Some Comments on Style in the Meanings of the Past

1979 ◽  
Vol 38 (2) ◽  
pp. 231-244 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shelly Errington

AbstractLike the European written genre history, court literature from the traditional kingdoms of Southeast Asia often relates historical events and possible or probable genealogies. Yet, like the myths of tribal peoples, these accounts are characterized by mythical elements and a somewhat repetitious style, and were recited aloud rather than read in private silence. But if we regard them as mixtures of historical and mythical elements, our understanding of their inner structure and meaning is inevitably compromised, for the notion of a mixture already imposes assumptions about the shape of the past and criteria of reality which are implicit in a historical consciousness. The form in which thought is couched, after all, is the thought, not a representation of something behind or outside it. This paper therefore attempts a rhetorical analysis of a Classical Malay text of the type called hikayat, one which dates from about the seventeenth century. It begins with an analysis of grammar and sentence structure, then moves to certain stylistic features of hikayat, contrasting them with some stylistic features of historical writing. I then comment on the context of texts—the meaning of audience, of performance, of language, of author—and end with some speculation about the notion of the past as revealed in Classical Malay hikayat.

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eileen Ka-May Cheng

“What is historiography?” asked the American historian Carl Becker in 1938. Professional historians continue to argue over the meaning of the term. This book challenges the view of historiography as an esoteric subject by presenting an accessible and concise overview of the history of historical writing from the Renaissance to the present. Historiography plays an integral role in aiding undergraduate students to better understand the nature and purpose of historical analysis more generally by examining the many conflicting ways that historians have defined and approached history. By demonstrating how these historians have differed in both their interpretations of specific historical events and their definitions of history itself, this book conveys to students the interpretive character of history as a discipline and the way that the historian’s context and subjective perspective influence his or her understanding of the past.


1963 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 365-377 ◽  
Author(s):  
Louis Hartz

In the seventeenth century America escaped from the world, in the twentieth century it has been forced to return to it. This cycle contains the drama of the American historical consciousness which protected America's provincialism in the past but is bound now, in the age of the reverse migration, to serve as an instrument of its dissolution.


1995 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 419-446 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig J. Reynolds

As a way of opening this critique of historical writing on early Southeast Asia, I ask, What interest do today's historians have in studying early Southeast Asia? What are they looking for in the early past? An essay by F. R. Ankersmit, in which he talks about what the modern reader brings to evidence from the past, serves as a point of departure for my answer. Rather than labor at accumulating more and more evidence about the past, historians should reflect on the difference between our own mentality and that of an earlier period. The past acquires point and meaning “only through confrontation with the mentality of the later period in which the historian lives and writes.” The experience of confronting this mentality Ankersmit calls “the historical sensation,” “which is accompanied by the complete conviction of genuineness, truth” (Ankersmit 1989:146). “A phase in historiography has perhaps now begun,” he says, “in which meaning is more important than reconstruction and genesis.”


1982 ◽  
Vol 32 ◽  
pp. 75-89
Author(s):  
William H. McNeill

World history was once taken for granted as the only sensible basis for understanding the past. Christians could do no other than begin with creation and fit subsequent details into the framework of divine revelation. This ordering of the past survived into the seventeenth century as Bossuet and Walter Raleigh may remind us. But with the revival of antique letters, a different model for historical writing asserted itself that could not fit smoothly within the Christian epos. In effect, Thucydides and Tacitus challenged Augustine, presenting the history of states and their interaction as a self-contained whole. Guicciardini and Machiavelli wrote their histories accordingly, dismissing as irrelevant the world historical framework that had seemed essential to earlier believers.


1990 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 639-659 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony Reid

The notion that the series of alarming events in Europe in the first half of the seventeenth century might be connected goes back at least as far as Voltaire. Professional historians of Europe during the past forty years have fixed on this period as the principal case to test the idea that societies can undergo a ‘general crisis’, in which agricultural, demographic, climatic, economic, military and political factors are interrelated (Hobsbawm 1954; Trevor-Roper 1959; Aston 1965; Parker and Smith 1978; Parker 1979). For some this was the crisis of the transition to capitalism, for others that of the absolutist state, while more recent commentators have put more emphasis on climatic and environmental factors. The causal connections between the various factors remain the most puzzling unresolved problem.


