Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T05:19:01.109Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Miroslav Hroch's model of small nation-formation and Begriffsgeschichte

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Oana Sînziana Păltineanu
Oana Sînziana Păltineanu*
Affiliation:
Department of History, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary
*
*Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article focuses on Miroslav Hroch's book titled Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe and it tries to build on Hroch's model of small nation-formation mainly on a methodological level. The aim is to incorporate the “subjective” dimension in Hroch's analysis of the “objective” factors that lead to nation-formation, by opening up the discursive level to investigation. I suggest that the comparative study of nation-formation needs to remain connected to the study of nationalism as a phenomenon, including the investigation of the discursive plane, of the political languages, and histories of concepts. In this sense, the article seeks to link Hroch's work to Begriffsgeschichte and to present a range of interpretations on how these two could work together, on a methodological level. The answers come mainly from Reinhart Koselleck's theorizing on the relation between social history and the history of concepts. This article also addresses compatibility problems that aim to encourage a more integrative type of analysis that would entail an in-depth and critical revisiting of Hroch's model. At the same time, Hroch's model proves to be flexible enough to be situated at the intersection of more types of history writing.

Keywords

Miroslav HrochBegriffsgeschichtenationalism theory
Type
Articles
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 38 , Issue 6: Special Issue: Twenty-Five Years of A-B-C: Miroslav Rrocr's Impact on Nationalism Studies, Guest Editor: Alexander Maxwell , November 2010 , pp. 813 - 827
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Breuilly, John. Rev. of Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe, by Miroslav Hroch. The English Historical Review 101.399 (1986): 446–49. Print.Google Scholar
Brubaker, Rogers. Ethnicity without Groups. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Cohen, Gary B. Rev. of Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe, by Miroslav Hroch. The Journal of Modern History 58.4 (1986): 897–99. Print.Google Scholar
den Boer, Pim. “The historiography of German Begriffsgeschichte and the Dutch project of Conceptual History.” History of Concepts: Comparative Perspectives. Ed. Hampsher-Monk, Iain. Amsterdam: Amsterdam U. 1998. 13–22. Print.Google Scholar
den Boer, Pim. “Civilization: Comparing Concepts and Identities.” Contributions to the History of Concepts 1.1 (2005): 51–62. Print.Google Scholar
Gellner, Ernest. “An Alternative Vision.” Encounters with Nationalism. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994. 182–200. Print.Google Scholar
Hobsbawm, E. J. Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2004, Print.Google Scholar
Hroch, Miroslav. Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe: A Comparative Analysis of the Social Composition of Patriotic Groups Among the Smaller European Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1985. Print.Google Scholar
Hroch, Miroslav. “From National Movement to the Fully-Formed Nation: The Nation-Building Process in Europe.” New Left Review 1.198 (1993): 3–20. Print.Google Scholar
Hroch, Miroslav. “Real and constructed: the nature of the nation.” Ed. Hall, John A. The State of the Nation: Ernest Gellner and the Theory of Nationalism. Cambridge UP, 2000 (c1998). 91–106. Print.Google Scholar
Hroch, Miroslav. “Learning from Small Nations. Interview.” New Left Review 58 (2009): 41–59. Print.Google Scholar
Kirby, David. Rev. of Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe, by Miroslav Hroch. The Slavonic and East European Review 65.2 (1987): 293. Print.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart. “A Response to Comments on the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe.” Eds. Lehmann, Hartmut and Richter, Melvin. The Meaning of Historical Terms and Concepts. New Studies on Begriffsgeschichte. Washington DC: German Historical Institute, 1996. 59–70. Print.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart. The Practice of Conceptual History: Timing History, Spacing Concepts. Stanford, California: Stanford UP, 2002. Print.Google Scholar
Koselleck, Reinhart. Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time. New York: Columbia UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Palonen, Kari. “An Application of Conceptual History to Itself. From Method to Theory in Reinhart Koselleck's Begriffsgeschichte.” Finish Yearbook of Political Thought 1 (1997): 39–69. Print.Google Scholar
Porter-Szűcs, Brian. “Beyond the Study of Nationalism.” Eds. Jaskulowski, Krzysztof and Kamusella, Tomasz. Nationalism Today. Oxford: Peter Lang, 2009, 3–15.Google Scholar
Richter, Melvin. “Reconstructing the History of Political Languages: Pocock, Skinner, and the Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe.” History and Theory 29.1 (1990): 38–70. Print.Google Scholar
Richter, Melvin. “Appreciating a Contemporary Classic. The Geschichtliche Grundbegriffe and Future Scholarship.” Finish Yearbook of Political Thought 1 (1997): 25–38. Print.Google Scholar
Richter, Melvin. “More than a Two-Way Traffic: Analyzing, Translating, and Comparing Political Concepts from Other Cultures.” Contributions to the History of Concepts 1.1 (2005): 7–20. Print.Google Scholar
Stokes, Gale, Rev. of Social Preconditions of National Revival in Europe, by Miroslav Hroch. The American Historical Review 91.3 (1986): 625–26. Print.Google Scholar
Todorova, Maria. “The Trap of Backwardness: Modernity, Temporality, and the Study of Eastern European Nationalism.” Slavic Review 64.1 (2005): 140–64. Print.Google Scholar