Periodization

• 1. Introduction

  ›

  Periodization is the practice of slicing the past into named, bounded chunks of time so that historians can study them. It sounds like a neutral, technical act. But consider this: the historian Arthur Marwick argued that "the 1960s" began in the late 1950s and ended in the early 1970s. The decade on the calendar and the era in the culture were two completely different things. That gap between the clock and human experience sits at the heart of what periodization actually is. How do we draw lines across time? Who decides where one age ends and another begins? And what happens when those labels carry so much cultural weight that they start shaping the very history they were meant to describe?

• 2. Ancient Roots

  ›

  The Sumerian King List, dating to the second millennium BC, is one of the earliest known attempts to organize the past into recognizable eras. It divided history into dynastic reigns, period by period, even though most of its content is not considered historically accurate. The impulse to segment time, it turns out, is about as old as writing itself. The Greek poet Hesiod, writing in the 8th-7th century BC, gave the Western world its first famous age-scheme: a Golden Age, a Silver Age, a Bronze Age, a Heroic Age, and an Iron Age, each one a descent from the last. In the Middle Ages, Saint Paul's theological framework divided all of human history into three phases: a period before Moses, a period under Mosaic law, and a period under the grace of Christ. A separate medieval scheme, the Six Ages of the World, counted roughly a thousand years per age from Adam forward, with the medieval present understood to be the sixth and final age. These early systems were not academic exercises. They were ways of locating one's own moment inside a larger story, of deciding what era you were living in and what it meant.

• 3. The Power of Labels

  ›

  Petrarch, the Italian poet who lived from 1304 to 1374, is credited with two of the most consequential labels in Western historiography. He coined the concept of a "Middle Ages" by comparing his own era to the ancient classical world, casting the centuries between them as a dark, intermediate phase. He also developed the notion of rebirth that would underpin the Renaissance. That word, Renaissance, now carries strongly positive connotations, which is part of why it keeps expanding. The English Renaissance describes a period largely identical to the Elizabethan age, starting some two hundred years after the Italian Renaissance. A Carolingian Renaissance is said to have occurred under the Frankish king Charlemagne. A Macedonian Renaissance is attributed to the Eastern Roman Empire. The American Renaissance covers roughly the 1820s-1860s and refers mainly to literature. The Harlem Renaissance of the 1920s reaches into literature, music, and the visual arts. None of these, the source notes, necessarily constituted a "rebirth" in the original sense of revival. The label migrated because its positive charge was useful, and once a period brand is established, it becomes very hard to dislodge. Many professional historians now prefer to call the Renaissance and the Reformation together the start of the Early Modern Period, a label that implies broader geography and a closer attention to Europe's relationships with the wider world. The shift in nomenclature has gradually filtered into university courses and published histories.

• 4. When Terms Turn Pejorative

  ›

  Giorgio Vasari probably coined the word "Gothic" as a deliberate insult, applying it to architecture and other things he considered Northern European and, by extension, barbarous. The word baroque traces to Portuguese, Spanish, or French roots and literally means an irregular or misshapen pearl. Its first use outside the jewellery trade came in the early 18th century, as a dismissal of music considered over-complicated and rough. Both labels were weapons before they were descriptors. The Baroque period was eventually designated as a formal historical category in the 19th century and is generally considered to have begun around 1600 across all artistic media. Music historians mark its close at 1750, the year J. S. Bach died. Art historians, by contrast, place its end considerably earlier in most areas. Gothic architecture, meanwhile, has largely shed the negative charge Vasari intended, acquiring new meanings as the centuries passed. The term "Dark Ages" has traveled in the opposite direction. Once widely used, it is now largely abandoned by modern scholars because of the difficulty of using it without judgment, though some writers have attempted to reclaim it on neutral terms. The adjective "medieval" also carries a pejorative ring in everyday speech, even while remaining academically standard.

• 5. Cultural Reach and Its Limits

  ›

  "The 1960s never occurred in Spain." That provocative phrase, discussed in the source, means that the sexual revolution, counterculture, and youth rebellion of the decade never took hold in Spain's conservative Roman Catholic culture under Francisco Franco's authoritarian regime. The calendar decade was universal; the cultural meaning of those years was not. This is a sharp illustration of how periodizing labels derived from decimal numbering systems can carry specific cultural connotations in some places and almost none in others. The same limit applies to labels tied to rulers or dynasties. The Jacksonian Era makes sense in an American context, the Meiji Era in Japan, the Merovingian Period in France. Take them out of their geographic frame and the meaning evaporates. The Romantic period, the source notes, is largely meaningless outside the Western world of Europe and European-influenced cultures. Historians have developed workarounds for this problem. The phrase "long 19th century" covers the span from 1789 to 1914, stretching the decimal boundary to match what scholars see as a coherent cultural and social phase. Eric Hobsbawm argued for a "short twentieth century" running from the First World War through the end of the Cold War, compressing the calendar century to fit what he saw as its true historical shape.

• 6. Prehistory and the Three-Age System

  ›

  Archaeology developed its own periodization system for the distant past, one built not on rulers or cultural movements but on shifts in material culture and technology. The Stone Age, the Bronze Age, and the Iron Age are its foundational divisions. John Lubbock refined the scheme further in 1865, partitioning the Stone Age alone into three sub-periods: the Palaeolithic, the Mesolithic, and the Neolithic. Despite the development of radiocarbon dating and other scientific methods that can now assign actual dates to many sites and artifacts, these long-established categories remain in use. Their durability illustrates something the source identifies as a general feature of period labels: once established, they become extraordinarily convenient, and convenience makes them hard to replace. For cultures that left no written record, neighboring peoples who did write sometimes preserved fragments of their history, giving archaeologists a supplementary chronological tool alongside physical remains.

• 7. The Problem of Borders

  ›

  Some events are so rupturing that they create their own periodizing vocabulary spontaneously. Pre-Reformation and post-Reformation, pre-colonial and post-colonial: both pairs mark a break so decisive that the event itself becomes the dividing line. Pre-war and post-war are still widely understood to mean before and after the Second World War, though the source notes that at some future point those phrases will need to be qualified to remain clear. English-speaking and Germanic historians broadly share a framework running from Prehistory through Ancient history, Late antiquity, Post-classical history, the Early modern period, Modern history, and Contemporary history. French and Romance-language historiography slices the same terrain differently: what the English tradition calls the early modern period, French historians label simply "modern", while the late modern and contemporary eras are grouped together as "contemporary". Post-classical history is roughly synonymous with the Middle Ages of Western Europe, but the term does not carry the same tripartite logic of classical, middle, and modern. The arbitrariness is not a flaw to be solved. It is a permanent feature of the enterprise, because periods are tools for understanding, not boundaries that exist in nature.