What do you think?
Rate this book
Régimes d'historicité: Présentisme et expériences du temps
Les expériences du temps sont multiples. Chaque société entretient un rapport particulier avec le passé, le présent et le futur. En comparant les manières d'articuler ces temporalités, François Hartog met en évidence divers " régimes d'historicité ".Dans les deux dernières décennies du XXe siècle, la mémoire est venue au premier plan. Le présent aussi. Histoire du présent, Les Lieux de mémoire ont exploré ces mots du temps : commémoration, mémoire, patrimoine, nation, identité. Tandis que le temps lui-même devenait, toujours plus, objet de consommation et marchandise. Historien attentif au présent, François Hartog observe la montée en puissance d'un présent omniprésent, qu'il nomme " présentisme ". Cette expérience contemporaine d'un présent perpétuel, chargé d'une dette tant à l'égard du passé que du futur, signe, peut-être, le passage d'un régime d'historicité à un autre. Serait-on passé insensiblement de la notion d'histoire à celle de mémoire ?
321 pages, Paperback
First published September 1, 2003
23 people are currently reading
385 people want to read
About the author
François Hartog
44 books26 followersFrançois Hartog is a French historian and Chair of Modern and Antique Historiography at the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS) in Paris. Born in 1946, Hartog attended the 'École normale supérieure. A former student of Jean-Pierre Vernant and assistant to Reinhart Koselleck, Hartog’s early work focused on the intellectual history of ancient Greece and historiography, while his recent work deals mainly with temporality.
His most recent book to be published in English, Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time (Columbia University Press, 2015, translated by Saskia Brown), engages our “ways of relating to the past, present, and future.” Hartog also tackles the concept of “presentism,” or how we adhere to present-day ideas to attempt to understand the past via interpretations of writing as the “motor of history” and the “contradictory qualities of our contemporary presentist relation to time.”
Hartog’s research frequently attempts to situate the progressions of time and memory against the realities of repetition and methodologies of understanding history from various theoretical reference points.
His other publications include Mémoire d'Ulysse: récits sur la frontière en Grèce ancienne (Gallimard, 1996), Anciens, modernes, sauvages (Galaade, 2005), and Vidal-Naquet, historien en personne (La Découverte, 2007), as well as countless articles, lectures, and, more recently, a series of podcasts on ancient and modern history.
Selected Bibliography
-Le Miroir d'Hérodote. Essai sur la représentation de l'autre, Gallimard, 1980.
-Le XIXe siècle et l'histoire. Le cas Fustel de Coulanges, PUF, 1988.
-Les Usages politiques du passé, avec Jacques Revel, EHESS, 2001,
-Régimes d'historicité. Présentisme et expériences du temps, Le Seuil, 2002 (Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time, Columbia University Press, 2015; translated by Saskia Brown)
-Anciens, modernes, sauvages, Galaade, 2005.
-Évidence de l'histoire. Ce que voient les historiens, EHESS, 2005.
-Vidal-Naquet, historien en personne, La Découverte, 2007.
-Croire en l'histoire, Flammarion, 2013.
-Partir pour la Grèce, Flammarion, 2015.
His most recent book to be published in English, Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time (Columbia University Press, 2015, translated by Saskia Brown), engages our “ways of relating to the past, present, and future.” Hartog also tackles the concept of “presentism,” or how we adhere to present-day ideas to attempt to understand the past via interpretations of writing as the “motor of history” and the “contradictory qualities of our contemporary presentist relation to time.”
Hartog’s research frequently attempts to situate the progressions of time and memory against the realities of repetition and methodologies of understanding history from various theoretical reference points.
His other publications include Mémoire d'Ulysse: récits sur la frontière en Grèce ancienne (Gallimard, 1996), Anciens, modernes, sauvages (Galaade, 2005), and Vidal-Naquet, historien en personne (La Découverte, 2007), as well as countless articles, lectures, and, more recently, a series of podcasts on ancient and modern history.
