Method in Translation History. Reply to Critics

Published in 1998, Method in Translation History has received several criticisms, both directly and indirectly. These include objections to treating translation history as methodologically autonomous from political and economic history; accusations of presentism, instrumentalism, and excessive subjectivity; complaints about selective case studies and historical gaps; and concerns about focusing on translators as agents at the expense of institutions, audiences, or power structures. A blow-by-blow response defends methodological pluralism, reflexive empiricism, and multi-causal explanation, rejecting the idea that translation history should be subordinate to nationalized narratives. Translation history should be seen as a field of historical inquiry, grounded in human agency, interdisciplinarity, and critical self-awareness.