THE PROBLEM OF PERIODIZATION IN HISTORY

Author(s): A. Gangatharan
Source: Proceedings of the Indian History Congress , 2008, Vol. 69 (2008), pp. 862-871
Published by: Indian History Congress

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/44147249

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Indian History Congress is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Proceedings of the Indian History Congress

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 THE PROBLEM OF PERIODIZATION IN
HISTORY
A. Gangatharan.

The concept of chronology and the segment of periodization is la

viewed as the salient feature of historical explanation. Every hist
argument is inextricably linked to a context of time and space w
can be reified by a range of evidences. The idea of periodization
colourless universal category came into use as early as in the begi
of the seventeenth century Europe.1 Demarcation of time into differ
slices has been brought as a convenient mental category for hist
analysis. Lord Acton had observed as early as in 1 895 that the histor
should concentrate on problems rather than periods.2 But as a m
of fact, periodization itself has become problem for the histor
tackle with apposite classificatory grids.
Time as a continuum of a seemless web of whole continues to flow
without interruption in which historian is forced to crate a sense of
meaning through the process of gerrymandering.3 The fragmentation
of time into different periods forces a complex problem which indeed
is river with ruptures, disjunctures and fissures. Nevertheless,
periodization has been broadly used a convenient category to
contextualize every historical events in its political, social and cultural
milieu. The concept of periodization is alluded to have been brought
into use for the first time by Pausin in his work on Feodium , 1634,
while describing the economic transition of Europe in Seventeenth
century. Subsequently, Leyden historian Hornius of Area Novea,
introduced the binary concept of antiqua/moderna in 1666.The current
tripartite concept of periodization into ancient, medieval and modern
came to significance in 1688. The Lutheran humanist Cristoph Keller
or Cellarius, (1634-1700) segmented the history of Europe into three
major periods of ancient medieval and modern in his medium aevum :
Constantine the Great to the Constantine XI (1453) published at
Cologne4 since than the colorless mental category of periodization was
widely used to offer a secular explanation to past historical events on a
broader time framework. Similarly the conventional idea of epoch, era
and age also underwent a through transformation through a process of
calendaric scheme leading to a mathematical calculation. With the
introduction of Gregorian calendar by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582 the
concept of century, millennia and decade came into prominent use
creating arithmetic possibilities for accuracy of date and time.5 The
concept of periodization became a convenient temporal category during

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Countries other than India 863

the age of enlightenment by acquiring ideologica

visceral dimensions. Voltaire (1694 - 1 778) the lea
signaled the harbinger of modernity in his tour de force Essai
surmoueurs. Adam Smith (1722-1790) added new dimensions to the
concept of periodization with an economic overtone. The concept of
chronological classification became a force to reckon with during the
age of Marxism with its economic overtone.
The Eurocentric history of the world was conveniently divided by
different set of labels, platitudes and stereotypes with the view to offer
an appropriate chronological framework.6 Under the influence of
Orientalism the first work on Indian antecedents the history of British
India appeared in 1817 with a conventional periodization of India into
ancient Hindu; medieval Muslims; and the modern British; which indeed
became the bedrock of Indian chronology. Whatever may be the discrete
and discrepant nature of the periodization the concept of Ancient,
Medieval, Modern became the integral temporal categories of Indian
history.
This paper seeks to trace the genesis of periodization and its
ramification in the intellectual domain across Europe while throwing
light on the colonial influence in Indian history. An attempt will also
may be made to assess and evaluate the platitudes, stereotypes and
other temporal labels that went into the making of various
historiographie chronologic framework. The division of time into
different segments on the basis of general trends and developments
offer a systematic approach to analyze various historical events in a
normally acceptable time framework so as to give meaning and sense
to the events of the past.
Periodization as a temporal schema offers a broad chronological
time framework to locate an event in its context. Without some context
to evetns they can have no meaning. But a context must itself be defined
in terms which are appropriate to the events located within it. This
entails marking it from other contexts which, since they apply to events
in time, must constitute a temporal division. Hence, all historical writing
is framed by epochs, from the most general divisions into sub-divisions,
into ancient, medieval and modern, to particular subdivisions, such as
the age of the crusades or of benevolent despotism or of revolution and
most political history is still divided by the reigns of kings and rulers.
Central to our concern is not to deliberate on the viability of the
periodization scheme. Our intention is to assess and evaluate the
evocative relevance of temporal classification. What are the ways in
which the evidences can be elicited? How criteria should be fixed
between bordering periods? Wfiy do we need to classify time with

