Search

What are current tendencies in historical theory, judging by the inaugural conference (2013) of the International Network for Theory of History? In this article, I note two tendencies: an interest in history beyond the academy and a desire to overcome the theoretical polarization that has characterized the field in past decades. Subsequently, I argue that these tendencies can be seen as reflecting a single research agenda, which, in turn, can be described in terms of ‘relations to the past.’ I unpack this notion, borrowed from Mark Day, in some detail, explain what sort of questions it helps address, and offer two examples from in and outside the historical discipline. If I am right in arguing that this research agenda captures much of what is currently being offered under the flag of historical theory, then historical theory seems on its way to become a field of expertise on the ways in which both historians and others relate to the past. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

ABSTRACT What is the problem that 'epistemic virtues' seek to solve? This article argues that virtues, epistemic and otherwise, are the key characteristics of 'scholarly personae,' that is, of ideal-typical models of what it takes to be a scholar. Different scholarly personae are characterized by different constellations of virtues and skills or, more precisely, by different constellations of commitments to goods (epistemic, moral, political, and so forth), the pursuit of which requires the exercise of certain virtues and skills. Expanding Hayden White's notion of 'historiographical styles' so as to encompass not only historians' writings, but also their nontextual 'doings,' the article argues that different styles of 'being a historian'-a meticulous archival researcher, an inspired feminist scholar, or an outstanding undergraduate teacher-can be analyzed productively in terms of virtues and skills. Finally, the article claims that virtues and skills, in turn, are rooted in desires, which are shaped by the examples of others as well as by promises of reward. This makes the scholarly persona not merely a useful concept for distinguishing among different types of historians, but also a critical tool for analyzing why certain models of 'being a historian' gain in popularity, whereas others become 'old-fashioned.' [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What did it mean for eighteen- to twenty-year-old men and women in the nineteenth-century Netherlands to be confirmed--that is, to sit in the front row of the church, dressed in Sunday dress, and be accepted into full church membership? Previous scholarship on confirmation in the Netherlands Reformed Church has mostly focused on theological controversies surrounding the wording of the so-called confirmation questions (three questions about Christian doctrine and morals that confirmants had to answer during the service), treating these controversies as markers of growing struggles between 'wings' or 'parties' in nineteenth-century Dutch Protestantism. Important as these theological controversies were, this article nonetheless approaches confirmation from a different, less frequently explored angle, arguing that confirmation was also, and perhaps especially, a social rite of passage, which symbolically marked transition into a new stage of life, with adult responsibilities in church and society. Drawing on a rich array of published as well as unpublished sources (sermons, booklets, letters, and diaries), the article examines what kind of meanings were associated with this rite of passage, by both clergy and confirmants, and to what extent these meanings changed over the course of the century. It shows that Protestants throughout the nineteenth century tried to hold together, in one way or another, what one may call the 'inward' and the 'outward' aspects of the ritual (expressions of personal conviction and conformation to societal standards of morality). Although they insisted that professions of faith must be made "from the bottom of the heart," they simultaneously equated confirmation with a promise to a virtuous life. Also, while accepting sighs and tears as testifying to the sincerity of a confirmant s profession, many authors explicitly warned against strong emotions that could carry newly confirmed church members away from the narrow path of virtue. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The philosophy of history is unlikely to disappear in a world beset by crises. Crises, understood as anomalies in how people conceive of their past-present relationships, serve as impetuses rather than as obstacles to philosophy of history. The more societies wonder whether economic growth is endless, or whether children in the West will ever reach the prosperity levels of their parents or how growing burdens of public debt will affect the ‘social contract between the generations’, the more likely they are to rethink their inherited past-present relationships. In a sense then, philosophy is a crisis phenomenon: the genre thrives in times of uncertainty. This does not imply that philosophy of history will always be taught in academic history departments: the genre has often, not to say usually, been practiced by non-historians. Historians might want to consider though, how well they serve their societies if they allow the philosophy of history to be practiced without the critical checks and balances of professional historiography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What does 'historical distance' mean? Starting with Johan Huizinga, the famous Dutch historian who refused to lecture on contemporary history, this introductory article argues that 'historical distance' is a metaphor used in a variety of intellectual contexts. Accordingly, the metaphor has ontological, epistemological, moral, aesthetic, as well as methodological connotations. This implies that historical distance cannot be reduced to a single 'problem' or 'concept.' At the same time, this wide variety of meanings associated with distance helps explain why an easily recognizable tradition of scholarly reflection on historical distance does not exist. In a broad survey of nineteenth- and twentieth-century historical theory, this article nonetheless attempts to show that distance has been a major, if seldom explicitly articulated, theme in European and American philosophy of history. In doing so, it pays special attention to those few authors who in recent years have taken up the metaphor for critical study. Finally, the paper summarizes some of the main arguments put forward in the articles comprising this issue on historical distance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