Selected Bibliography
-Le Miroir d'Hérodote. Essai sur la représentation de l'autre, Gallimard, 1980.
-Le XIXe siècle et l'histoire. Le cas Fustel de Coulanges, PUF, 1988.
-Les Usages politiques du passé, avec Jacques Revel, EHESS, 2001,
-Régimes d'historicité. Présentisme et expériences du temps, Le Seuil, 2002 (Regimes of Historicity: Presentism and Experiences of Time, Columbia University Press, 2015; translated by Saskia Brown)
-Anciens, modernes, sauvages, Galaade, 2005.
-Évidence de l'histoire. Ce que voient les historiens, EHESS, 2005.
-Vidal-Naquet, historien en personne, La Découverte, 2007.
-Croire en l'histoire, Flammarion, 2013.
-Partir pour la Grèce, Flammarion, 2015.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
Read
June 9, 2025Francois Hartog focuses on temporal experiences in the broad sense of the word and starting from collectivities rather than individuals: the way in which people and societies experience the relationship between the past, the present and the future. It is precisely in order to cover that breadth that Hartog uses the concept of 'régimes d'historicité' and that is understandable, but it is a difficult, barely translatable term. He admits he was inspired by the German theoretical historian Reinhart Koselleck and his concept of 'temporality'.
Of course, this is particularly interesting, because in that relationship between past, present and future very large differences can be established both over time and geography. It is a domain that has already been explored by numerous historians and especially by anthropologists: the way we experience time is very different from that of other cultures or other times. There's a classical difference, for instance, between a cyclical time experience (everything returns more or less, there is hardly any progress, usually associated with the Antiques and with pre-modern cultures) and a linear time experience (we go from past to present to future, in an ascending line, typical of modernity within a Jewish-Christian or a-religious/utopian context). Hartog's scheme is related, but different: he distinguishes a time experience in which history is seen as a model for the present (the classic 'historia magistra vitae'), a time experience dictated entirely by future expectations (utopianism) and a time experience in which only the 'now' counts and both past and future are completely subordinated to that present.
I have some problem with that very strict schedule. Especially because I think that these different time regimes cannot be separated so neatly; and in his analysis Hartog himself has to admit this fluidness. So his schedule is only an attempt to bring some order into the variety of time experiences. The fact that he mainly supports his analysis with literary examples (the Odyssee, Chateaubriand etc.) and with French historical works also undermines his thesis considerably: in my opinion they are too narrow a foundation for such a grand theory.
I have even more issues with his bold thesis that we have arrived in the era of 'presentism': according to Hartog since about 1990 progress-thinking and modernity have been renounced, and as a consequence, both past and future are only considered from a present outlook. He refers to the rise of the patrimony movement that wants to "museumalize" everything and only "conserve" (also the ecological movement is an expression of it), purely with a narrow, contemporary agenda. This presentism indeed is recognizable, but it is by no means as monopolistic as Hartog suggests. On the contrary, in our time there are still plenty of traces of past time experiences (the cyclical, exemplary and modernist); they even constantly intertwine. Just as the identity of an individual is built up from different layers (geographical, cultural, professional,...), that individual also uses different time regimes at the same time (pun intended). It may be interesting to distinguish them and possibly to designate some kind of hierarchy between them, but it is absolutely too simplistic to reduce them to a single one, as Hartog seems to do.
In short, Hartog touches upon very interesting material, but he has not convinced me at all. Personally, I would rather refer to the work of David Lowenthal, The Past is a Foreign Country - Revisited, which provides a much more nuanced and, above all, much broader overview of how we deal with past, present and future. And then of course, there's also the work of the Grand Master himself, Reinhart Koselleck (see Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time and Sediments of Time: On Possible Histories.
