جستارهای سیاسی معاصر

جستارهای سیاسی معاصر

تاریخ تحول مفهومی «انقلاب»: از ارسطو تا مدرنیته سیاسی

نوع مقاله : علمی-پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانش‌آموخته کارشناسی‌ارشد، علوم‌ سیاسی، دانشکده اقتصاد و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
2 دانشیار علوم‌ سیاسی، دانشکده اقتصاد و علوم سیاسی، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، تهران، ایران
چکیده
در این مقاله کوشیده شد تا با نظر به چارچوب مفهومی راینهارت کوزلک از تاریخ مفاهیم به بررسی تاریخ تطور مفهومی انقلاب در غرب بپردازیم و لحظات بغرنج تاریخی آن را با تبیین شرایط تاریخی ایضاح نماییم. انقلاب از جمله مفاهیم بنیادین در چارچوب تاریخ مفهومی است که چونان دیگر مفاهیم بنیادین نمایانگر حرکت تاریخ است. در این مقاله کوشیدیم تا چهره ژانوسی انقلاب را نشان دهیم و تبیین نماییم که چگونه لحظه‌های مختلف تاریخی در صورت‌بندی معنایی انقلاب موثر افتاده‌ است. ما معتقدیم که مفهوم انقلاب در پیش از دوران جدید، در معنایی غیرسیاسی، ناظر بر دوران و چرخش غالبا استفاده می‌شد و در مواردی می‌توان به نیمه قرن ۱۶ اشاره کرد که این مفهوم دلالت سیاسی می‌یابد؛ در این اشاره مراد از انقلاب را نوعی بازگشت به گذشته یا بازتفسیر گذشته می‌توان خواند. از حدود نیمه قرن هجدهم است که مفهوم انقلاب با نگاهی خطی و رو به جلو استفاده می‌شود. در این مقاله به سیر تاریخی انبان‌شده در پس‌پشت این مفهوم اشاره کرده‌ایم و نیز، به ردپای لحظات مختلف دگرگونی که در مفهوم انقلاب خود را مستتر ساخته‌اند و بر حسب شرایط دائما امکان احضار و فراخواندنی از نو را دارند، پرداخته‌ایم.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Conceptual History of Revolution: From Aristotle to Political Modernity

نویسندگان English

Mahdi Panjalipour Kakeroudi 1
Reza Najafzadeh 2
1 Political science, Department of Economics and Political Sciences, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
2 Political Science, Department of Economics and Political Science, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran
چکیده English

Abstract
In this article, we explore the historical development of the concept of revolution in the Western context by using Reinhart Koselleck's framework from the history of concepts. We aim to explain the complex historical moments by elaborating on the historical conditions. Revolution, as one of the basic concepts in the framework of history, represents the movement of history, similar to other basic concepts. We focus on demonstrating the multifaceted nature of revolution and uncovering how different historical moments influenced its semantic formulation. We argue that before the modern era, the concept of revolution was often used in a non-political sense, referring to eras and cycles of change. However, by the mid-16th century, the concept began to acquire a political meaning, signifying a return to the past or a reinterpretation of history. From the mid-18th century onwards, the concept of revolution has been associated with a linear, forward-looking perspective. In this article, we delve into the historical trajectory underlying this concept and examine the various moments of transformation that are embedded within the concept of revolution. These transformative moments can be revisited and reinterpreted based on the prevailing conditions.
Keywords: Conceptual History, Revolution, Circular Motion, Metabole, Political Modernity.
Introduction
In 1842, Hero pointed out that the term "revolution" actually refers to a return and a periodic movement back to the point of origin. The word "revolution" is derived from the Latin "revolutio," meaning change and displacement of an object, as well as a movement that returns to its origin. Originally used to describe the regular and periodic movement of celestial bodies, the term maintained this meaning in scientific usage. This refers to the predictable and regular movement of the stars, which is beyond human control and therefore seems inevitable. It is worth noting that, although the concept of revolution can encompass rebellion and upheaval, its literal meaning is that of a repeated, periodic movement (Therborn, 2008: xiv), as Therborn observes.
Most scholars argue that the modern understanding of revolution, particularly in its function and political significance, emerged during the modern era. In the pre-modern world, the political understanding of revolution, as we know it today, did not exist. This article aims to explore the historical development of the concept of "revolution" from ancient Greece to political modernity and the transformations it has undergone. By doing so, we can better understand the various possibilities inherent in this concept.

