Disciplinevorming en de handboekparadox: De Geschichte der Künste und Wissenschaften (1796-1820) als onbedoeld pionierswerk

Translated title of the contribution: Discipline Formation and the Handbook Paradox: The Geschichte der Künste und Wissenschaften (1796-1820) as unintended pioneer work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle (Academic Journal)

Abstract

Compiled by a ‘society of learned men’ mainly affiliated to the University of Göttingen, the Geschichte der Künste und Wissenschaften (1796-1820) presented a tableau of the history and progress of the arts and sciences at an unprecedented scale, divided up into eleven sections and 71 volumes. Ambivalent between a bibliographic format and a running narrative, it is both a high point and an end point of the early modern genre historia literaria. This article explores how the Göttingen megaproject contributed to discipline formation especially in the domains of history, art history, and the history of literature, giving these fields a history of their development and formulating a programme for furthering them. Thus, the attempt to create an overview also resulted in unintended pioneer work, even if the contents of the Geschichte were rather dull. I call this the ‘handbook paradox’.
Translated title of the contributionDiscipline Formation and the Handbook Paradox: The Geschichte der Künste und Wissenschaften (1796-1820) as unintended pioneer work
Original languageDutch
Pages (from-to)52-71
Number of pages20
JournalDe Achttiende Eeuw
Volume54
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Discipline Formation and the Handbook Paradox: The Geschichte der Künste und Wissenschaften (1796-1820) as unintended pioneer work'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this