Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

WHY BOTHER ABOUT HISTORICAL REGIONS?: DEBATES OVER CENTRAL EUROPE IN HUNGARY, POLAND AND ROMANIA

WHY BOTHER ABOUT HISTORICAL REGIONS?: DEBATES OVER CENTRAL EUROPE IN HUNGARY, POLAND AND ROMANIA The article analyzes the ways in which the concept of Central Europe and related regional classifications were instrumentalized in historical research in Hungary, Poland and Romania. While Hungarian and Polish historians employed the discourse of Central Europe as a central means to contextualize and often relativize established national historical narratives, their geographical frameworks of comparison were nevertheless fairly divergent. the Hungarian one relating to the former Habsburg and Austro-Hungarian lands while the Polish one revolving around the tradition of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. Romanian historians approached the issue from the perspective of local history, debating two alternative regional frameworks: the Old Kingdom, treated as part ofthe Byzantine and Ottoman legacies, and Transylvania, Bukovina and the Banat that were shaped by the Habsburg project of modemity. In the Romanian context the debate on Central Europe reached its peak at a time when it lost re1evance in the Polish and Hungarian contexts. While conceding to recent critiques on the constructed and often exclusivist nature of symbolic geographical catcgories, the authors maintain the heuristic valuc of regional frameworks of interpretation as models of historical explanation transcending the nation-state at sub-national or trans-national level. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png East Central Europe Brill

WHY BOTHER ABOUT HISTORICAL REGIONS?: DEBATES OVER CENTRAL EUROPE IN HUNGARY, POLAND AND ROMANIA

Loading next page...
 
/lp/brill/why-bother-about-historical-regions-debates-over-central-europe-in-E9dGnVFoIf
Publisher
Brill
Copyright
Copyright 2005 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands
ISSN
0094-3037
eISSN
1876-3308
DOI
10.1163/18763308-90001031
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

The article analyzes the ways in which the concept of Central Europe and related regional classifications were instrumentalized in historical research in Hungary, Poland and Romania. While Hungarian and Polish historians employed the discourse of Central Europe as a central means to contextualize and often relativize established national historical narratives, their geographical frameworks of comparison were nevertheless fairly divergent. the Hungarian one relating to the former Habsburg and Austro-Hungarian lands while the Polish one revolving around the tradition of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. Romanian historians approached the issue from the perspective of local history, debating two alternative regional frameworks: the Old Kingdom, treated as part ofthe Byzantine and Ottoman legacies, and Transylvania, Bukovina and the Banat that were shaped by the Habsburg project of modemity. In the Romanian context the debate on Central Europe reached its peak at a time when it lost re1evance in the Polish and Hungarian contexts. While conceding to recent critiques on the constructed and often exclusivist nature of symbolic geographical catcgories, the authors maintain the heuristic valuc of regional frameworks of interpretation as models of historical explanation transcending the nation-state at sub-national or trans-national level.

Journal

East Central EuropeBrill

Published: Jan 1, 2005

There are no references for this article.