Abstract
There are two approaches to universal history: a structural one and one which may be called ‘real’ or ‘practical’. The former compares and draws general conclusions; it is theoretical history. The second is concerned with causality, relating dispersed occurrences, where possible, by determining their interdependence and establishing priorities in time. There can be no doubt, however, that an understanding of the whole of the history of mankind, from its earliest beginnings to the recognizable process of total acculturation in our present world, is the ultimate, if unattainable, goal towards which all its efforts are directed. Certain aspects of this ‘real’ or ‘practical’ universal history are the subject of this paper. The Ancient Historian can advance several arguments to justify his special claim to a universalist point of view. Three observations will be selected and briefly considered anew.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Literature and Literary Theory,Archeology,Visual Arts and Performing Arts,History,Archeology,Classics
Reference108 articles.
1. Arikamedu;Wheeler;Ancient India,1946
Cited by
44 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献