Author(s):  
Ewa Fiutka

Elena Mauli Shapiro in “13 rue Thérèse” asks questions about the ways of mediating the past. The problem is by no means new but the author attempts to present historical events through the category of historical experience as a valid manner of showing the past. Therefore, the novel is looked upon from the perspective of Frank Ankersmit’s concept of experience as well as the theory of objects as tools which assist the recipient in mediating the past. Thus, both through the use of the category of experience and the presentation of history through objects, the past is presented as fragmented and unreliable, which in fact reflects how historical writing is perceived nowadays, especially if the ending of the novel suggests that the past is inevitably linked with the present.


1961 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 73-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
John R. W. Small

It is generally accepted that history is an element of culture and the historian a member of society, thus, in Croce's aphorism, that the only true history is contemporary history. It follows from this that when there occur great changes in the contemporary scene, there must also be great changes in historiography, that the vision not merely of the present but also of the past must change.


2015 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 496-514
Author(s):  
Christophe Van Eecke

When Ken Russell's film The Devils was released in 1971 it generated a tidal wave of adverse criticism. The film tells the story of a libertine priest, Grandier, who was burnt at the stake for witchcraft in the French city of Loudun in the early seventeenth century. Because of its extended scenes of sexual hysteria among cloistered nuns, the film soon acquired a reputation for scandal and outrage. This has obscured the very serious political issues that the film addresses. This article argues that The Devils should be read primarily as a political allegory. It shows that the film is structured as a theatrum mundi, which is the allegorical trope of the world as a stage. Rather than as a conventional recreation of historical events (in the tradition of the costume film), Russell treats the trial against Grandier as a comment on the nature of power and politics in general. This is not only reflected in the overall allegorical structure of the theatrum mundi, but also in the use of the film's highly modernist (and therefore timeless) sets, in Russell's use of the mise-en-abyme (a self-reflexive embedded play) and in the introduction of a number of burlesque sequences, all of which are geared towards achieving the film's allegorical import.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Miftahul Jannah

<p align="center"><strong>Abstrak</strong></p><p>Tulisan dalam jurnal ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui proses runtuhnya Khilafah Turki Ustmani tanggal 3 maret 1924 dan dampaknya terhadap kehidupan umat Islam. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode sejarah. Metode sejarah adalah prosedur sejarawan Untuk melukiskan kisah masa lampau berdasarkan jejak-jejak yang ditinggalkan pada masa lampau dengan langkah-langkah penulisan sejarah sebagai berikut: (1) heuristik, (2) kritik, (3) interpretasi dan (4) historiografi. Berdasarkan penelitian yang dilakukan maka dapat ditarik kesimpulan bahwa: Khilafah Turki Ustmani dihancurkan dengan cara menghapus sistem kekhilafahan dan menggantinya dengan sistem republik oleh seorang keturunan yahudi yaitu Mustafa Kemal Attatur. Selama 14 abad kaum muslimin hidup dalam pemerintahan Islam yang mana diterapkan hukum-hukum Islam dalam seluruh aspek kehidupan. Namun sayangnya hari itu tepatnya 3 maret 1924 secara resmi dengan bantuan Inggris, Mustafa Kemal Attaturk mengubah khilafah dengan sistem Repulik Turki dan sampai hari ini sistem tersebut masih berjalan. Runtuhnya khilafah menyebabkan munculnya persoalan kaum muslimin mulai dari kolonialisme, konflik di Negara dunia ketiga, persoalan ekonomi,politik dan sosial budaya.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Kata Kunci:</strong> Khilafah Turki Ustmani, 3 maret 1924</p><p> </p><p align="center"><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong></p><p><em>The writing in this journal aims to find out the process of the collapse of the Ottoman Caliphate on March 3, 1924 and its impact on the lives of Muslims. The method used in this study is the historical method. Historical method is the procedure of historians to describe the story of the past based on traces left in the past by the steps of historical writing as follows: (1) heuristics, (2) criticism, (3) interpretation and (4) historiography.</em></p><p><em>Based on the research conducted, it can be concluded that: the Ottoman Caliphate was destroyed by removing the Caliphate system and replacing it with a republic system by a descendant of the Jews namely Mustafa Kemal Attatur. For 14 centuries the Muslims lived in an Islamic government which applied Islamic laws in all aspects of life. But unfortunately that day to be exact 3 March 1924 officially with the help of Britain, Mustafa Kemal Attaturk changed the Caliphate with the system of the Republic of Turkey and to this day the system is still running. The collapse of the Caliphate caused the emergence of problems of the Muslims ranging from colonialism, conflict in third world countries, economic, political and socio-cultural issues</em><em>.</em></p><p><em> </em></p><strong><em>Keywords:</em></strong><em> the Caliphate of Turkish Ottoman, March 3, 1924</em>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document