Of course, this is particularly interesting, because in that relationship between past, present and future very large differences can be established both over time and geography. It is a domain that has already been explored by numerous historians and especially by anthropologists: the way we experience time is very different from that of other cultures or other times. There's a classical difference, for instance, between a cyclical time experience (everything returns more or less, there is hardly any progress, usually associated with the Antiques and with pre-modern cultures) and a linear time experience (we go from past to present to future, in an ascending line, typical of modernity within a Jewish-Christian or a-religious/utopian context). Hartog's scheme is related, but different: he distinguishes a time experience in which history is seen as a model for the present (the classic 'historia magistra vitae'), a time experience dictated entirely by future expectations (utopianism) and a time experience in which only the 'now' counts and both past and future are completely subordinated to that present.
I have some problem with that very strict schedule. Especially because I think that these different time regimes cannot be separated so neatly; and in his analysis Hartog himself has to admit this fluidness. So his schedule is only an attempt to bring some order into the variety of time experiences. The fact that he mainly supports his analysis with literary examples (the Odyssee, Chateaubriand etc.) and with French historical works also undermines his thesis considerably: in my opinion they are too narrow a foundation for such a grand theory.
I have even more issues with his bold thesis that we have arrived in the era of 'presentism': according to Hartog since about 1990 progress-thinking and modernity have been renounced, and as a consequence, both past and future are only considered from a present outlook. He refers to the rise of the patrimony movement that wants to "museumalize" everything and only "conserve" (also the ecological movement is an expression of it), purely with a narrow, contemporary agenda. This presentism indeed is recognizable, but it is by no means as monopolistic as Hartog suggests. On the contrary, in our time there are still plenty of traces of past time experiences (the cyclical, exemplary and modernist); they even constantly intertwine. Just as the identity of an individual is built up from different layers (geographical, cultural, professional,...), that individual also uses different time regimes at the same time (pun intended). It may be interesting to distinguish them and possibly to designate some kind of hierarchy between them, but it is absolutely too simplistic to reduce them to a single one, as Hartog seems to do.
In short, Hartog touches upon very interesting material, but he has not convinced me at all. Personally, I would rather refer to the work of David Lowenthal, The Past is a Foreign Country - Revisited, which provides a much more nuanced and, above all, much broader overview of how we deal with past, present and future. And then of course, there's also the work of the Grand Master himself, Reinhart Koselleck (see Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time and Sediments of Time: On Possible Histories.
August 18, 2019
The French historian Hartog deals with a really interesting subject, namely the very diverse relationship that people and societies have had with time: the past, present and future. His starting point is the concept of 'temporality' of the German historical theorist Reinhart Koselleck, and he transforms this into an even more abstract concept of 'historicity regime'. And though he tries to make this concept as concrete as possible, it remains a very elusive term.
Hartog distinguishes 3 regimes: 1. the classic historicity regime where the gaze is mainly focused on the past and history serves for learning; 2. The modern regime in which the focus is on the future and everything (including past and present) is aimed at religious or non-religious utopias; and finally 3. Presentism, in which past and future are viewed purely and solely in function of the present. Hartog draws his examples mainly from literature and from French historiography, and that is a rather narrow basis, I think. Moreover, his strict separation between these regimes does not convince me, and especially his statement that we are today in a complete presentism (only the present counts), seems to me to be overrated. But that does not diminish the fact that this book offers many interesting incentives for further reflection. See also my review in my Sensofhistory-account: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
Hartog distinguishes 3 regimes: 1. the classic historicity regime where the gaze is mainly focused on the past and history serves for learning; 2. The modern regime in which the focus is on the future and everything (including past and present) is aimed at religious or non-religious utopias; and finally 3. Presentism, in which past and future are viewed purely and solely in function of the present. Hartog draws his examples mainly from literature and from French historiography, and that is a rather narrow basis, I think. Moreover, his strict separation between these regimes does not convince me, and especially his statement that we are today in a complete presentism (only the present counts), seems to me to be overrated. But that does not diminish the fact that this book offers many interesting incentives for further reflection. See also my review in my Sensofhistory-account: https://www.goodreads.com/review/show...
