Abstract
It was noticeable in the late Middle Ages and clearly marked in modern times that the centre of gravity of a historian’s interest was moving from the narration itself toward the foundations of that narration. The result was a magnificent development of a historian’s critical techniques. The increasing subtlety of those techniques are the signum spe-cificum of a historian’s good work, and are treated, by some historians interested in methodology (e.g., L. E. Halkin), as the criterion of the scientific nature of historical research even today, when the standards of historical research have risen to a higher level and good research techniques are taken for granted. This criterion, which minimized the issue of past events, was-in the light of the critical pattern of research-made richer by the requirement that historical narratives be not only true, but also given to theory (philosophy). This requirement was being advanced mainly by philosophers and theorists of science, although prominent historians also would not shun general considerations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
H. L. V. de la Popelinière, Histoire des Histoires avec l’idée de l’histoire accomplie, 1599.
Cf. W. Voisé, Poczqtki nowozytnych nauk spoiecznych (The Origins of the Modem Social Sciences), Warszawa 1962, pp. 206–22.
Consider also J. Bodin’s basic work La République, first published 1576.
Cf. K. Grzybowski, “Z dziejów pojęcia postępu”(Issues in the History of the Concept of Progress), Kwartalnik Historyczny, No. 3/1957, pp. 3 ff. On changes in historical thinking during the Renaissance see W. K. Ferguson, The Renaissance in Historical Thought, Boston 1948; A. Klempt, Die Säkularisierung der universalhistorischen Auffassung. Zum Wandel der Geschichtswissenschaft im 16 und 17 Jahrhundert, Göttingen 1960; H. Butterfield, The Origins of Modern Science 1300–1800, London 1958. Concerning Poland see K. Dobrowolski, “Studia nad kulturą. naukową. w Polsce do schyłku XVI stulecia”(Studies in Scientific Culture in Poland up to the End of the 16th Century), Nauka Polska, vol. XVII, Warszawa 1933, and S. Herbst, “Początki historycznego widzenia rze-czywistości w nauce i sztuce polskiego Odrodzenia”(The Beginnings of the Historical Approach in Science and Art under the Renaissance in Poland), Od-rodzenie w Polsce, (The Renaissance in Poland), vol. II, part. 1, Warszawa 1956. See also G. Monod, “Du progrés des études historiques en France depuis le XVI siècle”. Revue Historique, vol. I, Paris 1876, pp. 5-33.
E. Bernheim, op. cit., pp. 31, 173, 222, 227.
Cf. F. Smith-Fussner, The Historical Revolution. Historical Writing and Thought, 1580–1660, London 1962. The present writer is indebted to M. H. Serejski for drawing his attention to this book.
Jean Mabillon (1639–1707) was a monk in the Benedictine abbey of St. Germain-des-Prés in Paris. He established the rules of examining the authenticity of sources (mediaeval diplomas) when studying documents from the Marovingian period. Jean Bolland 1596–1665, a Belgian Jesuit, arrived at the same results when publishing documents pertaining to biographies of saints (the Acta Sanctorum mentioned above) and when preparing his Martyrologium Romanum.
R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History, éd. cit., p. 59; F. J. Teggart, Theory and Processes of History, éd. cit., pp. 87-91.
E. Bernheim, op. cit., p. 223.
Ibid., p. 226. A pertinent appraisal of Fresnoy’s works was given in 1826 by J. Lelewel, “O historii, jej rozgałęzieniach i naukach zwiazek z nią. mają-cych”(On History, Its Ramifications and Related Disciplines), Dziela (Collected Works), vol. II, part 1, Warszawa 1964, pp. 233, 395-7, 402-3, 405. See also J. Topolski, “Na drodze do nowoczesnej nauki historycznej. Nicolas Lenglet DuFresnoy (1674–1755) i jego metoda badania historycznego”(Toward the Modern Science of History. Nicolas Lenglet DuFresnoy (1674–1755) and His Method of Historical Research), in: Wiek XVIII. Polska i świat (The Eighteenth Century. Poland and the world), Warszawa 1974, pp. 51-61.
A. Naruszewicz, “Memorial względem pisania historii narodowej”(A Memorandum on the Writing of the Nation’s History), in: Historycy o historii (Historians on History), M. H. Serejski (ed.), Warszawa 1963, p. 36.
On the Göttingen school see H. Wesendonck, Die Begründung der neueren deutschen Geschichtsschreibung durch Gatterer und Schlözer, Leipzig 1875. For a newer approach see H. Butterfield, Man on His Past, Cambridge 1955; M. H. Serejski, Koncepcja historii powszechnej Joachima Lelewela (Joachim Lelewel’s Idea of Universal History), Warszawa 1958, pp. 33-41.
