Search results

This introductory essay reviews recent debates on social history, with a focus on the revival of this field of studies in post-communist East Central Europe and its potential impact on rejuvenating approaches to the social history of Europe. The first part of the essay provides a brief overview of the emergence of social history as a reaction to the dominant political history of the nineteenth century and its crystallization in different national schools, and highlights recent responses to the poststructuralist and postmodern critiques of "the social." The second part focuses on traditions of social history research in East Central Europe, taking Poland and Romania as main examples. The third part summarizes the main claims of the articles included in this issue and evaluates their implications for future research. It is argued that, at first glance, post-communist historiography in East Central Europe provides the picture of a discipline in transformation, still struggling to break up with the past and to rebuild its institutional framework, catching up with recent trends and redefining its role in continental and global historiography. The recent attempts to invigorate research in traditional fields of social history might seem largely obsolete, not only out of tune with international developments but also futile reiterations of vistas that have been for long experimented with and superseded in Western Europe. At closer scrutiny, however, historiography in East Central Europe appears—unequal and variegated as it is—as a laboratory for historical innovation and a field of experimentation, and interaction of scholars from various disciplines and scholarly traditions, in which old and new trends amalgamate in peculiar ways. It is suggested that the tendency to reconceptualize the "social" that we currently witness in humanities and social sciences worldwide could be not only reinforced but also cross-fertilized by the "social turn" in East Central Europe, potentially leading to novel approaches.

In the translated lecture the author tries and answers the question on what ground are we entitled to ascribe "centrality" to Central Europe. He points out that, in contemporary usage, the term "Europe" stands for three different, not overlapping phenomena: geographical, political, and cultural.

Philosophers in Central Europe are highly dependent on the Western European tradition of philosophy, while politicians in the region tend to use arguments that are often foreign to the ones used in Western Europe. The philosophical tradition of Central Europe is dependent on Western European tradition – it would be impossible to speak about any kind of distinct regional philosophical paradigm. The situation with political self‑understanding in the region is very different. The politicians in the region are aware of the various differences between the two cultural and political traditions. Today these differences have become especially clear in various disagreements between politicians from the Visegrád Group and their colleagues in Western Europe. Politicians from Central Europe propose their own understanding of the meaning of Western civilization. This phenomenon can be described as a new political Messianism. The old Messianims of the 19th century today are being replaced by new consciousness of the specific mission of the region. Conservative politicians propose an understanding of the region which is based on cultural differences from Western Europe. Various conceptions about the singular identity of the region that were developed in the ninth decade of the 20th century by Czesław Miłosz, Milan Kundera and György Konràd today are gaining a new political significance.

Philosophers in Central Europe are highly dependent on the Western European tradition of philosophy, while politicians in the region tend to use arguments that are often foreign to the ones used in Western Europe. The philosophical tradition of Central Europe is dependent on Western European tradition – it would be impossible to speak about any kind of distinct regional philosophical paradigm. The situation with political self‑understanding in the region is very different. The politicians in the region are aware of the various differences between the two cultural and political traditions. Today these differences have become especially clear in various disagreements between politicians from the Visegrád Group and their colleagues in Western Europe. Politicians from Central Europe propose their own understanding of the meaning of Western civilization. This phenomenon can be described as a new political Messianism. The old Messianims of the 19th century today are being replaced by new consciousness of the specific mission of the region. Conservative politicians propose an understanding of the region which is based on cultural differences from Western Europe. Various conceptions about the singular identity of the region that were developed in the ninth decade of the 20th century by Czesław Miłosz, Milan Kundera and György Konràd today are gaining a new political significance.

Philosophers in Central Europe are highly dependent on the Western European tradition of philosophy, while politicians in the region tend to use arguments that are often foreign to the ones used in Western Europe. The philosophical tradition of Central Europe is dependent on Western European tradition – it would be impossible to speak about any kind of distinct regional philosophical paradigm. The situation with political self‑understanding in the region is very different. The politicians in the region are aware of the various differences between the two cultural and political traditions. Today these differences have become especially clear in various disagreements between politicians from the Visegrád Group and their colleagues in Western Europe. Politicians from Central Europe propose their own understanding of the meaning of Western civilization. This phenomenon can be described as a new political Messianism. The old Messianims of the 19th century today are being replaced by new consciousness of the specific mission of the region. Conservative politicians propose an understanding of the region which is based on cultural differences from Western Europe. Various conceptions about the singular identity of the region that were developed in the ninth decade of the 20th century by Czesław Miłosz, Milan Kundera and György Konràd today are gaining a new political significance.

Philosophers in Central Europe are highly dependent on the Western European tradition of philosophy, while politicians in the region tend to use arguments that are often foreign to the ones used in Western Europe. The philosophical tradition of Central Europe is dependent on Western European tradition – it would be impossible to speak about any kind of distinct regional philosophical paradigm. The situation with political self‑understanding in the region is very different. The politicians in the region are aware of the various differences between the two cultural and political traditions. Today these differences have become especially clear in various disagreements between politicians from the Visegrád Group and their colleagues in Western Europe. Politicians from Central Europe propose their own understanding of the meaning of Western civilization. This phenomenon can be described as a new political Messianism. The old Messianims of the 19th century today are being replaced by new consciousness of the specific mission of the region. Conservative politicians propose an understanding of the region which is based on cultural differences from Western Europe. Various conceptions about the singular identity of the region that were developed in the ninth decade of the 20th century by Czesław Miłosz, Milan Kundera and György Konràd today are gaining a new political significance.