October 5, 2017
Fantastic exploration and development of a theory of presentism, which for Hartog has several important implications. History is now memory, monuments are now memorials, and all of our work to explain the past and predict the future are simply ways of extending our eternal present in both directions.
He analyzes how we got to presentism by approaching the past through a theory of regimes of historicity, by which he means the norms, standards, and rhetorical methods of articulating the past, present, and future. We start with Odysseus and move forward to Cicero, then into the ages of the big disruptions with time - the French Revolution taking center stage here. The work is impressive due to Hartog's really engaging critical style. He chooses one or two authors and their works in order to prove his point about the era. It sounds as if it wouldn't be persuasive, but it is. There were seldom times in the book where I felt that he didn't make his case well given what he did with his selected texts.
The book's conclusion is awesome. He suggests what presentism looks like and how it functions, then advocates for a couple of perspectives that might thwart presentism and replace it with something else. This part of the book was disappointing as I felt a lot more could be said. But as I thought about it, it might be more of a volume 2 than a conclusion. . . . there's a lot to investigate when we start to think of how to rearticulate past, present, and future to be able to come up with new ontologies.
A fantastic read and a great investigative and critical journey into historiography via some pretty forgotten about books that are now very compelling due to how Hartog discusses them. Really enjoyed it.
He analyzes how we got to presentism by approaching the past through a theory of regimes of historicity, by which he means the norms, standards, and rhetorical methods of articulating the past, present, and future. We start with Odysseus and move forward to Cicero, then into the ages of the big disruptions with time - the French Revolution taking center stage here. The work is impressive due to Hartog's really engaging critical style. He chooses one or two authors and their works in order to prove his point about the era. It sounds as if it wouldn't be persuasive, but it is. There were seldom times in the book where I felt that he didn't make his case well given what he did with his selected texts.
The book's conclusion is awesome. He suggests what presentism looks like and how it functions, then advocates for a couple of perspectives that might thwart presentism and replace it with something else. This part of the book was disappointing as I felt a lot more could be said. But as I thought about it, it might be more of a volume 2 than a conclusion. . . . there's a lot to investigate when we start to think of how to rearticulate past, present, and future to be able to come up with new ontologies.
A fantastic read and a great investigative and critical journey into historiography via some pretty forgotten about books that are now very compelling due to how Hartog discusses them. Really enjoyed it.
Want to read
October 21, 2021Recommended by Stephen B. Chapman.
February 19, 2018
François Hartog comienza a percibir un cambio en la manera en que relacionamos y percibimos el tiempo. Dicha coyuntura pudiera ubicarse temporal y simbólicamente en 1989. Si bien existieron otras "brechas de tiempo", siguiendo a Hannah Arendt, la actual, el "presentismo" nos muestra nuevas interrogantes y el ascenso de otras categorías y prácticas como la "memoria" y su alter ego, el "patrimonio".
¿Cómo es que se ha llegado a este nueva etapa y qué conlleva este "presentismo"? Con la noción de "régimen de historicidad", Hartog se adentra a la historia de dos órdenes del tiempo, el primero, articulado a través de la historización del régimen heroico, el paso del mito al acontecimiento, la memoria y la historia en Ulises, el paso del Antiguo al Nuevo Régimen con Chataubriand en el auge y caída de la Historia Magistra Vitae. El segundo orden, producto en parte de las herencias y proyectos fallidos de la Modernidad, en el que se imponen categorías como memoria, patrimonio, conmemoración.
La práctica histórica ha sido concebida de manera diferente en cada "brecha de tiempo". Existe hoy en día un desplazamiento temporal del cual el historiador no está exento y en el que se comienza a cuestionar su utilidad. En medio de esta crisis, el historiador ha convertido a la "memoria" y el "patrimonio" en objetos de estudio.