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
864 ¡HC: Proceedings , 69th Session, 2008

temporal categories and how does the historian wield influen

shaping them? These are some of the pertinent issues that deserv
attention. The concept of periodization is essentially linked to o
understanding of the past and how we methodologically analyze
unfolding of events from time to time and epoch to epoch. Needl
say reification of time with recognizable categories with its inte
cohesi veness offers a meaningful logic to understand the comprehen
nature of the historical events corresponding to its socio-cul
context.7 The idea of periodization hinges on the general histor
conceptual development which in turn attempt to identify the pe
characteristic of each distinctive age. The Historian must devise
coherent logic to create a liaison between two periods by recogni
their chronological, ecological and geographical factors. Periodiz
is being used to order the historiographical material and to conn
with the fundamental general tendency of human society of a particu
period. This involves a great deal of intellectual exercise what we
call as "Historical Interpretation'.
The problem of periodization generally emanates while attemp
to effect minor classifications within the larger one. It become
immense issue of debate when it carries the invective of ideolo
overtones such as the age of enlightenment feudalism and nationa
As a protean concept the idea of periodization assumed to have g
its own connotations leading to complex historical deliberation.
Platitudes, clichés and hackneyed phrases also add momentum to the
overarching question of periodization, when it comes to designating
them with different time categories.8 Concepts such as renaissance and
reformation and scientific revolution posed immense challenge of
classification since they are directly linked to ideological and
intellectual transformation of society. Periodization as a mental category
obviously can not and will not be able to elicit a common consent while
providing a convenient clue for classification. Much ink has been
already spilt in Europe on this topic, several theories and propositions
have been already advanced in finding meaningful logic.
The concept of periodization is subject to wide range of debate
while focusing on its historical genesis with regard to its routine
application. Scholars emphasize the need for maintaining internal
cohesiveness by taking into account other inter related features. The
classification of periods must be effected on the basis of agreeable
chronological order as it would offer a tangible time framework to
delineate a range of issues flow from the seamless web of time. Finally
the concept of periodization needs to be revised with the present trends
while reflecting about the future possibilities.

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Countries other than India 865

Historically speaking, the segmentation of time be

intellectual significance with the resurgence of church
as early as in the fourth century A.D.9 Fr. Julius Africanu
divide historical development into two different faces w
of Jesus Christ. The idea of Judaic - Christian classification of time
can be traced to the old and new Testaments of Bible. Ordering the
lineage of Jesus, Daniel's concept of empire and the theology of Paul
inexplicitly reflect the division of time while moving towards its
teleology. The typology of time into different phases based on the
concept of Judaic understanding of grace and sin made an indelible
impression on the esoteric of time. The advent of Papal authority and
the subsequent formation of Holy Roman Empire offered a convenient
legitimacy to the concept of Christian chronology.
Church historians like Eusebius, Julius Africanus, Fr. Jerome and
Saint Augustine embarked in the process of dividing historical periods
into different phases on the basis of significant departures.10 Saint
Augustine (356-430 CE) divided the general historical development
into seven biblical phases in his most celebrated treatise entitled the
'City of God'. Fr. Isidore of Seville introduced the ideal type of Christ
centered chronological classification in 636 CE.11 IT was subsequently
popularised by Bede the Venerable in his Historia Eclisastica in 731
CE. The concept of anno domini (AD) gradually gained the currency
of acceptance in the knowledge circle. Consequently the culture of
bifurcation of time became widely accepted as a viable historical norm.
The idea of chronological dichotomy was further legitimized with an
introduction of Gregorian calendar in 1582 by the then Pope Gregory
XIII. With the age of enlightenment the concept of grand theories began
to unfold with a view to appropriate the historical space for political
legitimacy. However the problem of periodization assumed recondite
significance with the resurgence of new ideas and aspirations in Italy
during thirteenth century which paved the way for the emergence of
new intellectual movement.12

