The terms “historical interpretation” and “historical representation” are often used interchangeably. The historical text can alternatively be described as an “interpretation” or as a “representation of the past.” Nevertheless, the two terms do not have quite the same meaning. Interpretation and representation have their own respective domains of preferred application. And this raises the question of where to locate historical writing in the space defined by the two axes of interpretation and representation. This chapter argues that we should distinguish between interpretation and representation and, more specifically, avoid looking at the historical text from the perspective of interpretation only. Representation takes priority over interpretation in the historical text: there can be interpretation only after there has first been a representation and therefore an either real or imaginary reality represented by the text.
Cornell Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.
If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.
To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs, and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us.