Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T12:19:33.397Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explanatory Genealogies and Historical Testimony

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2012

Nick Jardine
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

This article proposes that a general theory of assessment of historical testimony should do justice to the long tradition of adjudication in accordance with maxims of reliability and competence. I argue that an explanatory genealogical theory (along lines first adumbrated by Charles Seignobos) satisfies this condition, and that it has further notable virtues: respect for the strengths of rival theories, regard for the links between adjudication of testimony and other basic procedures of historical inquiry, and the promise of profitable lines of investigation.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Episteme , Volume 5 , Issue 2 , June 2008, pp. 160 - 179
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

References

REFERENCES

Arnauld, A. & Nicole, P.. 1662/1996. Logic or the Art of Thinking. Buroker, J. V. (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bernheim, E. 1889. Lehrbuch der historische Methode. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.Google Scholar
Biagioli, M. 1990. “Galileo the Emblem Maker.” Isis 81: 230–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biagioli, M. 1993. Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloch, M. 1939/1954. The Historian's Craft. Putnam, P. (trans.), J. R. Strayer (intro.). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Brahe, T. 1913–1929. Opera omnia. Dreyer, J. L. E. (ed.). Copenhagen: Libraria Gyldendaliana.Google Scholar
Burge, T. 1993. “Content Preservation.” Philosophical Review 102: 457–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burke, P. 2001. Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. London: Reaktion Books.Google Scholar
Chadwick, J. 1958. The Decipherment of Linear B. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Chladenius, J. M. 1757. Versuch einer allgemeinen Auslegungskunst. Halle: Hemmerde.Google Scholar
Coady, C. A. J. 1992. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Daunou, P.-C.-F. 1842. Cours d'études historiques. Vol. 1. Paris: F. Didot Frères.Google Scholar
Detienne, M. & Vernant, J.-P.. 1974/1978. Cunning Intelligence in Greek Culture and Society. Lloyd, J. (trans.). Hassocks: Harvester.Google Scholar
Dretske, F. I. 1981. Knowledge and the Flow of Information. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Eden, K. 1997. Hermeneutics and the Rhetorical Tradition: Chapters in the Ancient Legacy and its Humanist Reception. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Frei, H.W. 1974. The Eclipse of Biblical Narrative: A Study in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Hermeneutics. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Fricker, E. 1995. “Telling and Trusting: Reductionism and Anti-Reductionism in the Epistemology of Testimony.” Mind 104: 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricker, M. 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, R. 1987. “Route Analysis of Credibility and Hearsay.” Yale Law Journal 96: 667–742.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelfert, A. 2006. “Kant on Testimony.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 14: 627–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gingerich, O. & Voelkel, J. R.. 1998. “Tycho Brahe's Copernican Campaign.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 29: 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gingerich, O. & Westman, R. S.. 1988. The Wittich Connection: Conflict and Priority in Late Sixteenth-Century Cosmology. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society.Google Scholar
Ginzburg, C. 1983. “Clues: Morelli, Freud, and Sherlock Holmes.” In Eco, U. and Sebeok, T. A., Dupin, Holmes, Peirce: The Sign of Three, pp. 81–118. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Grafton, A. 1990. Forgers and Critics: Creativity and Duplicity in Western Scholarship. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Graham, P. J. 1997. “What is Testimony?” Philosophical Quarterly 47: 227–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Granada, M. A. 1996. El debate cosmológico en 1588. Bruno, Brahe, Rothmann, Ursus, Röslin. Naples: Bibliopolis.Google Scholar
