Momentum of Their Own

How are the three structural elements related to momentum of their own?

Hierarchy of estates: We assume that both individuals and groups were constantly challenged to maintain and, if possible, improve their own position in the hierarchical structure of estates. Accompanied by sometimes violent disputes, positions had to be constantly renegotiated, leading to new rules and changes in the social structure.

The momentum of its own here stems from tension between the ideal of a fixed hierarchical order, which was regarded as fundamental to human coexistence by the societies studied, and the openness of its daily realisation.

Presence culture: The co-presence of the actors in space made the 'daily' communication of hierarchical relationships unavoidable; often the divergent views on one's own position only became visible when people met. Conflicts were pre-programmed, as the perception of clothing and body as well as the positioning in the room were ultimately difficult to balance. Changes were reflected, among other things, in the further development and expansion of the repertoire of communication methods. Elaborate writing, which is important in all the regions of the world analysed in the project, is not in contradiction with the culture of presence, but rather in a productive relationship with it.

The project focuses on the associated dynamics of change, which have hardly been systematically investigated to date and which, under the conditions mentioned, were already inherent in the gatherings themselves and experienced current continuations.

Consensus orientation: For the societies under consideration, consensus orientation is defined as low tolerance for dissenting positions; dissent could hardly claim legitimacy for itself. It therefore does not refer to a romanticised idea of 'the' Middle Ages or a supposedly harmony-affine East Asian mentality. Disputes and violent conflicts were omnipresent; however, they must be interpreted in the light of the normative character that unanimity acquires in the societies observed here. The dispute, which Simmel already saw as a driving force for change, gains its own dynamic in the context of a general consensus orientation.

Seen in this light, consensus orientation does not prevent conflicts that tend to take on a momentum of their own; rather, it drives them forward, intensifies them and imposes a certain form on them.

The three structural elements have often been the subject of research. What is new is identifying them as central drivers of change and linking them to the concept of momentum of its own. We suspect that these three elements were able to motivate the actors to 'co-operate' in self-propelled processes. This gave rise to new narratives about ones own origin, networks were established and investments were made in art and literature. These innovations did not undermine the existing structures but rather supported them so that the impetus for momentum of its own continued to exist.

Consequences

The project aims at encouraging a change of perspective: The changes of the pre-modern era no longer seem to be part of a centuries-long development leading up to the present. Rather, at least for the regions analysed, similar drives for change appear to be discernible, which reveals this period and these regions to be highly dynamic; however, this dynamism was primarily directed towards the further expansion of the structures of these societies. As an outlook, and going beyond the scope of the project, a relatively rapid change in the 'long 19th century' towards the society of the present could be assumed, which could be associated more with terms like ‘emergence’ than with long-term development.

The elaboration of such abstract descriptions of processes of change, which are committed to basic historical research, also has important political implications. For if commonalities of different world regions regarding the drivers of change can be established, essentialist Sino-, Euro- or Japanocentric narratives can hardly be maintained.