Talk:Long nineteenth century
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
 | This article is written in British English with Oxford spelling (colour, realize, organization, analyse; note that -ize is used instead of -ise) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
 | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Short twentieth century was merged into Long nineteenth century on 27 August 2023. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Long 19th century - Hobsbawm's original idea? edit
Hobsbawm wasn't original in this one. Fernand Braudel coined the term "long 16th century" in his book "The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip II" which Hobsbawm transferred to the 19th century. Philosopher12 (talk) 15:08, 20 August 2011 (UTC)
Subject of article edit
Before anyone can expand this article I'd like to ask for a clarification. Is this article about the period itself, or the theory of the period? Closely related is the question, is this theoretical period well-known and respected enough to use as a fundamental article in the WikiProject History? Recently, I've been looking for an article that fits this time frame to follow the Postclassical Era and precede Contemporary history. It would fill the hole in "middle" Modern history, as there seemed to be no main article for that time frame. But it sounds like this time period might be set for an entirely different system of time periods (i.e. it is followed by the "short twentieth century"). I request more opinions on this matter. Thank you.
— InvaderCito (talk) 02:23, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
Article's scope edit
Hi! I came here via France in the long nineteenth century. It begins with a single sentence in the lead, followed by a list: "The history of France from 1789 to 1914 (the long 19th century) extends from the French Revolution to World War I and includes:.." The following article, without doubt well written, deals with the course of events. There is not a hint for this selective time frame.The reader might find out, if he chooses to follow the link here. First thing i did, was to add the {{italic title}} tag, as it is a literary phrase and not an element of a formal historiographic framework. However, here is my point, i was not able to find a direct and clearly stated primary - nor a reliable secondary source for it. What i was able to insert (with sufficient refs) in the article is: "Numerous authors, before and after Hobsbawm's 1995 publication, have applied similar forms of book titles or descriptions to indicate a selective time frame for their works...". I think it is necessary to check, whether a full featured history article associated with this phrase is justified. If so, WP should expect dozens of other "Long century" titled books to come forth and demand such honors soon. I am aware of Hobsbawm's eminence, but at least the article France in the long nineteenth century should include a clarification. All the BestWikirictor (talk) 19:57, 11 January 2017 (UTC)