Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer
Logo Conceptos Históricos

Dossier

Vol. 9 No. 15 (2024)

Reflections on the Characterization of the Medieval Period in Reinhart Koselleck’s Work and the Relationship Between Medievalism and Conceptual History

Submitted
August 21, 2024
Published
2024-01-01

Abstract

The purpose of this work is to analyze the way in which the medieval period is characterized in the works of Reinhart Koselleck, establishing a dialogue between his work and some of the critical theoretical res­ponses postulated by medievalists in recent years. Our reflection also aims to problematize the applicability or not of conceptual history to medieval studies, as well as to point out the need to revisit the cons­truction of a view of the medieval period in the theories and discourses of and about modernity. In this sense, our hypothesis is that for a bet­ter understanding of modernity, its genesis, and the discourse it creates about itself, both a critical knowledge of the medieval period and an awareness of how modernity projects and creates a tailor-made Middle Ages are essential.

References

  1. Auerbach, Erich. Mímesis. La representación de la realidad en la literatura occidental. Buenos Aires, Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2014.
  2. Blanco Rivero, José Javier. “La historia de los conceptos de Reinhart Koselleck: conceptos fundamentales, Sattelzeit, temporalidad e histórica”, Politeia, Vol. 35, Nº 49, 2012, pp. 1-33.
  3. Chignola, Sandro. “Diferencia y repetición. Otto Brunner, Reinhart Koselleck, la historia conceptual”, Conceptos Históricos, Nº 1, 2015, pp. 18-38.
  4. Cole, Andrew; y D. Vance Smith (eds.). The Legitimacy of the Middle Ages: On the Unwritten History of Theory. Durham, Duke University Press, 2010.
  5. Davis, Kathleen. Periodization and Sovereignty: How Ideas of Feudalism and Secularization Govern the Politics of Time. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008.
  6. – “The Sense of an Epoch: Periodization, Sovereignty, and the Limits of Secularization”, en Andrew Cole y D. Vance Smith (eds.): The Legitimacy of the Middle Ages…, pp. 39-69.
  7. Freedman, Paul; y Gabrielle Spiegel. “Medievalism Old and New: The Rediscovery of Alterity in North American Medieval Studies”, The American Historical Review, Vol. 103, Nº 3, 1998, pp. 677-704.
  8. Hardt, Michael. “Response: More Than We Bargained For”, en Andrew Cole y D. Vance Smith (eds.): The Legitimacy of the Middle Ages…, pp. 119-124.
  9. Hunt, Lynn. Measuring Time, Making History. Budapest, CEU Press, 2008.
  10. – “Modernity: Are Modern Times Different?”, Historia Crítica, Nº 54, 2014, pp. 107-124.
  11. Jordheim, Helge. “Against Periodization: Koselleck’s Theory of Multiple Temporalities”, History and Theory, Vol. 51, Nº 2, 2012, pp. 151-171.
  12. Kempshall, Matthew. Rhetoric and the Writing of History, 400-1500. Manchester, Manchester University Press, 2011.
  13. Koselleck, Reinhart. “Geschichte/Historie”, en Otto Brunner, Werner Conze y Reinhart Koselleck (eds.): Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe: Historisches Lexikon zur politisch-sozialen Sprache in Deutschland. Vol. 2., Stuttgart, Ernst Klett, 1975, pp. 593-717. [Hay traducción al español: historia/Historia. Madrid, Trotta, 2004.]
  14. – Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 1979.
  15. – Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time. Cambridge, The MIT Press, 1985.
  16. – Zeitschichten: Studien zur Historik. Frankfurt am Main, Suhrkamp, 2000.
  17. – Los estratos del tiempo: estudios sobre la historia. Barcelona, Paidós, 2001.
  18. –The Practice of Conceptual History. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2002.
  19. – “Introducción al Diccionario histórico de conceptos político-sociales básicos en lengua germana”, Anthropos, Nº 223, 2009, pp. 92-105.
  20. – Historia de conceptos. Estudios sobre semántica y pragmática del lenguaje político y social. Madrid, Trotta, 2012.
  21. – Sentido y repetición en la historia. Buenos Aires, Hydra, 2013.
  22. – Sediments of Time: On Possible Histories. Stanford, Stanford University Press, 2018.
  23. Loud, Graham; y Martial Staud (eds.). The Making of Medieval History. Woodbridge, York Medieval Press y Boydell and Brewer, 2017.
  24. Melve, Leidulf. “The Revolt of the Medievalists. Directions in Recent Re¬search on the Twelfth-Century Renaissance”, Journal of Medieval History, Vol. 32, Nº 3, 2012, pp. 231-252.
  25. Morsel, Joseph. “La production circulaire d’un concept: le ‘Geschlecht’ (lignage). Contribution à l’approche critique de la ‘Begriffsgeschichte’”, 2011. Versión preprint en línea: https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01390124.
  26. Motzkin, Gabriel. “On the Notion of Historical (Dis)Continuity: Reinhart Koselleck’s Construction of the Sattelzeit”, Contributions to the History of Concepts, Vol.1, Nº 2, 2005, pp. 145-158.
  27. Osborne, Peter. The Politics of Time: Modernity and Avant-Garde. London, Verso, 1994.
  28. Palti, Elías. “Koselleck y la idea de Sattelzeit. Un debate sobre modernidad y temporalidad”, Ayer, Nº 53, 2004, pp. 63-74.
  29. Rivera García, Antonio. “La secularización después de Blumenberg”, Res publica, Nº 11-12, 2003, pp. 95-142.
  30. – “Blumenberg y el debate sobre la secularización”, Eikasia, Nº 45, 2012, pp. 237-244.
  31. Rey, María Paula. “The Vocabulary of Empire: Gerald of Wales and the Angevin Dominions”, Annual of Medieval Studies at CEU, Vol. 26, 2020, pp. 101-120.
  32. Sergi, Giuseppe. La idea de Edad Media. Entre el sentido común y la práctica historiográfica. Barcelona, Crítica, 2001.
  33. Schwandt, Silke. “Virtus as a Political Concept in the Middle Ages”, Contributions to the History of Concepts, Vol. 10, Nº 2, 2015, pp. 71-90.
  34. Summit, Jeniffer; y David Wallace (eds.). “Medieval/Renaissance: After Periodization”, Journal of Medieval and Early Modern Studies, Vol. 37, Nº. 3, 2007.
  35. Zammito, John. “Koselleck’s Philosophy of Historical Time(s) and the Practice of History”, History and Theory, Vol. 43, Nº 2004, pp. 124-135.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.