Hope, C. 1981. “Artists, Patrons and Advisers in the Italian Renaissance.” In Lytle, G. F. & Orgel, S. (eds.), Patronage in the Renaissance, pp. 293–343. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Jardine, N. 1984. The Birth of History and Philosophy of Science: Kepler's A Defence of Tycho against Ursus with Essays on its Provenance and Significance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Johns, A. 1998. The Nature of the Book. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennedy, R. 2004. A History of Reasonableness: Testimony and Authority in the Art of Thinking. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kepler, J. 1937–;. Gesammelte Werke. von Dyck, W. & Caspar, M. (eds.). Munich: C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Lackey, J. 1999. “Testimonial Knowledge and Transmission.” The Philosophical Quarterly 49: 471–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lackey, J. 2008. Learning from Words: Testimony as a Source of Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Langlois, C. & Seignobos, C.. 1898. Introduction to the Study of History. Berry, G. G. (trans.). New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1704/1981. New Essays on Human Understanding. Remnant, P. & Bennett, J. (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lerner, M.-P. 1997. Le monde des sphères. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
Lipton, P. 1998. “The Epistemology of Testimony.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 29: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lipton, P. 2004. Inference to the Best Explanation. 2nd ed. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lipton, P. 2007. “Alien Abduction: Inference to the Best Explanation and the Management of Testimony.” Episteme, A Journal of Social Epistemology 4(3): 238–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maclean, I. 1992. Interpretation and Meaning in the Renaissance: The Case of Law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McKeon, M. 1987. The Origins of the English Novel. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Montagu, J. 1994. The Expression of the Passions: The Origin and Influence of Charles le Brun's Conférence sur l'expression générale et particulière. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mosley, A., Jardine, N., & Tybjerg, K.. 2003. “Epistolary Culture, Editorial Practices, and the Propriety of Tycho's Astronomical Letters.” Journal for the History of Astronomy 34: 437–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neuschel, K. B. 1989. Word of Honour: Interpreting Noble Culture in Sixteenth-Century France. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Otte, G. 1971. Dialektik und Jurisprudenz. Untersuchungen zur Methode der Glossatoren, Ius Commune. Frankfurt am Main: Klostermann.Google Scholar
Owen, D. 1987. “Hume versus Price on Miracles and Prior Probabilities: Testimony and the Bayesian Calculation.” Philosophical Quarterly 37: 187–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, H. 1978. Meaning and the Moral Sciences. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Raeder, H. 1920/2003. “Om Tycho Brahe's astronomiske brevvexling.” Tybjerg, K. (trans.). In Mosley, Jardine, & Tybjerg (2003).Google Scholar
Rosen, E. 1986. Three Imperial Mathematicians. New York: Abaris Books.Google Scholar
Schleir, H. 1990. “Ranke in the Manuals of Historical Method of Droysen, Lorenz, and Bernheim.” In Iggers, G. C. & Powell, J. M. (eds), Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of the Historical Discipline, pp. 111–123. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Schofield, C. J. 1981. Tychonic and Semi-Tychonic World Systems. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
Seignobos, C. 1887. “Les conditions psychologiques de la connaissance en histoire.” Revue philosophique de la France et de l'étranger 24: 1–32, 168–79.Google Scholar
Serjeantson, R. 1999. “Testimony and Proof in Early-Modern England.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30: 195–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, S. 1994. A Social History of Truth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, S. & Schaffer, S.. 1985. Leviathan and the Air Pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the Experimental Life. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Shapiro, B. J. 1983. Probability and Certainty in Seventeenth-Century England. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sobel, J. H. 1987. “On the Evidence of Testimony for Miracles: A Bayesian Interpretation of David Hume's Analysis.” Philosophical Quarterly 37: 166–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starn, R. 1989. “Seeing Culture in a Room for a Renaissance Prince.” In Hunt, L. (ed.), The New Cultural History, pp. 205–32. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Szondi, P. 1975/1995. Introduction to Literary Hermeneutics. Woodmansee, M. (trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tucker, A. 2007. Our Knowledge of the Past: A Philosophy of Historiography. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tucker, A. Forthcoming. “Supervenient Social Knowledge: Inference from Multiple Testimonies Naturalized.”Google Scholar
Ursus, N. R. 1588. Fundamentum astronomicum. Strasbourg: Bernardus Iobin.Google Scholar
von, Ranke L. 1824. Zur Kritik neueren Geschichtschreiber. Leipzig: Duncker und Humblot.Google Scholar
Wach, J. 1926/1996. Das Verstehen. 3 vols. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar