{"title":"雄辩是银,沉默是金。图尔的格列高利作品中的创造性选择与建构遗忘","authors":"G. Schwedler","doi":"10.1515/9783110757279-007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is a common misconception that the foremost task of historians is to collect records. On the contrary, the main endeavour is to omit and select from the overwhelm-ing abundance of past material in order to find – invenire – the pertinent detail from specific enquiries and subjects of interest. As early as the classic lectures in rhetoric, such as Cicero ’ s De Inventione or the simultaneous and anonymously authored Ars rhetorica ad Herennium , the methods for the discovery of arguments are described as inventio. ¹ However, often the convincing point about historical works is that not all the discovered facts were conveyed and most of them were left out. It can be said of all historical periods that reliable historiography comes to the fore by working out the contours and developments, by condensing mere episodes and contributing to the creation of meaning as well as conveying insights. Subsequent generations of scholars have focused their analyses of earlier historical documents on this con-struct; they called for deconstruction to expose the presumed statements of facts and implications. It was important to correct erroneous finds and inventions ( inven-tiones ), and to trace a clear picture of the facts. Since the narrative turn , however, ‘ narrated ’ history has gained intrinsic significance. The multiplicity of voices replaces exclusive interpretations of the world and history. Therefore, the prevailing trend for the analysis of historiography is to place less emphasis on verifiability and plausibil-ity, while paying greater attention to writing techniques and media-oriented forms of knowledge transfer, where false recollection and phantoms of remembrance are also taken into account.²","PeriodicalId":436102,"journal":{"name":"Creative Selection between Emending and Forming Medieval Memory","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Speech is Silver, but Silence is Golden. Creative Selection and Constructed Oblivion in the Work of Gregory of Tours\",\"authors\":\"G. Schwedler\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/9783110757279-007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is a common misconception that the foremost task of historians is to collect records. On the contrary, the main endeavour is to omit and select from the overwhelm-ing abundance of past material in order to find – invenire – the pertinent detail from specific enquiries and subjects of interest. As early as the classic lectures in rhetoric, such as Cicero ’ s De Inventione or the simultaneous and anonymously authored Ars rhetorica ad Herennium , the methods for the discovery of arguments are described as inventio. ¹ However, often the convincing point about historical works is that not all the discovered facts were conveyed and most of them were left out. It can be said of all historical periods that reliable historiography comes to the fore by working out the contours and developments, by condensing mere episodes and contributing to the creation of meaning as well as conveying insights. Subsequent generations of scholars have focused their analyses of earlier historical documents on this con-struct; they called for deconstruction to expose the presumed statements of facts and implications. It was important to correct erroneous finds and inventions ( inven-tiones ), and to trace a clear picture of the facts. Since the narrative turn , however, ‘ narrated ’ history has gained intrinsic significance. The multiplicity of voices replaces exclusive interpretations of the world and history. Therefore, the prevailing trend for the analysis of historiography is to place less emphasis on verifiability and plausibil-ity, while paying greater attention to writing techniques and media-oriented forms of knowledge transfer, where false recollection and phantoms of remembrance are also taken into account.²\",\"PeriodicalId\":436102,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Creative Selection between Emending and Forming Medieval Memory\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Creative Selection between Emending and Forming Medieval Memory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110757279-007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Creative Selection between Emending and Forming Medieval Memory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110757279-007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
认为历史学家的首要任务是收集记录是一种普遍的误解。相反,主要的努力是从过去的大量材料中省略和选择,以便从具体的调查和感兴趣的主题中找到-创造-相关的细节。早在修辞学的经典讲座中,如西塞罗的《论发明》或同时匿名撰写的《Ars rhetoric and Herennium》,发现论证的方法就被描述为“发明”。¹然而,关于历史著作的令人信服的一点往往是,并不是所有发现的事实都被传达了出来,其中大部分被遗漏了。可以说,在所有的历史时期,可靠的史学都是通过勾勒出轮廓和发展,通过浓缩单纯的事件,并有助于创造意义和传达见解而脱颖而出的。随后的几代学者将他们对早期历史文献的分析集中在这个结构上;他们呼吁进行解构,以揭露对事实和含义的假定陈述。重要的是纠正错误的发现和发明,并对事实有一个清晰的了解。然而,自叙事转向以来,“被叙述的”历史获得了内在意义。声音的多样性取代了对世界和历史的排他性解释。因此,史学分析的主流趋势是较少强调可验证性和合理性,而更多地关注写作技巧和面向媒体的知识转移形式,其中也考虑到错误的回忆和记忆的幽灵
Speech is Silver, but Silence is Golden. Creative Selection and Constructed Oblivion in the Work of Gregory of Tours
It is a common misconception that the foremost task of historians is to collect records. On the contrary, the main endeavour is to omit and select from the overwhelm-ing abundance of past material in order to find – invenire – the pertinent detail from specific enquiries and subjects of interest. As early as the classic lectures in rhetoric, such as Cicero ’ s De Inventione or the simultaneous and anonymously authored Ars rhetorica ad Herennium , the methods for the discovery of arguments are described as inventio. ¹ However, often the convincing point about historical works is that not all the discovered facts were conveyed and most of them were left out. It can be said of all historical periods that reliable historiography comes to the fore by working out the contours and developments, by condensing mere episodes and contributing to the creation of meaning as well as conveying insights. Subsequent generations of scholars have focused their analyses of earlier historical documents on this con-struct; they called for deconstruction to expose the presumed statements of facts and implications. It was important to correct erroneous finds and inventions ( inven-tiones ), and to trace a clear picture of the facts. Since the narrative turn , however, ‘ narrated ’ history has gained intrinsic significance. The multiplicity of voices replaces exclusive interpretations of the world and history. Therefore, the prevailing trend for the analysis of historiography is to place less emphasis on verifiability and plausibil-ity, while paying greater attention to writing techniques and media-oriented forms of knowledge transfer, where false recollection and phantoms of remembrance are also taken into account.²