This applies in particular to his work Le Siècle de Louis XIV, Berlin 1751, in which Voltaire discussed many economic problems. These interests of his are also revealed by his other works, especially Essai sur les Moeurs et Esprit des Nations (1753–8). Later authors differ widely in their opinions on Voltaire’s role in the history of historical research. He is extolled by Fuoro Diaz (Voltaire storico, Torino 1958), whereas J. H. Brunfitt (Voltaire Historian, London 1958) is much more critical by pointing out that on some issues Montesquieu’s interpretations are better and that Voltaire still ascribed exaggerated importance to outstanding individuals. For the model edition of Voltaire’s historical works see Voltaire, oeuvres historiques, Bibliothèque de la Pléiade, Paris, with an introduction by René Pomeau. See also Ideas in History. Essays Presented to Louis Gottschalk, Durham, N. C, 1965 (with papers on Voltaire and Condorcet by K. Weintraub and R. Rockwood, and with a discussion of German historicism by G. G. Iggers).
Ch. L. Montesquieu, L’esprit des lois (first published in 1748) and other works.
A. H. L. Heeren, Ideen über die Politik, den Verkehr und den Handel der vornehmsten Völker der alten Welt, vols. I-III, Göttingen 1793–1812. Many pertinent comments on that historian are to be found in S. I. Krandievsky, Ocerki po istoriagrafii ekonomičeskoy istorii (Notes on the Historiography of Economic History), Kharkov 1964, pp. 123-4.
J. von Müller, Geschichte der schweizerischen Eidgenossenschaft, Leipzig 1786–1808.
E. Gibbon, The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, 1776–88. F. J. Teggart (Theory and Processes of History, éd. cit., pp. 36-8) is right in highly appreciating Gibbon’s role in the development of historical thinking.
See the comments by H. Becker and H. E. Barnes, Social Thought From Lore to Science, pp. 527-529 (Polish translation). Montesquieu in his emphasis on the immense importance of the climate as a historical factor was inspired by J. Arbuthnoth, the author of Essay Concerning the Effects of Air on Human Bodies (1733). L’esprit des lois appeared in 1748.
This applies in particular to Hume’s works Of Rise and Progress of the Arts and Sciences (1742) and Of National Character (1748). Cf. F. J. Teggart, Theory and Processes of History, 3rd ed., 1962, Chap. 15, “The Method of Hume and Turgot”, pp. 181 ff; and H. Becker and H. E. Barnes, op. cit., pp. 526-527.
F. J. Teggart, op. cit., pp. 183 ff.
A. R. J. Turgot, Oeuvres, ed. G. Schelle, vol. 1, Paris 1913. The present writer is much indebted to I. Berlin, The Age of Enlightenment. The 18th Century Philosophy Selected with Introduction and Interpretative Commentary, New York 1956. See also G. Pflug, “Die Entstehung der historischen Methodeim 18. Jahrhundert”, Deutsche Vierteljahrschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Geistesgeschichte, vol. XXVIII, 1954, pp. 447-71; K. Weyand, Kants Geschichtsphilosophie, Köln 1963.
For a comprehensive analysis of this issue see H. Becker and H. E. Barnes, op. cit., pp. 529-535.
A. N. Condorcet, Esquisse d’un tableau historique des progrès de l’esprit humain (first published 1794); see also B. Suchodolski’s introduction to the Polish-language edition, Warszawa 1957.
Cf. H. Becker and H. E. Barnes, op. cit., pp. 538–541. See also J. Niedermann, Kultur. Werden und Wandlungen des Begriffs und seiner Ersatzbe-griffe von Cicero bis Herder, Biblioteca dell’ Archivum Romanicum, Series I, vol. 28, Firenze 1941; A. L. Kroeber, C. Kluckhohn, Culture. A Critical Review of Concepts and Definitions, Cambridge 1952; M. H. Serejski, “Początki i dzieje slow ‘kultura’ i ‘cywilizacja’ w Polsce”(The Origins and History of the Terms ‘Culture’ and ‘Civilization’ in Poland), in: Przeszłość a teraźniejszość (The Past and the Present), pp. 237 ff.
R. G. Collingwood, The Idea of History, p. 65; see also G. A. Sabine, “Hume’s Contribution to the Historical Method”, Philosophical Review, vol. 15, 1909.
See G. B. Vico, The New Science, in: Theories of History, P. Gardiner (ed.), Glencoe 1959, pp. 12–21, in particular pp. 20-1; B. Croce, “Giovanni Bat-tista Vico”, Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences, vol. 15, pp. 249-50.
Cf. A. N. Condorcet, The Progress of the Human Mind, in: Theories of History, p. 57.
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1976 PWN - Polish Scientific Publishers - Warszawa
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Topolski, J. (1976). Critical Reflection. In: Methodology of History. Synthese Library, vol 88. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1123-5_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1123-5_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-1125-9
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-1123-5
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive