Theory & History of HistoriographyCroce, Benedetto
Philosophy
Theory & History of Historiography
Croce, Benedetto
Historiography
When on the one hand the two cities, the heavenly and the earthly, and
on the other the transcendency of the principle of explanation had
been conceived, the composition of dualism could not be sought for in
intelligence, but in myth, which put an end to the strife with the
triumph of one of the two adversaries: the myth of the fall, of the
redemption, of the expected reign of Christ, of the Last Judgment, and
of the final separation of the two cities, one ascending to Paradise
with the elect, the other driven back into hell with the wicked. This
mythology had its precedent in the Judaic expectations of a Messiah,
and also, from some points of view, in Orphism, and continued to
develop through gnosis, millenarism, and other heretical tentatives
and heresies, until it took a definite or almost a definite form in
St Augustine. It has been remarked that in this conception metaphysic
became identified with history, as an entirely new thought, altogether
opposed to Greek thought, and that it is a philosophical contribution
altogether novel and proper to Christianity. But we must add here that,
as mythology, it did not unite, but indeed confounded, metaphysic and
history, making the finite infinite, avoiding the fallacy of the circle
as perpetual return of things, but falling into the other fallacy of a
progress beginning and ending in time. History was therefore arranged
in spiritual epochs or phases, through which humanity was born, grew
up, and attained completion: there were six, seven, or eight epochs,
according to the various ways of dividing and calculating, which
sometimes corresponded to the ages of human life, sometimes to the days
of the creation, sometimes to both these schemes combined; or where
the hermeneutic of St Jerome upon the Book of Daniel was accepted,
the succession of events was distributed among the four _monarchies,_
of which the last was the Roman, not only in order of time, but also
in that of the idea, because after the Roman Empire (the Middle Ages,
as we know, long nourished the illusion that that empire persisted in
the form of the Holy Roman Empire) there would be nothing else, and
the reign of Christ or of the Church and then of Antichrist and the
universal judgment were expected to follow without any intermission.
The end which history had not yet reached chronologically, being also
intrinsic to the system, was ideally constructible, as the Apocalypses
had already ideally constructed it, pervading theological works and
even histories, which in their last section (see the works of Otto of
Frisia for all of them) described the coming of Antichrist and the end
of the world: hence the idea of a _history of things future,_ continued
by the paradoxical Francesco Patrizzi, who gave utterance to his theory
in the sixteenth century in his dialogues _Upon History_ (1560). This
general historical picture might be here and there varied in its
particulars, but never shattered and confuted; it varied in orthodoxy
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account