casentini, G., Al di là del fiume: storia e antropologia di un confine africano (Ghana e Togo), Viella, 2015.
Educational goals and expected learning outcomes:
A) Learning Outcomes: The module analyses the complex and unfolding relationship between theories and methods in history and anthropology, and related debates. Particular attention shall be dedicated to transdisciplinary research that combines archive, ethnographic approach, and oral history. We shall propose a critical analysis of the reading of texts and experiences that may shed light on difference and convergences between the two disciplines, especially focusing on the state-society relation, colonialism, and the role of memory.
B) Knowledge and Understanding: The module aims at preparing students to understand the divergences and convergences between the two disciplines, in their historic relation and political tensions. Particular attention shall be devoted to the productive encounter between history and anthropology, and the positive contribution to the development of modern social sciences.
C) Applying Knowledge and Understanding: Through analytical skills developed during the module, students shall be able to make the most of the knowledge provided by anthropology in its relationship with history. Students will be encouraged to put into practice this knowledge for their future research in a critical and creative manner.
D) Making Judgements: The analysis of the interdisciplinary debate aims at providing the critical ability and the autonomy in constructing a personal thought, but also the capacity to navigate autonomously the possibilities produced by different disciplines in dialogue.
Methods and criteria for verifying the learning:
The exam assesses the student’s overall preparation, the ability to combine knowledge about each part of the syllabus, the coherence of argumentation, the analytical ability, and the autonomy of judgment. In addition, the student’s command of language and clarity of presentation are also assessed, in adherence with the Dublin descriptors (1. knowledge and understanding; 2. applying knowledge and experience; 3. making judgments; 4. learning skills; 5: communication skills).
The final grade will be based 70% on the student’s depth of knowledge and 30% on the student’s ability for expression (written and oral) and independent critical thinking.
The exam will be evaluated according to the following criteria:
– Failed: significant deficiencies and inaccuracies in the knowledge and the understanding of the subject matter; poor analytical and synthesizing skills, recurrent generalizations, limited critical and judgmental skills; the arguments are exposed inconsistently and with inappropriate language.
– 18-20: Knowledge and understanding of topics barely adequate, with occasional generalizations and imperfections possible; sufficient capacity for analysis synthesis and autonomy of judgment, the arguments are frequently exposed in an incoherent manner and with inappropriate/non technical language.
– 21-23: Fair knowledge and understanding of the subject; proper analysis and synthesis skills with coherent, logical argumentation, but with language that is often inappropriate/non technical.
– 24-26: Moderate knowledge and understanding of the subjects; good analytical and synthesis skills with arguments expressed rigorously but with language that is not always appropriate/technical.
– 27-29: Comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the subjects; remarkable analytical and synthesis skills. Good autonomy of judgment. Topics expounded rigorously and with appropriate/technical language.
– 30-30L: Excellent level of in-depth knowledge and understanding of the subjects. Excellent skills in analysis, synthesis, and independent judgment. Arguments are expressed in an original way and with appropriate technical language.
Teaching methods:
The module is structured in lectures and tutorials, in which students will be encouraged to prepare, present and discuss in class papers, articles, books indicated in the bibliography.
Attendance modalities:
Attendance, which is optional, is strongly recommended.
Previous year Following year