英文摘要 |
That the study of the past is subject to the perspective of the present is, for most, beyond dispute. Historians can not be impartial recorders since they are conditioned, if only unconsciously, by the flow of history itself. One can attempt to recognize and set aside opinions of one's own world, understanding earlier cultures as 'other'. Yet, even the terms of reference and the language in which they are expressed condition the resulting narrative. Such recognition, though limiting an ability to understand the past 'wie es eigentlich gewesen' does not imperal study and appreciation of earlier cultures. However, a more recent tenet does: in the eyes of constructivists, those who study the past construct the very objects of their knowledge. Objects, even texts, are in flux according to their relation to the assumption and procedures of the investigators and their societies who see what they are conditioned to see. This view renders study of the past at best an exercise in ingenuity or even fruitless. My attempt is to undercut-perhaps even disprove-this positon. Certain elements from past cultures are extraordinarily ubiquitous and lasting through vast sweeps of time. I believe that there are grounds for trusting the concreteness of such elements. First since they are rooted in elemental human concerns, they are timeless. Second, they are so brilliantly demonstrated within their own time frame that they have become admirable in their own right. Both of these qualities produce a third: they provoke a desire to know more about them and to use this knowledge to understand and inform the present. While my example is ancient Greece, I propose that these qualities pertain to 'classics' in all cultures. |