Between History and System. Historical Knowledge in Comenius’ Pansophy

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F67985955%3A_____%2F24%3A00599328" target="_blank" >RIV/67985955:_____/24:00599328 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://doi.org/10.14712/24645370.4575" target="_blank" >https://doi.org/10.14712/24645370.4575</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14712/24645370.4575" target="_blank" >10.14712/24645370.4575</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Between History and System. Historical Knowledge in Comenius’ Pansophy

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

By analysing Johannes Amos Comenius’ Pansophy, this study shows how Comenius squared his idea of a system with his strong sense of history. It discusses how his systematic and historical approaches interact. The monumental, long-standing project of Pansophia, originating in the 1630s, was supposed to provide a wide range of information and cover all important subjects. Although Comenius studied history from early in his academic career, wrote several history treatises, and considered history the “most beautiful part of knowledge”, he seems to have failednto include it in his ambitious pansophical work. The striking absence of history makes Comenius’ pansophical enterprise significantly different from his earlier encyclopaedic project, Theatrum universitatis rerum, which included several books covering both civil and church history. The lack of such a prominent field of scholarship might be surprising in a book designed to summarise the entire knowledge available at the time. Seeking an explanation for such a remarkable omission, this study argues that excluding history was intentional, based on two significant changes in the author’s intellectual predilections. The first was related to the very concept of history, its nature and function. The second was linked to the issue of early modern knowledge organization. While structuring knowledge, Comenius did not omit history, but he abandoned the concept of disciplines in general. In the deconstructed systematisation, the topics concerning time, history and historicity stepped out of traditional historical genres. They are scattered throughout the book in more or less inconspicuous passages, hidden in many specific, non-narrative manifestations. These changes are to be attributed to the highly discussed questions regarding the optimal knowledge system in seventeenth-century scholarly discourse.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Between History and System. Historical Knowledge in Comenius’ Pansophy

Popis výsledku anglicky

By analysing Johannes Amos Comenius’ Pansophy, this study shows how Comenius squared his idea of a system with his strong sense of history. It discusses how his systematic and historical approaches interact. The monumental, long-standing project of Pansophia, originating in the 1630s, was supposed to provide a wide range of information and cover all important subjects. Although Comenius studied history from early in his academic career, wrote several history treatises, and considered history the “most beautiful part of knowledge”, he seems to have failednto include it in his ambitious pansophical work. The striking absence of history makes Comenius’ pansophical enterprise significantly different from his earlier encyclopaedic project, Theatrum universitatis rerum, which included several books covering both civil and church history. The lack of such a prominent field of scholarship might be surprising in a book designed to summarise the entire knowledge available at the time. Seeking an explanation for such a remarkable omission, this study argues that excluding history was intentional, based on two significant changes in the author’s intellectual predilections. The first was related to the very concept of history, its nature and function. The second was linked to the issue of early modern knowledge organization. While structuring knowledge, Comenius did not omit history, but he abandoned the concept of disciplines in general. In the deconstructed systematisation, the topics concerning time, history and historicity stepped out of traditional historical genres. They are scattered throughout the book in more or less inconspicuous passages, hidden in many specific, non-narrative manifestations. These changes are to be attributed to the highly discussed questions regarding the optimal knowledge system in seventeenth-century scholarly discourse.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/GA20-11795S" target="_blank" >GA20-11795S: Historiam videre. Svědectví, zkušenost a empirická evidence v raně novověké historiografii českých zemí</a><br>

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2024

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Dějiny - teorie - kritika

ISSN

1214-7249

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

—

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

22

Strana od-do

9-30

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85203645596