Koselleck's Philosophy of Historical Time(s) and the Practice of History

Zammito, John H.

doi:10.1111/j.1468-2303.2004.00269.x

Cited by 71 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This observation is in itself an argument to be aware of the slow-changing, deeper structures, and not only the spectacular events. Zammito, John. (2004…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discussing Borders, Escaping Traps

Wagner¹

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…This observation is in itself an argument to be aware of the slow-changing, deeper structures, and not only the spectacular events. Zammito, John. (2004…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Discussing Borders, Escaping Traps

Wagner¹

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Braudel, 1980: 25-54). More richly, Reinhart Koselleck (2002Koselleck ( , 2004; see also Jordheim, 2012;Zammito, 2004) argues that history is formed of multiple 'layers of time' (Zeitschichten), which flow at different velocities: there is no single track which paves its course, but rather a multiplicity of paths criss-crossing, some long and others short, some deep and others shallow, some winding and others straight. This pluralized historical temporality is fundamentally antagonistic to the stadial model's allocation of continuity and change to discrete phases of history (as stages and transitions); once one admits multiple layers of time, the apparatus of stages and transitions breaks down.…”

Section: A New Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

History, periodization and the character of contemporary crime control

Churchill

2018

Criminology & Criminal Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, several highly influential studies have sought to articulate the changed and changing character of contemporary crime control in its historical context. While the substantive claims of these studies have attracted close scrutiny, there has been remarkably little analysis of the historiographical apparatus underpinning them. As a result, criminology has neglected to develop a valuable, critical vantage point on how crime and justice in our own times are understood. This article advances discussion of contemporary crime control by critically assessing the historiographical foundations of existing studies. Furthermore, it outlines a new approach to analysing the governance of crime through time, which might facilitate a more empirically robust and satisfactory characterization of contemporary crime control. More broadly, the article signals the significance of history and historiography for contemporary criminological scholarship, and reflects upon the advantages of developing a more fully historical criminology.

show abstract

“…także: Pomian 1984, Hartog 2003, Tarkowska 1987, Hammer 2011, Friese 2001, Munn 1992: 93-123, Ricoeur 2008, Hunt 2008, Kavanaugh 2010: 90-124, Leduc 1999, Friese 2010 Zob. Zammito 2004: 124-135, Scuccimarra 2008: 160-175, Jordheim 2012: 151-171, Hammer 2011: 39-44, Ricoeur 2008 Por. Koselleck 2012: 262-263, Therborn 2003.…”

Section: /// 4 Perspektywa Historii Społecznejmentioning

confidence: 99%