Materials and Methods
For our research, we used the library method to explore the historical context of the revolution by analyzing various texts and works. In this endeavor, Reinhart Koselleck's methodological framework, as mentioned by Glock & Kalhat in 2018, proved to be quite valuable for us. Conceptual history is an approach that involves analyzing language to study social conditions and relations, to understand history through concepts and examine their development and influence on the future. Concepts are like seeds planted in the past, growing and shaping the future. Koselleck's discussions emphasize the importance of fundamental concepts, not as mere records of the world, but as creators and shapers of the world.

Conclusion
The concept of revolution has evolved significantly over time. Initially, it was rooted in a cosmological and biological context and held theological implications. Terms like rebellion, defiance, and revolt were deeply connected to theological implications, especially during the publication of Copernicus's book when the word "revolution" was in conversation with the church.
The concept of revolution originally had a cyclical meaning, but gradually took on political implications and became intertwined with social and political realities in the 18th century, as proposed by Koselleck. The French Revolution is often seen as the onset of the modern era due to the transformation of the concept of revolution.
According to Koselleck, the modern concept of revolution has two key features: first, it represents a single break or interruption towards an unknown future, rather than a cycle or era. Second, it has a "metahistorical" status, transcending its natural meanings and referring not only to specific events in time, but also to the shape of time itself—an asymmetrical line of progress with an unknown future. The concept of revolution serves as a principle that regulates knowledge and is shaped by different power structures. It is significant in defining new problematic

