Contributions to the History of Concepts

The year 2023 marked the centenary of the birth of German historian Reinhart Koselleck whose work we wish to celebrate in this special issue. The conference “Uses and Actuality of Reinhart Koselleck's Work,” funded by the Fritz Thyssen Foundation and held that year at the Deutsches Literaturarchiv (German Literature Archive) in Marbach am Neckar, was the starting point for the articles we are publishing here. Research on Koselleck's work has undergone many variations over time, and it became clear at this conference that the emphasis placed on different themes has challenged the monopoly of conceptual history. In the past several years, new publications of great importance to Koselleckian research have appeared, including a compilation of his articles on memory under the title Geronnene Lava. This recent scholarly scenario is supported and spurred on by the establishment not only of literary estates at the Deutsches Literaturarchiv but also by the pictorial estate at the Deutsches Dokumentationszentrum für Kunstgeschichte—Bildarchiv Foto Marburg (German Documentation Center for Art History—Photo Archive Marburg). Both contain extensive materials that open new perspectives: in addition to handwritten works, they include books from Koselleck's personal library and a diverse collection of images, including numerous photographs taken by the historian himself. Inspired by this re-centering of the specialized literature, and from an interdisciplinary point of view, the texts presented in the current issue are conceived under the aegis of memory and image, also including related aspects such as dreams, experience, mass media, and iconology.

Although images are an integral part of historical research today, it is quite unusual that a historian is conceiving the image as a heuristic model instead of interpreting it in terms of representation (of an event or “its” time). In this article, I argue that in a long-term dialogue with image theory and by taking photographs of monuments and memory sites, Reinhart Koselleck discovered the image as an experimental space for thinking of historical time differently from linear narrative. Koselleck's photographs of memory sites in particular may be viewed as an invitation to explore the intricate relations between individual perception now and then, experience, memory, and its cultural (trans-)formations. Seen this way, images can provoke new questions and give impulses for methodological reflection in historical research.

This study investigates nonverbal iconographical signs in the sphere of political iconography, both in relation to late eighteenth- and early nineteenth-century French historical paintings and portraiture and to political caricatures published in early nineteenth-century France. After examining the visual codes mobilized by French historical painting and portraiture of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, and the temporal symbolism underlying their various modes of visual communication, I examine what I take to be the shift in visual symbolism brought about by the epoch-making caricatures of Honoré Daumier, which deployed new techniques of lithography permitting the unprecedented communication of highly charged political messages to a mass population. In elaborating this second part of my study, I draw on the iconographic theory of Reinhart Koselleck.

This article reconsiders the relationship between experience, memory, and iconology in Reinhart Koselleck's thought from an unexpected perspective. It focuses on the lesser-known Reinhart Koselleck Figure Collection donated by the family to Bielefeld University in 2021, which contains about 150 highly diverse artifacts: tin soldiers, busts and monument miniatures, and especially figures of horses and horsemen. Reviewing the collection not in isolation but as part of Koselleck's working and inspirational material allows us to rethink his iconological project through the lens of figural assemblage perspective and, thus, in relation to Aby Warburg's Bilderatlas Mnemosyne, a connection that has hitherto been insufficiently explored. In this light, Koselleck's figure collection, entangled with other media such as print and images, is itself analyzed as evidence of Warburg's influence on his method of assembling historical material.

What role do dreams play in the writing of history, and how might we understand them beyond the limits of psychoanalytic interpretation? This article explores these questions by engaging with a range of interdisciplinary literature that examines the intersection between dreams, history, and philosophy. It highlights how dreams, often dismissed as purely subjective or psychological phenomena, can also serve as valuable historical sources that reflect collective experiences, social tensions, and political realities. The article then turns to the work of German historian Reinhart Koselleck, who investigated this potential through his analysis of two collections of dreams recorded during the era of National Socialism: one by Jean Cayrol and another by Charlotte Beradt. By examining Koselleck's approach, the article discusses how dreams not only relate to the historical context in which they emerge but also contribute to processes of individual and collective memory, offering a unique lens for historical inquiry.

This article analyzes Koselleck's views on the politics of memory and examines why, despite his valuable insights, these have had little impact on memory studies. After reviewing his contributions to the German debate, an attempt to reconstruct his notion of memory is made. It is then suggested that such a notion is limited by Koselleck's focusing on his own personal primary experiences and on the German case, as well as by the fact that he considers only victims and perpetrators. Nevertheless, at the same time, such limitations contain important potentialities. Koselleck's position as both a witness and historian, his advocation for wordless, negative aesthetics as a response to the absurdity of history and his insistence on the differentiation of victims are akin to proposals regarding multidirectional memory and the implicated subject.

In the space of a generation, the image has become the main and omnipresent medium through which we relate to the world, shaping our modes of expression and our experiences. This mutation has brought about a profound renewal of our practices and a significant change in our relationship to time—with a narrowing focus on actuality—but also to memory, with the possibility through images to instantly disseminate singular experiences in the public sphere. Starting from the untransmissible nature of individual experiences, particularly traumatic ones, Koselleck offers us the outline and starting point for a rethinking of these contemporary transformations, particularly regarding the question of transmission, but also access to a common memory, which leads us to rethink the very presuppositions of historical work.

Space of experience (Erfahrungsraum) and horizon of expectation (Erwartungshorizont) are key concepts in Koselleck's theory of history. One of his best-known essays, written in 1976, is devoted to these empirical–historical premises. For him, they are anthropological presuppositions that, as formal categories of knowledge, constitute the possibility of history. The article analyzes the origin, appropriation, and use of these terms in the work of the Bielefeld historian and relates them to the concept of primary experience (Primärerfahrung), which refers mainly to sensory and physical dimensions. As the article shows, the sociological theories of Karl Mannheim prove to be influential in the genesis of Koselleck's Historik, although they are rarely mentioned in his texts.