Renaissance, Reformation and revolution are some of the historical

semantic mantras which give a new^meaning and direction to the
question of historical time and chronological concept. The idea of
Renaissance as a concept of political and cultural rebirth became a
popular historical category as early as in the late seventeenth century.13
It was in this context the question of modernity began to loom large in
the domain of intellectual thinking, exclusively recognizing the new
way of comprehending reality. Modernity is increasingly associated
with the question of positive outlook, broader perspective and the
willingness for adopting change. While on the other hand, the middle

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
866 ÌHC: Proceedings , 69th Session , 2008

age is scornfully derided as the age of darkness and period of

interregnum, marking a departure from the splendor of Greco-Roman
antiquity. The identification of historical trends through a chronological
framework thus slowly became an accepted academic norm of cultural
practice opening new^vistas for kaleidoscopic distinguish development
on the basis of their chronology was widely accepted but there was
wide range of difference between scholars in delineating their
distinction with its differences. The binary category of ancient and
modern kindled in the imagination of early fourteenth century European
thinkers to speak in the terms of tempora antique and tempora nova.
The genesis of this kind of temporal cliché may be traced to the
emergence of European art and aesthetics. Giovanni Boccaccio ( 1 303-
1374), one of the leading social functionaries of the Renaissance
attempted to trace the inception of modern age from the paintings of
Giotto. This view of Giotto as the restorer of the fine arts became
standard during the following centuries.14 Filippo Villani, Matteo
Palmieri, Lorenzo Ghiberti, and many others shared this assessment
of Giotto as the pioneer of a new period in art. Around 1550, Giorgio
Vasari (1511-1 574), author of the 'Lives of the Painters', characterized
the preceding two centuries as a period of rinascita in the fine arts. He
considered the period from Giotto (1266-1337) with his naturalism in
style to Michelangelo (1475-1564) as the period marking the departure
from its traditional practice. Renaissance and the age of modernism
are interchangeably used without making much of distinction
particularly in the filed of art, painting and other aesthetics. Giorgio
Vasari was perhaps the first scholar to inaugurate the triennial concept
of chronology in the field of art studies. His evocative trifurcation of
time into maniera antica, maniera vecchia, and maniera moderna,
heralded an era of new thinking in the area of Renaissance-stricken
Europe.15
In due course of time this insidious influence began to register its
presence in other fields of thinking. Pierre Belon a French naturalist,
recognized this development in his field of research. Francesco Petrarch,
the revered humanist of the fourteenth century, systematically
distinguished the dichotomy between the past Dark Age and present
glowing period as tempra nouva from that of tempora antique. The
cascading impact of cultural thinking generated new self consciousness
creating new possibilities for innovative approaches with time. Scholars
and thinkers attempted to associated development of new taste and
thinking in liberal arts as the harbinger of modernity. Filippo villain,
Marsilio Ficino, Leonardo da Vinci, Machiavelli ^nd many other
theologians and priests recognized the Zeitgeist of the age in respect of
their field of specialization.

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Countries other than India 867

Diffusion of printed material and disseminat

towards life style with the emergence of reviv
injected a sense of confidence for new inventions
Galileo Dicobrahi, Erasmus, Francis Bacon and ma
century thinkers exhibited their confidence throu
inventions, innovations and deliberations. The sense
of adventurism and the predilections for achievement
altered the European outlook towards life thro
scientific temperament and rational humanism. T
Renaissance brought about spectacular shift i
modernization by a range of intellectual and visc
eighteenth century enlightenment thinking a
rationalization of human approach are unquestion
revolution in human response to natural and s
activities concerning reformation and resurgence
created a historical necessity for the classificatio
broader trends and developments.
The contingency of historical action predicated
reality continued to loom large in the general co
categories. Periodization as a mental category app
as the result of its multifaceted aspects and variegate
through explication in its proper historical and i
Historical time cannot be considered as a mere abs
meaning to human efforts and endeavours. Every
are inextricably linked to a web of time without whi
sense». Time cannot be treated as homogenous segmen
in its flow. It always continues to represent a range o
around it. Marc Bloch argued "Historical time is a
reality with an irreversible onward rush.' It is the ve
events are immersed, and the field within which they become
intelligible."18 The measurement of historical time thus become
inevitable in order to make a sense of understanding from a volley of
historical events and activities. The concept of time and its classification
is constantly undergoing a dynamic transformation through a process
of dialectical action. Thè interpretation of historical time had acquired
new meaning and definition with an advent of Marxist mode of
interpretation. The dialectics of historical contingencies continues to
impinge upon the mode of economic activities as they are inextricably
linked to the process of deterministic development.19 The acceleration
of economic activities therefore cannot be explicated without taking
recourse to historical chrono-topological development. Frederic Angels'
insightful work 'The Origin of the Family the Property and the State'
first published in 1865, offers an anxibmatic elucidation of the evolution

