@ARTICLE{Falkowski_Tomasz_Writing_2010,
 author={Falkowski, Tomasz},
 volume={vol. 40},
 pages={81–96},
 journal={Historyka Studia Metodologiczne},
 howpublished={online},
 year={2010},
 publisher={Polska Akademia Nauk Oddział PAN w Krakowie},
 publisher={Instytut Historii Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego},
 abstract={In the paper I try to reconstruct the main theoretical assumptions underlying Paul Veyne’s vision of the ancient world that are to be found in his book L’empire gréco-romain. First of all, recalling the opposition between two ways of making the past intelligible: “explication” versus “explicitation”, I show how the French historian uses that second type of historical analyse to reveal some ancient phenomena (i.e. “democracy”, “imperialism”, “soul”, “faith”) in their original and singular forms. Then, I pass to the question of causality and genesis in history. It seems that in Veyne’s book we can distinguish three different “models” of becoming: 1) “time of a project”, 2) “epigenesis” and 3) “discourse effectiveness”. All these fi ndings lead me to the conclusion that Veyne’s writing of history is essentially “essayistic”.},
 type={Artykuł},
 title={Writing History Today: a Short Analysis of Paul Veyne’s “L’empire gréco-romain”},
 URL={http://journals.pan.pl/Content/124406/PDF/8_Historyka_40_Falkowski_Jak.pdf},
 keywords={Veyne, empire, explication, explicitation, Genesis, causality, epigenesis},
}