Introduction

Reports on the economy, environment and identity often initiate debates concerning globalization, migration, devolution and displacement and usually the erosion of place in the modern world. In academia, with the decline of grand narratives, many scholars unanimously accept theoretical approaches that preach ‘multiple sites of belonging’. Identities are no longer rooted in single, stable locales and individuals once regarded as out of place are now more easily situated in a world of process and elasticity. In historical studies, a preoccupation with place is associated with the rise of cultural history and a proliferation of micro-studies, most scholars engaging with their own unique places. Though always overtly and appropriately contextualized, these studies do not always speak to each other, even when situated within the same region. As a result, historians have been overwhelmed by detail and greater efforts are required by scholars to identify commonalities in studies of different places.

There is no better time for historians to engage with the work of geographers. Almost all historians study particular places, and place is the geographer's principle object of study. The subject, however, is unfamiliar territory to many scholars, and remains a slippery subject, even to the specialist. Most academics, for example, use the terms place and space interchangeably. Often, place is simply regarded as a set of coordinates, or a point on a map.