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
868 ¡HC : Proceedings , 69th Session , 2008

of historical time. The stages of the transformation that emanate from

the natural corollary to actual economic activities are the indicative of
the changing phenomenon of the human attitudes. In spite of acerbic
criticism the idealized classification of Marxist historical time continues
to hold its way in large sale interpretation. Maurice Dobb, Christopher
Hill, E.J. Hobsbawm and score of scholars continue to consistently
follow a pattern of time framework that which conforms to the historical
contingency corresponding to the concept of material reality.20
The Annales approach to the abstract notion of the time opens up
new vistas for the historical interpretation by creating new possibilities.
The question about the linearity of time and its cyclic nature is not
fully defined with determinant categories. The concept of time
continuum continues to flow from different directions thereby not
conforming to one pattern of linearity. However, the classical
description of time very much fits into the pattern of socio-cultural
explanation thereby negating the possibility for a general theory of
chronology. Nevertheless, Ferdinand Braudel, (1902-1985), the author
The Mediterranean and the Mediterranean World in the Age of Philip
I! ( ¡949) fame, advanced a theory of tripartite time framework. Unlike
the seventeenth century model, Breudelian time framework is a
universal category mainly conforming to the size of the events rather
than the length of the time. Braudel classical time into three major
categories depending on the nature of the events and length of time it
takes. While following the pattern of macro and micro historical
approach he assigns a nebulous and flexible time framework to delineate
the historical trends of the events in a particular expense of time.
Part One of the Mediterranean, which is the bottom layer of
Braudel's three phased history, spans the immense, timeless phase of
human interaction with the natural world. What the author provides
here is what he himself calls 'geohistory' - a kind of historical
geography devoted to mountains and plains, islands and coastline,
climate, land routes and sea routes. Here, man is in intimate relationship
to the earth which bears and feeds him. At this level, which Braudel
calls la long duree (the long run or the long-term), time is almost
stationary or moves at the slowest pace because distance was reality
and communications difficult. This bottom level has "a history whose
passage is almost imperceptible, that of man in his relationship to his
environment, a history in which all change is slow, a constant repetition,
and ever-recurring cycles.
In part two of the Mediterranean, Braudel distinguishes an
intermediate pace of change which he calls the time of ( Conjoctures
Conjucntures). This is the medium-term or time taken by the broader

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Countries other than India 869

movements of economies, social structures, po

civilizations and forms of war, which constitute t
this second phase. Here the duration is that of cy
prices and wages; the rhythms and phases and ten
exchange. Such phases last for five, ten, twenty,
Changes in this phase of structures have to be st
structural changes in other departments of life. C
Spain, for example, need for their proper compre
the government's financial resources.
Part Three of the Mediterranean is concerned, afte
pattern, with 'events, politics and people'. These ta
span. This is the třme sector of political even
understand them and of individual actors in their
- the fast moving time of micro history and the
traditional historian. A fine piece of traditional p
history of the Mediterranean area in the age of Phili
substantial work in its own right.21
The concept of Braduelian time though was not
Annals scholars continues to provide an alternati
time in different perspectives. Chaunu, Ladurie
partly subscribed to the Bradulian sentiments in the
micro and macro phenomenon of historical even
conforming to the Marxist methods of dialectics, bu
deviant from that pattern of description. The E
time framework slowly and steadily entered into
world in the third world countries through the
domination.

