What do you think?
Rate this book
Timpul istoriei
Philippe Ariès (1914-1984) produziu os oito ensaios que compõem esta obra entre 1946 e 1951, sob o impacto da Segunda Guerra Mundial. No livro, ele reflete sobre a História a partir de experiências pessoais, autobiográficas, e analisa as diversas concepções da História então existentes – conservadoras, marxistas, científicas e existenciais.
Os textos evidenciam a influência das ideias inovadoras constantes nos Annales, às quais Ariès foi um dos primeiros intelectuais a aderir. Mas também comprovam a originalidade do próprio autor, que propõe uma maneira singular de construir a História: ele parte da própria experiência e leva em conta a perspectiva do tempo presente. Por tais características, Ariès foi repudiado tanto pelos adeptos das escolas conservadoras quanto das escolas marxistas e ignorado pelos grandes editores.
No primeiro ensaio, Ariès recorre a suas memórias de infância e adolescência vividas em uma família monarquista para refletir sobre como ele próprio percebe a História. Nos ensaios seguintes examina o modo como a História é avaliada por sua família, pelo meio universitário, pelos historiadores da Action françaisee pelos autores dos Annales. Em dois capítulos distintos,que prenunciam o que viria a ser a história da História, ele analisaa abordagem da História predominante na Idade Média e no período clássico.
Das visões ideológicas da História Ariès faz uma análise tão implacável quanto coerente com sua própria concepção. Ele compara o materialismo histórico com o que chama “o historicismo conservador”, cuja matriz é a “escola capetiana do século 20”. E mostra que, com pontos de partida antagônicos – a nostalgia do passado de um lado e a esperança de uma ruptura radical de outro – as duas correntes confluem em seus princípios fundamentais. Ambas anulam as histórias das comunidades particulares, tornando-as uma história coletiva, a do Estado nacional ou a da humanidade inteira. Ambas pretendem estabelecer leis que regulem as repetições de situações idênticas. Ambas dissolvem as singularidades das existências concretas, seja na abstração das instituições, seja no anonimato das classes: “Aproximar assim Marx e Bainville, para criticá-los, era audacioso e, em todo caso, repudiava a filosofia da história proclamada por aqueles de quem Ariès estava familiar, afetiva e politicamente mais próximo”, escreve no prefácio Roger Chartier.
Os textos evidenciam a influência das ideias inovadoras constantes nos Annales, às quais Ariès foi um dos primeiros intelectuais a aderir. Mas também comprovam a originalidade do próprio autor, que propõe uma maneira singular de construir a História: ele parte da própria experiência e leva em conta a perspectiva do tempo presente. Por tais características, Ariès foi repudiado tanto pelos adeptos das escolas conservadoras quanto das escolas marxistas e ignorado pelos grandes editores.
No primeiro ensaio, Ariès recorre a suas memórias de infância e adolescência vividas em uma família monarquista para refletir sobre como ele próprio percebe a História. Nos ensaios seguintes examina o modo como a História é avaliada por sua família, pelo meio universitário, pelos historiadores da Action françaisee pelos autores dos Annales. Em dois capítulos distintos,que prenunciam o que viria a ser a história da História, ele analisaa abordagem da História predominante na Idade Média e no período clássico.
Das visões ideológicas da História Ariès faz uma análise tão implacável quanto coerente com sua própria concepção. Ele compara o materialismo histórico com o que chama “o historicismo conservador”, cuja matriz é a “escola capetiana do século 20”. E mostra que, com pontos de partida antagônicos – a nostalgia do passado de um lado e a esperança de uma ruptura radical de outro – as duas correntes confluem em seus princípios fundamentais. Ambas anulam as histórias das comunidades particulares, tornando-as uma história coletiva, a do Estado nacional ou a da humanidade inteira. Ambas pretendem estabelecer leis que regulem as repetições de situações idênticas. Ambas dissolvem as singularidades das existências concretas, seja na abstração das instituições, seja no anonimato das classes: “Aproximar assim Marx e Bainville, para criticá-los, era audacioso e, em todo caso, repudiava a filosofia da história proclamada por aqueles de quem Ariès estava familiar, afetiva e politicamente mais próximo”, escreve no prefácio Roger Chartier.
