Parallels and Divergences: Perspectives on the Early Second Millennium

J. Arnason
{"title":"Parallels and Divergences: Perspectives on the Early Second Millennium","authors":"J. Arnason","doi":"10.1163/1570067043077887","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper argues that more conceptual clarification and a more equal development of comparative history are needed before we can attempt a synthetic interpretation of the early second millennium CE. In conceptual terms, the debate centres on the idea of formative historical phases, characterized by major and lasting innovations on the levels of cultural patterns and/or power structures; but the dynamics of such phases can only be analyzed in relation to long-term processes of two kinds: those that precede the episodes of accelerated change and those through which their consequences unfold. This problematic is briefly explored with reference to classical as well as contemporary sources. As for historical analyses and controversies, there are good reasons to regard the period in question as a phase of formative changes in various fields and in different parts of the Eurasian macroregion, but there is also a broad spectrum of conflicting interpretations, more structured in some cases than others. The two most thoroughly analyzed cases—and the clearest examples of transformative dynamics—are Western Christendom and Song China. Preliminary Reflections: Long-term Processes and Formative Phases Let us start with some reflections on the categories and perspectives of historical sociology. The latter (whether understood as a new branch or a comprehensive reorientation of sociological inquiry) is frequently defined in terms of a focus on long-term processes—or, in other words, a processual approach to the longue durée. This interpretation, most closely associated with Norbert Elias and his disciples, is one-sided in that it bypasses a problematic which goes back to classical sociology and becomes more explicit in the works of later authors, even if a selective emphasis on separate aspects tends to obscure the connections: the question of the relationship between long-term processes and formative phases. The latter term is, in brief and without touching upon issues to be discussed later, used to refer to relatively short periods of comprehensive, condensed and decisive change. Medieval 10,1-3_f3-11-40 11/4/04 11:51 AM Page 13","PeriodicalId":102259,"journal":{"name":"Eurasian Transformations, Tenth to Thirteenth Centuries","volume":"55 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eurasian Transformations, Tenth to Thirteenth Centuries","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1570067043077887","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper argues that more conceptual clarification and a more equal development of comparative history are needed before we can attempt a synthetic interpretation of the early second millennium CE. In conceptual terms, the debate centres on the idea of formative historical phases, characterized by major and lasting innovations on the levels of cultural patterns and/or power structures; but the dynamics of such phases can only be analyzed in relation to long-term processes of two kinds: those that precede the episodes of accelerated change and those through which their consequences unfold. This problematic is briefly explored with reference to classical as well as contemporary sources. As for historical analyses and controversies, there are good reasons to regard the period in question as a phase of formative changes in various fields and in different parts of the Eurasian macroregion, but there is also a broad spectrum of conflicting interpretations, more structured in some cases than others. The two most thoroughly analyzed cases—and the clearest examples of transformative dynamics—are Western Christendom and Song China. Preliminary Reflections: Long-term Processes and Formative Phases Let us start with some reflections on the categories and perspectives of historical sociology. The latter (whether understood as a new branch or a comprehensive reorientation of sociological inquiry) is frequently defined in terms of a focus on long-term processes—or, in other words, a processual approach to the longue durée. This interpretation, most closely associated with Norbert Elias and his disciples, is one-sided in that it bypasses a problematic which goes back to classical sociology and becomes more explicit in the works of later authors, even if a selective emphasis on separate aspects tends to obscure the connections: the question of the relationship between long-term processes and formative phases. The latter term is, in brief and without touching upon issues to be discussed later, used to refer to relatively short periods of comprehensive, condensed and decisive change. Medieval 10,1-3_f3-11-40 11/4/04 11:51 AM Page 13
相似与分歧:对第二个千年初期的看法
本文认为,在我们尝试对公元第二个千年早期进行综合解释之前,需要更多的概念澄清和更平等的比较历史发展。从概念上讲,辩论的中心是形成历史阶段的概念,其特点是在文化模式和(或)权力结构的各级上进行重大和持久的革新;但是,这些阶段的动态只能通过两种长期过程来分析:一种是在加速变化之前的过程,另一种是在它们的后果展现出来的过程。这个问题是简要探讨参考古典以及当代的来源。至于历史分析和争议,有充分的理由将这一时期视为欧亚宏观区域各个领域和不同地区形成变化的阶段,但也有广泛的相互冲突的解释,在某些情况下比其他情况更有条理。分析得最透彻的两个案例——也是最清晰的变革动力的例子——是西方基督教世界和宋朝。让我们从对历史社会学的范畴和观点的一些思考开始。后者(无论是被理解为社会学研究的一个新分支还是一个全面的重新定位)经常被定义为关注长期过程,或者换句话说,是一种长期研究的过程方法。这种解释与诺伯特·埃利亚斯(Norbert Elias)和他的门徒最密切相关,它是片面的,因为它绕过了一个问题,这个问题可以追溯到古典社会学,在后来的作者的作品中变得更加明确,即使有选择地强调不同的方面往往会模糊联系:长期过程和形成阶段之间的关系问题。简而言之,后一词不涉及后面要讨论的问题,用来指相对较短时期的全面、浓缩和决定性的变革。中世纪10,1-3_f3-11-40 11/4/04 11:51 AM第13页
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信