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Conceptual History
Revolution
Circular Motion
Metabole
Political Modernity
آرنت، هانا (۱۳۹۷)، انقلاب‌، ترجمۀ عزت‌الله فولادوند، تهران: خوارزمی.
حسینی بهشتی، سیدمحمدرضا (۱۳۷۹)، «فرانسیس بیکن و بحران طبیعت»، فصل‏نامۀ فلسفی، ۱۵۸-۱۷۰.
فوکو، میشل (1391)، باید از جامعه دفاع کرد: درس‏گفتارهای کلژ دوفرانس 1975-1976، ترجمۀ رضا نجف‏زاده، تهران: رخ‏داد نو.
کسرایی، محمدسالار (۱۳۸۹)، «انقلاب: تحولات مفهومی یک واژه»، دانش‏نامۀ علوم اجتماعی، دورۀ ۱، ش ۳.
کوزلک، راینهارت (۱۴۰۱ الف)، تاریخ مفهومی: بنیان‌های نوین نظریۀ تاریخ، ترجمۀ عیسی عبدی، تهران: فرهامه.
کوزلک، راینهارت (۱۴۰۱ ب)، مقدمه‌ای بر مفاهیم بنیادین تاریخی: تاریخ تحول مفهوم بحران، ترجمۀ بهنام جودی، تهران: گام نو.
میسن، دیوید (۱۴۰۰)، تاریخ مختصر اروپای مدرن: آزادی، برابری، و هم‏بستگی، ترجمۀ علی‌رضا عسگری و امید یعقوب‏زاده، تهران: نگارستان اندیشه.
نجفی، صالح (۱۳۹۷)، «شعلۀ امید برای به‏روزی همگان»، منتشرشده در سایت اعتماد.
نیکفر، محمدرضا (۱۳۸۸)، تاریخ مفهوم‌ها، سایت رادیو زمانه، قابل بازیابی در: <http://zamaaneh.com/ pictures-new/Begriffsgeschichte.pdf>.
هابسبام، اریک (۱۳۷۶، چاپ جدید ۱۴۰۱)، عصر انقلاب، ترجمۀ علی‌اکبر مهدیان، تهران: اختران.
هلمز، الیور (۱۳۹۸)، مفهوم انقلاب و امر مدرن، ترجمۀ صالح نجفی، منتشرشده در سایت‌های شرق و تز یازدهم.
Berger, S. (2022), History and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Boym, S. (1991), Death in Quotation Marks: Cultural Myths of the Modern Poet, London: Harvard University Press.
Calvin, J (1536), Institutes of the Christian Religion, F. L. Battles (trans.), J. T. McNeill (ed.), Westminster Press, Philadelphia, 1960.
Farr, J. (1982), “Historical Concepts in Political Science: The Case of Revolution”, American Journal of Political Science, vol. 26, no. 4, 688-708, <https://doi.org/10.2307/2110968>.
Foucault, M. (1988), Politics, Philosophy, Culture: Interview and Other Writings, 1977-1984, Lawrence D. Kritzman (ed.), New York: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1994), Dits et écrits : 1954-1988, Gallimard.
Foucault, M. (2003), “Society Must Be Defended”, Lectures at the Collège de France 1975-1976, David Macey (trans.), New York: Picador.
Glock, H. and J. Kalhat (2018), “Linguistic Turn”, in: The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Taylor and Francis. Retrieved 21 Mar. 2024, from <https://www.rep.routledge.com/articles/ thematic/linguistic-turn/v-1. doi:10.4324/0123456789-DD3600-1>.
Goodwin, J. (1997), “State-Centered Approaches to Social Revolutions: Strenghts and Limitations of a Theoretical Tradition”, in: Theorizing Revolutions, J. Foran (ed.), 9-35, London and New York: Routledge.
Goodwin, J. (1997), “The Libidinal Constitution of a High-Risk Social Movement: Affectual Ties and Solidarity in the Huk Rebellion, 1946 to 1954”, American Sociological Review, vol. 62, no. 1, 53-69.
Göran, Therborn (2008), “Roads to Modernity: Revolutionary and Other”, in: Revolution in the Making of the Modern World, J. Foran et al. (eds.), p. xiv-xvii, New York: Routledge.
Grienwank, Karl (1955), “Der Neutzeitliche Revolutionsbegriff”, Heinz Lubasz (trans.), 171-182, with permission of the publisher. Reprinted with permission of the Macmillan Company, New York, from Revolutions in Modern European History (1966), Henz Lubasz (ed.), 55-61.
Hatto, A. (1949), “Revolution: An Enquiry Into the Usefulness of an Historical Term”, Mind, vol. 58, no. 232, 495-517, <http://www.jstor.org/stable/2250878>.
Hegel, G. W. F. (2001), The Philosophy of History, Charles Hegel (Prefaces.), J. Sibree (trans.).
Howell, P. A. (1985), The Greek Experience and Aristotle’s Analysis of Revolution in Revolution” A History of the Idea, David Close and Carl Bridge (eds.), Routledge.
Kasprowicz, Karol,(2020), Reflections on Historiography and Theory of Revolution, res historica 50, 2020, Doi:10.17951/rh.2020.50.417-460.
Koopman, Colin (2011), “Rorty’s Linguistic Turn: Why (More Than) Language Matters to Philosophy”, Contemporary Pragmatism, vol. 8, no. 1, 61-84.
Koselleck, R. (1985), “Historical Criteria of the Modern Concept of Revolution”, in: Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, 39-54, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Koselleck, R. (2002), The Practice of Conceptual History: Timing History, Spacing Concepts, Redwood City: Stanford University Press, <https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503619104>.
Koselleck, R. and K. Tribe (2004), Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, Columbia University Press, <http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7312/kose12770>.
Plato: Timaeus and Critias (2008), Robin Waterfield (trans.), Andrew Gregory (Introduction and Notes), Oxford World’s Classics, Oxford.
Quentin (1969), “Meaning and Understanding in the History of Ideas”, History and Theory, vol. 8, 3-53.
Rorty, Richard (1971), The Linguistic Turn, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. And see Richard Rorty (ed.) (1967), The Linguistic Turn: Recent Essays in Philosophical Method, Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Sharpe, Kevin (2013), Rebranding Rule: The Restoration and Revolution Monarchy, 1660-1714, Yale University Press.
Skinner, Wittgenstein, Ludwig (1961), Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, D. F. Pears and B. E. Mc Guinness (trans.), London: Routledge.