- GenresNonfictionHistory
288 pages, Unknown Binding
First published January 1, 1954
1 person is currently reading
16 people want to read
About the author
Philippe Ariès
79 books115 followersPhilippe Ariès (21 July 1914 – 8 February 1984) was a French medievalist and historian of the family and childhood, in the style of Georges Duby. He wrote many books on the common daily life. His most prominent works regarded the change in the western attitudes towards death.
Ariès regarded himself as an "anarchist of the right". He was initially close to the Action française but later distanced himself from it, as he viewed it as too authoritarian, hence his self-description as an "anarchist". Ariès also contributed to La Nation française, a royalist review. However, he also co-operated with many left-wing French historians, especially with Michel Foucault, who wrote his obituary.
During his life, his work was often better known in the English-speaking world than it was in France itself. He is known above all for his book L’Enfant et la Vie Familiale sous l’Ancien Régime (1960), which was translated into English as Centuries of Childhood (1962). This book is pre-eminent in the history of childhood, as it was essentially the first book on the subject (although some antiquarian texts were earlier). Even today, Ariès remains the standard reference to the topic. Ariès is most famous for his statement that "in medieval society, the idea of childhood did not exist". Its central thesis is that attitudes towards children were progressive and evolved over time with economic change and social advancement, until childhood, as a concept and an accepted part of family life, from the 17th century. It was thought that children were too weak to be counted and that they could disappear at any time. However, children were considered as adults as soon as they could live alone.
The book has had mixed fortunes. His contribution was profoundly significant both in that it recognised childhood as a social construction rather than as a biological given and in that it founded the history of childhood as a serious field of study. At the same time, his account of childhood has by now been widely criticised.
Ariès is likewise remembered for his invention of another field of study: the history of attitudes to death and dying. Ariès saw death, like childhood, as a social construction. His seminal work in this ambit is L'Homme devant la mort (1977), his last major book, published in the same year when his status as a historian was finally recognised by his induction into the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS), as a directeur d'études.
Ariès regarded himself as an "anarchist of the right". He was initially close to the Action française but later distanced himself from it, as he viewed it as too authoritarian, hence his self-description as an "anarchist". Ariès also contributed to La Nation française, a royalist review. However, he also co-operated with many left-wing French historians, especially with Michel Foucault, who wrote his obituary.
During his life, his work was often better known in the English-speaking world than it was in France itself. He is known above all for his book L’Enfant et la Vie Familiale sous l’Ancien Régime (1960), which was translated into English as Centuries of Childhood (1962). This book is pre-eminent in the history of childhood, as it was essentially the first book on the subject (although some antiquarian texts were earlier). Even today, Ariès remains the standard reference to the topic. Ariès is most famous for his statement that "in medieval society, the idea of childhood did not exist". Its central thesis is that attitudes towards children were progressive and evolved over time with economic change and social advancement, until childhood, as a concept and an accepted part of family life, from the 17th century. It was thought that children were too weak to be counted and that they could disappear at any time. However, children were considered as adults as soon as they could live alone.
The book has had mixed fortunes. His contribution was profoundly significant both in that it recognised childhood as a social construction rather than as a biological given and in that it founded the history of childhood as a serious field of study. At the same time, his account of childhood has by now been widely criticised.
Ariès is likewise remembered for his invention of another field of study: the history of attitudes to death and dying. Ariès saw death, like childhood, as a social construction. His seminal work in this ambit is L'Homme devant la mort (1977), his last major book, published in the same year when his status as a historian was finally recognised by his induction into the École des hautes études en sciences sociales (EHESS), as a directeur d'études.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
October 26, 2016
Philippe Ariès, destaca a importância da valorização regional pelo historiador. Também é bem signficativo a descrição da action francoise, com suas características conservadoras e apego a monárquia francesa.
Displaying 1 of 1 review