"Régimen de historicidad" es una noción que permite acercarnos al tiempo y a diagnosticar las "brechas" que ocurren en el. Construida por el autor y, al mismo tiempo, utilizada como categoría de análisis los "regímenes de historicidad" permiten la reflexión de evolución y representación de prácticas políticas, culturales, sociales, históricas e historiográficas, pues para Hartog, hacer historia y reflexionar sobre historia van siempre juntos.
¿Cómo es que se ha llegado a este nueva etapa y qué conlleva este "presentismo"? Con la noción de "régimen de historicidad", Hartog se adentra a la historia de dos órdenes del tiempo, el primero, articulado a través de la historización del régimen heroico, el paso del mito al acontecimiento, la memoria y la historia en Ulises, el paso del Antiguo al Nuevo Régimen con Chataubriand en el auge y caída de la Historia Magistra Vitae. El segundo orden, producto en parte de las herencias y proyectos fallidos de la Modernidad, en el que se imponen categorías como memoria, patrimonio, conmemoración.
La práctica histórica ha sido concebida de manera diferente en cada "brecha de tiempo". Existe hoy en día un desplazamiento temporal del cual el historiador no está exento y en el que se comienza a cuestionar su utilidad. En medio de esta crisis, el historiador ha convertido a la "memoria" y el "patrimonio" en objetos de estudio.
"Régimen de historicidad" es una noción que permite acercarnos al tiempo y a diagnosticar las "brechas" que ocurren en el. Construida por el autor y, al mismo tiempo, utilizada como categoría de análisis los "regímenes de historicidad" permiten la reflexión de evolución y representación de prácticas políticas, culturales, sociales, históricas e historiográficas, pues para Hartog, hacer historia y reflexionar sobre historia van siempre juntos.
March 3, 2017
Yet another French theory of history, mourning the loss of France's colonies without being explicit about it. The central thesis is that the horizon of the future no longer exists and we are trapped in presentism. Whose future? Europe? World? Ignores anything that runs counter to this thesis. Does global history while talking about pretty much nothing but France, with no mention of India or China or any awareness of the wider world. A book published in the 2000s without an understanding of postcolonial theories or subaltern theories of history, or indeed, any history but the Enlightenment model, is, frankly, not worth reading.
November 15, 2020
El autor analiza con conceptos de "tiempo, historia", historicidad y la función del historiador recorriendo las opiniones de diferentes pensadores en torno a dichos temas.
November 12, 2021
Fantástico libro acerca de las percepciones del tiempo histórico y quizás lo más claro que haya leído acerca del “presentismo”.
October 23, 2023
très continental, on va dire. ce n'est pas vraiment un compliment.
August 25, 2025
bom livro mas chega né
September 15, 2014
Εξαιρετική μελέτη!
Ξεκινώντας από την αρχαιότητα φτάνοντας στο σήμερα και στην αναγκαιότητα της μνήμης-λήθης.Ποιος ο ρόλος της Ιστορίας;Απλά καταγραφή των γεγονότων ή σύνδεση με το παρόν και το μέλλον;
Στην ελληνική έκδοση υπάρχει και συνέντευξη του συγγραφέα που λύνει τυχόν απορίες.
Εξαιρετική μτφ και επιμέλεια από Δημήτρη Κουσουρή και εκδ.Αλεξάνδρεια.
Ξεκινώντας από την αρχαιότητα φτάνοντας στο σήμερα και στην αναγκαιότητα της μνήμης-λήθης.Ποιος ο ρόλος της Ιστορίας;Απλά καταγραφή των γεγονότων ή σύνδεση με το παρόν και το μέλλον;
Στην ελληνική έκδοση υπάρχει και συνέντευξη του συγγραφέα που λύνει τυχόν απορίες.
Εξαιρετική μτφ και επιμέλεια από Δημήτρη Κουσουρή και εκδ.Αλεξάνδρεια.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews