Notes on the Articulation of Time

REFLECTION on the work of my fellow-contributors to this journal suggests that the barbarous name of periodization may be given to at least six quite different things. First, the mere separation of historical data into discrete blocks for purposes of convenient presentation. Second, the attempt to find temporal divisions into which one's material naturally falls. Third, the imposition of a formal structure on such an articulation by assigning to each division an initial, medial and terminal phase, and perhaps other phases too, supposed to stand in some such constant dynamic relation to each other as growth, maturity and decay. Fourth, the imposition of such a structure, not in such formal terms, but by purporting to find in each segment a describable character, so that (for example) each stylistic division would fall into archaic, classical and mannerist periods. Fifth, the rise among historians of a consensus as to the appropriate scheme of articulation for history in general or for some such specialized field as literary history. And sixth, the claim that some such agreed scheme of articulation somehow invalidates all alternative schemes in its own field, or even in any field.' I do not say that periodization denotes only these actions and processes, but that it denotes at least these, and that all six can be discerned in the writings contained in this number. But most contributors assume that the term contained in this number. But most contributors assume that

Art · Articulation (sociology) · Political science · Early Modern Spanish Literature · Historical and Linguistic Studies · Historical Influence and Diplomacy · Law

• Ralph Cohen on Literary Periods

  John L Rowlett•New Literary History•2019

  Add to list

• On the Presuppositions of Literary Periods

  Ralph Cohen, John L Rowlett•New Literary History•2019

  Add to list