The construction of Indian historiography had begun with the advent

of European enterprise as early as in the late seventeen century. Thanks
to the efforts of the bands of missionary scholars from various
ecclesiastical denominations, the lofty ideals of the Indian cultural
antiquity were decisively unearthed. Oriental scholars supported by
the Company's administrative apparatus engaged with the. process of
resuscitating the uneven past from its debris of splendor and pristine
glory. English East India Company officials undertook the task of
shaping the Indian chronological structure for a logical explanation of
historical activities. While there was no dearth of materials in
reconstructing the Indian past there was a challenge establishing a
chronology of historical developments on a firm footing. The absence
of a convenient chronological framework gave the English historians
unbridled freedom to construct a typology of time framework meeting
their political interest.22

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
870 IHC : Proceedings , 69th Session , 2008

James Stuarts Mill (1770-1831) undertook the task of organizin

the mass of evidences into a coherent historical treatise. "History
British India" the much celebrated Magna Carta of Indian
historiography published in 1 8 17, inaugurated a temporal categorization
of time framework to Indian history which was a curious mix of interest
and ideas. Written in a six thick volumes of large folios, 'The History
of British India' officially promulgated the communal historical
classification. James Mills' arguments concerning the chronological
puzzles deserve special discussion which in fact falls out of the scope
of this paper. Crucial to our focus is that the idealized trifurcation of
European time framework had been glued with the communal labels to
offer a new historical understanding. The Indian university system
which was the legacy of English Raj faithfully adopted the Pousinean
model of classifying Indian history into ancient, medieval and modern
for intellectual and academic consumption.23 However, the puzzle over
the segmentation of time continues to confuse the scholars by raising
pertinent questions. The vexed question of feudalism in India also added
a new dimension to the complex question of chronological conundrum.
The debates on the delineation of time continue to dominate the earlier
proceedings of Indian History Congress providing new insights for some
conclusions.

In spite of not having a qualified temporal categorization of Indian

history, the ideal type of the European model is currently in use for
common academic consumption with minor variations. In summing up
it may be asserted that the categorization of time into some units is
indispensable for our historical understanding. Nevertheless this must
be done with prescient caution and lucid clarification. The idea of
periodization continues to generate complex questions as they are
increasingly interpreted with underlying themes, notions and interests.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1 . Lewis W. Spitz, Periodization in History: Renaissance and Reform

F. Delzell, ed. Future of History, New York, 1998, pp. 189-208.
2. Cited in Arther Marvic, Nature of History, London, 1998, p. 270.
3. Kennith Jenkins, What is History' London, 1972, p.7.
4. Cited in Lewis W. Spitz, op. cit., p. 197.
5. Igor M. Diakonoff, The Paths of History, Cambridge, 1999, pp.
6. R. Baringer, Historical analysis and Clio's Craft, New York, 197
7. Marc Bloch, The Historian's Craft, 1955, Manchester, p. 17.
8. Arther Marvic, op.cit., p. 275.
9. J.W. Thompson and Bernard Holm, 1942, A History of Historical
p. 123.

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Countries other than India 87 1

10. Ibid., p. 135.

11. Ibid., p. 157.
12. Jermy Black and Donald M. Macraild, Macmillan, 1997
13. Meenakshi Phookan, The rise of Modern West, New Del
14. op.cit., Lewis W. Spitz, p. 195.
1 5 . Periodization, H istory and Social Theory, Vol

16. J.D. Bernal, History of Science, London, 1958, p. 2

17. Op.cit., J.W. Thompson and Bernard Holm, vol. 1 , p
18. Op.cit., Marc Bloch, The Historian's Craft, p. 17.
19. R.S. Sharma, Problem of Periodization, IHR, Vol. 1 ,
20. John Cannon, ed., Historian at Work, London, 1980, p
21 . For a discussion of Braduelian time see Peter Burke on Braduel in John Cannon
ed. op.cit., pp. 188-203.
22. N.R. Ray, 'The Medieval Factor in Indian History', General President's address,
Indian History Congress, 29,h session, Patiala, 1967, pp. 1-29.
23. B.D. Chattopadhyaya.The Making of Early Medieval India, New Delhi, 1994, see
Introduction, pp. 1 -37.

This content downloaded from

203.192.214.6 on Mon, 21 Jun 2021 19:45:04 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms