메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
역사학회 역사학보 歷史學報 第174輯
발행연도
2002.6
수록면
263 - 291 (29page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
Since the late 20th century, the field of cultural history has achieved a position with universality while leading other fields within the historical discipline and enjoying an un-precedent modernizing mood. However, in spite of these new leading trends of cultural history, the correct defmitions for the concept of 'culture' or 'cultural history' are not established yet. Consequently, within this absence of established definitions, understanding those concepts becomes much harder. In this paper, I am going to examine the definitions on history, culture, and cultural history given by Johan Huizinga, one of the most representative cultural historians in the early 20th century. Through this examination I hope to provide a vision to overcome the aforementioned dilemma in the present field of cultural history.
For Huizinga 'history' is seen as a mental form through which one would understand the world surrounding him on the basis of the culture of the past. And 'culture' for him is a historical subject, which suggests the answers to the Questions from the past. At the same time it is seen as major objects for the people within the same cultural boundary to choose to study when they write their history. Huizinga's understanding on the relationship between these two concepts could be stated as following: history is cultural phenomena and the culture is historical phenomena. In other words, history is the culture of the past, and culture is the history of the present. In defining both concepts, one concept should function as a quintessential device for explaining the other. Consequently, in Huizinga's writing we find that the distinction between the two concepts looks ambiguous in terms of their contents. Because of this tendency, the question whether 'history' and 'culture' are two completely substitutable concepts for Huizinga, seems to be still in debate.
However, on the basis of such outside features, we should not conclude that Huizinga understood history and culture as the same concepts that can substitute each other. Furthermore such an argument would lose any of its explanatory power when we find that Huizinga eventually regarded culture as an upper hand concept, which includes history. Consequently the relationship of 'history' and 'culture' for Huizinga should be understood as following. While they are sharing similar contents, history and culture are in the process of dialectical development while complementing each other in making up for the other's weakness in order to become one perfect concept.
On the other hand, 'cultural history' for Huizinga is not just some simple concept of mathematical combination between culture and history. Huizinga's cultural history is produced to be a synthetic concept in new dimension functioning to observe and respond to an era's historical situation while suggesting a new metaphorical vision as 'the phenomenology of culture' and 'the morphology of life: In this point of view, this very contribution by Huizinga should be reassessed as an opened vision about history, which had already discussed and predicted the possibility of interdisciplinary approaches among the new sciences of culture from the early 20th century.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 호이징하의 ‘역사‘ 개념과 그 문제점
Ⅲ. 호이징하의 ‘문화‘ 개념과 그 특성
Ⅳ. 호이징하에서의 ‘역사‘와 ‘문화;의 혼용?
Ⅴ. 호이징하의 ‘문화사‘ 개념과 방법
Ⅵ. 맺음말
〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-911-002857666