For the English speaking reader of today, Ranke is surprisingly inaccessible; indeed, he has become something of a patron saint, more praised than read. Now all his major works have been translated, while almost none of his letters, notes, or essays, so important in getting an informal appraisal of his craft of history, is in English. Many of his of books, whether in German or in English, are no longer in print, and the modern reader is less likely to bear (...) up with the four or six volume works which are. Thus the purpose of this anthology is to bring attention to some of the riches which a reader might find in a more extended study of Ranke's histories. Its emphasis is on Ranke as an historian, with translations of essays and addresses which lay down his program for research, politics, and the relationship between and historian's values and his work. It also attempts to give some sense of Ranke's literary skill, by including examples of his historical portraiture from his History of the Popes, History of France, and History of the Reformation. Finally, a selection of letters and brief reflections culled from his works and notes tries to recapture the man, whose own inner development joined with the tendencies of his age to make him a world-historical figure in Ranke's own sense of the word. (shrink)

Ranke (1795-1886) championed objective writing based on source material and established the study of history as a major university discipline. These essays, presented in October 1986 at a conference held to mark the centennial of his death, place the German historian in the context of the developing discipline and introduce important issues and problems in European historiography. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR.

Ranke's work marks a turning point in the development of historiography: it changed from literature to science. Ranke's introduction of reason into historiography gave it a certain aesthetic quality, which modern historical studies have forgotten. Traditional rhetoric, or the use of language for strategic purposes, was discarded for its fictitious nature. In its place, Ranke advocated a synthesis of the scientific principles of research and the more artistic principles of writing history. This synthesis initiated the aesthetics of historiography, and yielded (...) a hidden rhetoric in the form of linguistic patterns of significance, or topoi, which give the facts of the past their sense and meaning for present-day life. Historiography, by its aesthetics, addresses its audience in a way that makes visible the mental forces which constitute the identity of the addressed people in the temporal course of their life. The postmodern recognition of rhetoric in historiography should not lead us back to premodern rhetoric but forward to a rhetoric of historiography which preserves the necessity of liberating reason in historiography and which reflects this reason not simply as a technique of research, but 'With a much wider and deeper approach to historical studies as a question of the aesthetics of historiography. (shrink)

From 1827 to 1831 the German historian Leopold von Ranke travelled through Germany, Austria, and Italy, hunting for documents and archives. During this journey Ranke developed a new model for historical research that transformed the archive into the most important site for the production of historical knowledge. Within the archive, Ranke claimed, the trained historian could forget his personal predispositions and political loyalties, and write objective history. This essay critically examines Ranke's model for historical research through a study of (...) the obstacles, frustrations, and joys that he encountered on his journey. It shows how Ranke's archival experiences inspired him to re-evaluate his own identity as a historian and as a human being, and investigates some of the affiliations between his model for historical research and the political realities of Prince Metternich's European order. Finally, the essay compares Ranke's historical discipline to other nineteenth-century disciplines, such as anthropology and archaeology. (shrink)

Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886), generally recognized as the founder of the school of modern critical historical scholarship, and Jacob Burckhardt (1818-1897), the great Swiss proponent of cultural interpretation, are fathers of modern history--giants of their time who continue to exert an immense influence in our own. They are usually seen as contrasts, Ranke as representative of political history and Burckhardt of cultural history. In five essays, each flowing gracefully into the next, the distinguished historian Felix Gilbert shows that such (...) contrasts are oversimplifications. Despite their interest in different aspects of the past, Ranke's and Burckhardt's views arose from common elements in the first half of the nineteenth century, the time in which they grew up and in which their first masterworks attracted such wide attention. This concise volume clarifies the beginnings of history as an autonomous discipline, while forcing us to examine our views on basic questions in historical scholarship. In the case of Ranke, relating his work to his times counteracts the current tendency to disregard the difference between the historical concepts of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. By focusing on this difference, Gilbert emphasizes the originality and novelty of Ranke's ideas about history. Although Burckhardt is often portrayed as an intellectually lonely figure, this book reveals the importance of relating his thought to the intellectual trends of his time. Originally published in 1990. The Princeton Legacy Library uses the latest print-on-demand technology to again make available previously out-of-print books from the distinguished backlist of Princeton University Press. These editions preserve the original texts of these important books while presenting them in durable paperback and hardcover editions. The goal of the Princeton Legacy Library is to vastly increase access to the rich scholarly heritage found in the thousands of books published by Princeton University Press since its founding in 1905. (shrink)

Die Beihefte der Historische Zeitschrift werden in Neuer Folge von Andreas Fahrmeir und Hartmut Leppin herausgegeben. Die Beihefte enthalten Essays und Monographien zu Themen der deutschen und europäischen Geschichte sowie Sammelbände zu herausragenden Themenbereichen. In ihnen äußern sich die ausgewiesenen Sachkenner ihres Fachgebiets.

