{"title":"A történetiség fogalma a történeti tudományokban","authors":"Gyáni Gábor","doi":"10.57227/liter.2022.2.3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Historicity in the Historical Sciences \nNot every history writing is apt to apply the notion of historicity, the antique Greek and Roman ones surely do not use it: one cannot find in their narratives the trace of any temporal perspective. Martin Heidegger was the first, who elaborated in his fundamental ontology the concept of historicity, which, however, was already an integral element of the historist historical scholarship. The more recent influential notion of historical temporality was worked out later on by Reinhart Koselleck by postulating among others the concept of the„contemporaneity of the noncontemporaneous” (Gleichzeitigkeit der Ungleichzeitigen). This suggests that there does not exist an absolut present (and past and future), because the existents of different duration are simultaneously to be found and have their impact all at once at a given point of time. If the thesis is right then one can refute the notion of a teleologically determined linear evolution, which tends to assess any deviation from this as a purely deviant and deformed development. The case is further compounded by Fernand Braudel’s triad notion of historical temporality, which argues that the various existents (events and structures) have different durations. Taken all together it is recommended for historians to take seriously the temporal diversity available at a given moment, and not to try to making any effort for synchronizing the various time strata. \nKeywords: effective history, „contemporaneity of the noncontemporaneous”, revival, backwardness, synchronization of the various time strata","PeriodicalId":81044,"journal":{"name":"Cuadernos universitarios. Departamento de Literatura","volume":"71 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cuadernos universitarios. Departamento de Literatura","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57227/liter.2022.2.3","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
Historicity in the Historical Sciences
Not every history writing is apt to apply the notion of historicity, the antique Greek and Roman ones surely do not use it: one cannot find in their narratives the trace of any temporal perspective. Martin Heidegger was the first, who elaborated in his fundamental ontology the concept of historicity, which, however, was already an integral element of the historist historical scholarship. The more recent influential notion of historical temporality was worked out later on by Reinhart Koselleck by postulating among others the concept of the„contemporaneity of the noncontemporaneous” (Gleichzeitigkeit der Ungleichzeitigen). This suggests that there does not exist an absolut present (and past and future), because the existents of different duration are simultaneously to be found and have their impact all at once at a given point of time. If the thesis is right then one can refute the notion of a teleologically determined linear evolution, which tends to assess any deviation from this as a purely deviant and deformed development. The case is further compounded by Fernand Braudel’s triad notion of historical temporality, which argues that the various existents (events and structures) have different durations. Taken all together it is recommended for historians to take seriously the temporal diversity available at a given moment, and not to try to making any effort for synchronizing the various time strata.
Keywords: effective history, „contemporaneity of the noncontemporaneous”, revival, backwardness, synchronization of the various time strata
并不是所有的历史著作都倾向于使用历史性的概念,古希腊和古罗马的历史著作肯定不会使用它:人们在他们的叙述中找不到任何时间视角的痕迹。海德格尔是第一个在他的基本本体论中阐述历史性概念的人,然而,这一概念已经成为历史主义历史学术的一个组成部分。后来,莱因哈特·科塞莱克(Reinhart Koselleck)提出了“非同期的当代性”(Gleichzeitigkeit der Ungleichzeitigen)的概念,从而提出了更具影响力的历史时间性概念。这表明不存在绝对的现在(以及过去和未来),因为不同持续时间的存在是同时被发现的,并且在给定的时间点上同时产生影响。如果这篇论文是正确的,那么人们就可以反驳目的论决定的线性进化的概念,它倾向于将任何偏离这一观点的行为视为纯粹的偏离和畸形的发展。费尔南德·布罗代尔的历史时间性三合一概念进一步加剧了这种情况,该概念认为各种存在(事件和结构)具有不同的持续时间。综上所述,我们建议历史学家认真对待某一特定时刻的时间多样性,而不要努力使不同的时间层次同步。关键词:有效史,“非同时的同时性”,复兴,落后,各时期同步性