Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend

This treatise is dedicated to the term of historical legend as part of the scientific classification. In the future, this term should only be used in the context of research history in connection with narratives that have been called thus since the beginning of the 19th century. As a replacement, th...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Klaus Graf
Format: Article
Language:Estonian
Published: Eesti Kirjandusmuuseum 2003-01-01
Series:Mäetagused
Online Access:http://www.folklore.ee/tagused/nr20/graf.pdf
_version_ 1818475314994479104
author Klaus Graf
author_facet Klaus Graf
author_sort Klaus Graf
collection DOAJ
description This treatise is dedicated to the term of historical legend as part of the scientific classification. In the future, this term should only be used in the context of research history in connection with narratives that have been called thus since the beginning of the 19th century. As a replacement, the term historical heritage is offered. Narrative research needs to conclude the research into historical heritage initiated by historians. It is just as important that historians would recognise the achievements of narrative researchers. It is either trivial or dangerous to speak of the historical core of heritage: dangerous in case this is intended to prove the validity or source value of oral heritage or to support a speculation based on lacking source material. The term folk vision of history is unsuitable as the terms nation and history are not sufficiently unambiguous. The term historical thinking is a fickle group-specific summary of different kinds of (in Ludwig Wittgenstein's terms, kindred) language usage. Historical heritage needs to be viewed as an inseparable part of its contemporary culture, i.e. first of all together with its group-specific historical development, but also the non-verbal, material media. Not all heritage that included widespread narrative motifs has been among widespread heritage. Not all heritage in the form of folk legend was generally, i.e. also among the lower and middle class, known. Legends from the 19th and 20th centuries must be taken seriously, but first of all as literary phenomenon. Their (except in the case of obvious fakes) philological classification is primary to finding in them the narratives that were transmitted orally or archaic heritage. Heritage becomes relevant for research by the crossing points of discourses characteristic to a era as expressed in versions of a single heritage narration, not as the core essence of heritage maintained in all contexts. Translation based on the German article Thesen zur Verabschiedung des Begriffs der `historischen Sage' published in Fabula 29 (1988), pp 21-47. Translated by Reet Hiiemäe.
first_indexed 2024-12-10T09:11:21Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2940e7355c4c46818faea1d3b3134473
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1406-992X
1406-9938
language Estonian
last_indexed 2024-12-10T09:11:21Z
publishDate 2003-01-01
publisher Eesti Kirjandusmuuseum
record_format Article
series Mäetagused
spelling doaj.art-2940e7355c4c46818faea1d3b31344732022-12-22T01:54:59ZestEesti KirjandusmuuseumMäetagused1406-992X1406-99382003-01-0120Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistendKlaus GrafThis treatise is dedicated to the term of historical legend as part of the scientific classification. In the future, this term should only be used in the context of research history in connection with narratives that have been called thus since the beginning of the 19th century. As a replacement, the term historical heritage is offered. Narrative research needs to conclude the research into historical heritage initiated by historians. It is just as important that historians would recognise the achievements of narrative researchers. It is either trivial or dangerous to speak of the historical core of heritage: dangerous in case this is intended to prove the validity or source value of oral heritage or to support a speculation based on lacking source material. The term folk vision of history is unsuitable as the terms nation and history are not sufficiently unambiguous. The term historical thinking is a fickle group-specific summary of different kinds of (in Ludwig Wittgenstein's terms, kindred) language usage. Historical heritage needs to be viewed as an inseparable part of its contemporary culture, i.e. first of all together with its group-specific historical development, but also the non-verbal, material media. Not all heritage that included widespread narrative motifs has been among widespread heritage. Not all heritage in the form of folk legend was generally, i.e. also among the lower and middle class, known. Legends from the 19th and 20th centuries must be taken seriously, but first of all as literary phenomenon. Their (except in the case of obvious fakes) philological classification is primary to finding in them the narratives that were transmitted orally or archaic heritage. Heritage becomes relevant for research by the crossing points of discourses characteristic to a era as expressed in versions of a single heritage narration, not as the core essence of heritage maintained in all contexts. Translation based on the German article Thesen zur Verabschiedung des Begriffs der `historischen Sage' published in Fabula 29 (1988), pp 21-47. Translated by Reet Hiiemäe.http://www.folklore.ee/tagused/nr20/graf.pdf
spellingShingle Klaus Graf
Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
Mäetagused
title Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
title_full Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
title_fullStr Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
title_full_unstemmed Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
title_short Mõned teesid hüvastijätuks mõistega ajalooline muistend
title_sort moned teesid huvastijatuks moistega ajalooline muistend
url http://www.folklore.ee/tagused/nr20/graf.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT klausgraf monedteesidhuvastijatuksmoistegaajaloolinemuistend