Text
E-book Chronologics : Periodisation in a Global Context
At a first conference in Frankfurt, in 2016, we met to discuss Les usages de la temporalité dans les sciences sociales.9 Then, our focus was on the disciplines and their particular ways of structuring and shaping the past. We asked since when certain disciplines had begun to use specific periodisation schemes, and whether these schemes, and with them the introduction of temporality as a key concept for the writing of history, had changed the discipline and its methods and sources of study. We also questioned whether there were particular ways of (not) handling temporality in, say, Anthropology, Sociology, Philosophy, Geography, History, Art History and Literary Studies and how this had changed over time and in the history of the respective discipline. And we aimed to find out to what extent periodisation schemes were important elements in the self-perception of certain disciplines. Each of the disciplines, so it appeared, had its own semantics, and accordingly, its own rules of narrative, discourse and practice—its own chronologics. A specific disciplinary chronologics, therefore, would always (only) be able to express specific disciplinary contents, but when this chronologics becomes naturalised, these limitations are often no longer critically reflected. Accordingly, we asked questions about the transferability, translatability and reproducibility of perio-disation schemes, moving betwixt and comparing between the disciplines and their conceptions in the francophone and germanophone traditions.A comparative approach again drives this volume. This time, we engage in a regionally expansive global examination of periodisation schemes. The interdisci-plinary perspective, taken in our first conference and volume and the transregional perspective taken here, allow for a reconsideration of the transferability as well as the non-transferability of concrete historical periodisation schemes. This may help us work out categories of historical analysis that go beyond disciplinary as well as national or civilisation-bound interpretative patterns. The essays in this volume therefore focus on travelling Eurochronologies, as they will be called by some of our authors, or chronotypes, as they are called by others—particular forms of periodisation which are often modelled puts it in his chapter. We suggest the study of the (non-)transferability of specific peri-odisation schemes (or chronotypes) in different historical and regional situations. We offer thoughts on the possibility of coming up, in this process of dialogic negotiation, with new tools or categories of historical analysis, that may go beyond conventional interpretive patterns.
Tidak tersedia versi lain