What did 'historical distance' mean to historians in the Rankean tradition? Although historical distance is often equated with temporal distance, an analysis of Ernst Bernheim's Lehrbuch der historischen Methode reveals that for German historians around 1900 distance did not primarily refer to a passage of time that would enable scholars to study remote pasts from retrospective points of view. If Bernheim's manual presents historical distance as a prerequisite for historical interpretation, the metaphor rather conveys a need for self-distanciation. Self-distanciation is not a Romantic desire to 'extinguish' oneself, but a virtuous attempt to put one's own ideas and intuitions about the working of the world between brackets in the study of people who might have understood the world in different terms. Although Bernheim did not explicitly talk about virtue, the article shows that his Lehrbuch nonetheless considers self-distanciation a matter of virtuous behavior, targeted at an aim that may not be fully realizable, but ought to be pursued with all possible vigor. For Bernheim, then, distance requires epistemological virtue, which in turn calls for intellectual character, or what Bernheim's generation considered scholarly selfhood ( wissen-schaftliche Persönlichkeit). Not a mapping of time onto space, but a strenuous effort to mold 'scholarly characters,' truly able to recognize the otherness of the past, appears to be characteristic of Bernheim's view of historical distance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction to a section of the periodical is presented, in which the editor discusses the tendency to idealize historians such as Leopold von Ranke and perceive them as father figures.

The article discusses the tendency of historians to embrace a past historian as a father figure. The author examines the 'father of history' metaphor using the examples of several historians, including 19th century Dutch historian Robert Fruin, 19th century Belgian historian Godefroid Kurth, and ancient Roman historian Cornelius Tacitus. The article interprets the various meanings attributed by historians to the role of the father figure metaphor over the centuries. According to the author, some historians have used their father figures as stylistic examples, while others have seen them as models of epistemic virtues or morality.

The article is a response to a thesis on the philosophy of history put forth by Irish philosopher Jonathan Gorman in his book "Historical Judgement." It discusses the role of self-images of historians in historical studies. Specifically, the author argues against Gorman's contention that historians' self-images define what may be considered historiography. Instead, the author proposes that historians' self-images vary so widely that they must be taken as historians' individual conceptions of their own work within the context of time and place. Topics include various definitions of history, the philosophy of history, and national myths of origin.

This article explores not how historians study collective memories, but how they create and nourish (professional) memory cultures of their own. It examines how historians commemorate their predecessors and celebrate their historiographical achievements. The case studies chosen are Robert Fruin (1823-1899) and Godefroid Kurth (1847-1916), both of whom were hailed as ‘father of history' by Dutch and Belgian admirers, respectively, in the late nineteenth century. Tracing the fortunes of Fruin's and Kurth's reputations throughout the twentieth century, the article shows that this ‘father of history' metaphor acquired rather diverse meanings. These shifting meanings not only mirrored changing ideals of scholarly practice, but also reflected institutional concerns, religious or ideological partisanship, and growing concerns over the habit of conceiving of historical scholarship in national terms. Finally, the article recommends further research on the affective and emotional dimensions of fatherhood in nineteenth and twentieth-century historiography. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]