Abstract

This paper addresses the way Hegel determines the difference between poetry (i.e., literature) and history. Hegel’s position is particularly significant for understanding both the basic features of the two fields and the implications that their relationship generates, even in contemporary debates. Starting from a comparison with Aristotle’s fundamental position, I will show how the Hegelian proposal, while initially appearing akin to that of the Greek philosopher, actually differs profoundly from it. This divergence has to do with their different conceptions of the relationship between the two disciplines and philosophy. Unlike Aristotle, for Hegel history is more philosophical than poetry, because, to be genuinely history, it must itself become philosophy. At the same time, if poetry becomes philosophy, it loses its specificity and ceases to be art. To reach this determination, I will show that the key factors concern how the individual practice of the two disciplines is conceived and, more importantly, the different ways they relate to universality.