In this paper I revisit nineteenth-century debates over historical objectivity and the political functions of historiography. I focus on two central contributors to these debates: Leopold von Ranke and Johann Gustav Droysen. In their takes on objectivity and subjectivity, impartiality and political engagement I reveal diametrically opposed solutions to shared concerns: how can historians reveal history to be meaningful without taking recourse to speculative philosophy? And how can they produce a knowledge that is relevant to the present when the (...) project of “exemplary” history has been abandoned? I put a special focus on the relativist themes in Ranke’s and Droysen’s answers to these questions. Ranke’s demand for impartiality leads him to think of all historical epochs as equally valid, while Droysen’s emphasis on the historian’s subjectivity relativizes historical truth. In order to explain why Ranke and Droysen nevertheless remained unfazed by the problem of historical relativism, I analyze their normative conceptions of the historian’s disciplinary ethos. I show that Ranke and Droysen think of objective impartiality and subjective partiality not only in methodological terms, but also in terms of justice and ethic duty. This normative element secures the professional study of history an ethical-political relevance for the present. (shrink)

Keine ausführliche Beschreibung für "Reform der Wissenschaften, zur Herstellung der Einheit zwischen Theorie und Praxis, Teil 1" verfügbar.

This chapter contains sections titled: Ranke's Troubling Legacy Ranke's Methodology The Secret Fellowship Hidden Differences Ranke's Polemic against Hegel Hegel's Attack on Ranke and Niebuhr.

This paper sketches an analysis of the resemblances and differences between Fichte's notion of "idea" and Humboldt's and Ranke's notions of the "historical ideas". In an appendix it extends the analysis to the relationship between Droysen's hegelian notion of "ideas" and Humboldt's one.

La Revolución Francesa (1789) ha despertado desde sus impresionantes acontecimientos, las más diversas reacciones y las más inimaginadas formas de interpretarlos. El "problema social" durante las primeras décadas del siglo XIX, que aflora en parte como consecuencia de esta "aurora del mundo" contemporáneo, determinó una nueva manera de contemplar este acontecimiento histórico universal. Tres personalidades intelectuales de primer rango. Lorenz von Stein, Karl Marx y Alexis de Tocqueville, procedentes de tres mundos político-sociales y académicos diversos, se enfrentan a evaluar el (...) significado de la Revolución Francesa a la luz de los convulsos acontecimientos de su siglo. Sus penetrantes miradas no sólo enfatizan en la actualidad imborrable de los acontecimientos derivados del 89 hasta Napoleón, sino que descubren un horizonte social para la historia de cuño decisivo. La historia deja de ser una historia de acontecimientos, de datos o fechas, en el sentido tradicional de crónica, e incluso la historia deja de contemplarse como un asunto racional en la tradición ilustrada. La Revolución Francesa, gracias a estos tres autores, supera su circunstancialidad épocal y se eleva a una categoría de estructura de sentido inmanente. En otros términos, a diferencia de su contemporáneo Leopold von Ranke, von Stein, Marx y Tocqueville construyen un nuevo sentido de la historia, particularmente de las raíces incuestionables del mundo contemporáneo. (shrink)

1. Bd. Einleitung. Der altarische Himmelsgott, das höchste gute Wesen. -- 2. Bd. Naturverehrung und Lebensfeste.

Jakiej filozofii warto być wiernym, zwłaszcza w sofistopolis? Prolegomena do książki Seweryna Blandziego Między aletejologią Parmenidesa a ontoteologią Filona *** Artykuł unaocznia potrzebę wierności kilku ponadczasowym postulatom filozofii, które pobrzmiewają głośnym echem w książce Seweryna Blandziego Między aletejologią Parmenidesa a ontoteologią Filona. Służąc bezinteresownie prawdzie, rzetelny historyk filozofii musi – zarówno w samym sobie, jak i w kręgu osób sobie najbliższych – pielęgnować nie tylko dar uważnej obserwacji, bez którego nie nabywa nikt mądrości, lecz i cnotę męstwa, bez którego ani (...) w czynie, ani w słowie nie znajduje mądrość odzwierciedlenia. Słynne pytanie Leopolda von Rankego: Wie es eigentlich gewesen? powinien każdy współczesny badacz historii filozofii rozszerzyć: (1) jako filolog – do postaci: Wie es eigentlich geschrieben ist?; (2) jako filozof – do problemu: Wie es eigentlich gemeint ist? Jak długo historia filozofii będzie się wyrzekać ambicji ustalania jasnych i jednoznacznych odpowiedzi na pytania tego rodzaju, tak długo nie wydźwignie się z kryzysu, w jaki popadła zakwestionowawszy wartość i status prawdy. *** What kind of philosophy is deserving of our loyalty – especially in the sophistopolis? Prolegomena to Seweryn Blandzi’s book Between Parmenides’ Aletheiology and Philo’s of Alexandria Ontotheology The article reveals that one must be faithful to several timeless demands of philosophy, demands that resound loudly in Seweryn Blandzi’s book Between Parmenides’ Aletheiology and Philo’s of Alexandria Ontotheology. Serving the truth selflessly, a reliable historian of philosophy ought – both in himself and in the circle of his intimates – cultivate not only the gift of careful observation, without which nobody acquires wisdom, but also the virtue of courage, without which wisdom will not be expressed in deed or in word. Every modern researcher of the history of philosophy should broaden the famous question of Leopold von Ranke: Wie es eigentlich gewesen?: (1) as a philologist – to the form: Wie es eigentlich geschrieben ist?; (2) as a philosopher – to the problem: Wie es eigentlich gemeint ist? As long as the history of philosophy abdicates from providing clear and unambiguous answers to questions of this kind, it will not overcome the crisis it suffered after questioning the value and status of truth. (shrink)

Around the turn of the twentieth century, Wilhelm Dilthey, in his reflections on the nature of history as a “Geisteswissenschaft”—a science of “spirit” as opposed to “nature”—appealed “to Hegel’s notion of “spirit” (Geist). Attempting to extract Hegel’s concept from what he considered the unsupportable metaphysical system within which it had been developed, Dilthey, a neo-Kantian, gave it a broadly epistemological significance by correlating it with a distinct type of “understanding” (Verstehen) that was foreign to the Naturwissenschaften, concerned as they were (...) with explanation (Erklären) of phenomena in terms of laws of nature. Moreover, the paradigm of such an anti-naturalistic approach to history was not Hegel’s philosophical approach to history, but the strongly empiricist practice of the romantic “historical school”, found paradigmatically in the work of Leopold von Ranke. (shrink)

Idea for a universal history with cosmopolitan intent / Immanuel Kant -- Philosophy of history / Johann Gottfried von Herder -- What is universal history and to what end does one study it? / Friedrich Schiller -- On the task of the historian / Wilhelm von Humboldt -- Idea of universal history / Johann Gottlieb Fichte -- World history / Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel -- The ages of the world / Friedrich Wilhelm Josef Schelling -- On the epochos of modern (...) history / Leopold von Ranke -- Preface to first edition of histories on the Latin and Germanic nations / Leopold von Ranke -- Introduction to the history of the nineteenth century / Georg Gottfried Gervinus -- Outline of the principles of history / Johann Gustav Droysen -- The German ideology / Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels -- Speeches and essays / Theodor Mommsen -- Answer to the inaugural addresses / Theodor Mommsen -- On fortume and misfortune in history / Jakob Burckhardt -- Patterns and meaning in history / Wilhelm Dilthey -- The task of the historian / Heinrich von Treitschke -- The use and abuse of history / Friedrich Nietzsche -- Historism: the rise of the new historical outlook / Friedrich Meinecke -- The meaning of history / Karl Jaspers -- The problem of world history / Oswald Spengler. (shrink)

Includes "Coldness and Cruelty," by Gilles Deleuze, a study of masochism and sadism, as well as "Venus in Furs," the original novel by Leopold von Sacher-Masoch.

This article investigates the emergence of the archive as the primary venue for the production of historical knowledge in the 19th century. The turn to archival research, the article argues, may be considered as a response to the discussions about the problems of testimony that dominated 18th- and early 19th-century German writings on the methodology and epistemology of historical research. These discussions, especially regarding the epistemic virtues of witnesses, also helped create the particular culture of knowledge-making within German historical scholarship (...) that enabled the archival turn. The article illustrates these developments through the examples of Johann Peter von Ludewig, who was one of the most prominent historians of the early German Enlightenment, and Leopold von Ranke, who is normally considered the founder of the modern historical discipline and the most important advocate of the 19th-century archival turn. (shrink)

This article is concerned with history that is fuzzy in the sense of impressionistic rather than systematic, using “soft” rather than “hard” data and concerned more with “lumping” than with “splitting.” It argues that there have been at least four phases in the two centuries of conflict between precise and fuzzy historians. In the first phase, in the nineteenth century, precise history, firmly based on documents, was defined, by Leopold von Ranke and the Rankeans, against an older fuzzy or (...) “conjectural” history. In a second phase, at the beginning of the twentieth century, a new fuzzy history was defined against “positivist” history, by Karl Lamprecht in Germany, Lucien Febvre in France, and George Trevelyan in England, among others. In a third phase, in the middle of the twentieth century, practitioners of quantitative history (sometimes known as the New Economic History or more generally as “cliometrics”) condemned all nonquantitative historians as fuzzy. In a fourth phase, from the 1970s onward, a still newer fuzzy history, comprising historical anthropology, microhistory, and the New Cultural History, was defined against quantitative history by scholars such as Georges Duby in France, Carlo Ginzburg in Italy, and Robert Darnton in the United States. In short, there has been a gradual move from more or less unself-conscious imprecision to self-conscious antiprecision. (shrink)