The modern research university is divided into three distinct branches: the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. This particular constitution is far from evident, as the nature of knowledge and the relations between different realms of knowledge have been regularly redefined throughout history. In this session, we trace the shifting boundaries between the sciences and the humanities in the long nineteenth century.
Historiography on this period is characterized by accounts of specialization and professionalization that, above all else, focus on the development of the sciences or the humanities. This panel aims to place these two distinct historiographical traditions into conversation with one another by presenting four case studies in which the boundaries between “science” and “humanities” were blurred.
None of our case studies can be placed in either the history of science or the history of humanities exclusively, they bear relevance to both. They question what it means for a certain knowledge practice (or practices) to be ‘scientific’ in different times and different places. Furthermore, they show how the history of science can be enriched by insights from the history of humanities, and vice versa.
These case studies shed light on overarching questions such as: How has our notion of what belongs to the sciences or the humanities been established? How has this changed throughout the long nineteenth century? How have different groups of scholars carved out new niches between the sciences and the humanities to the example of, or in contradistinction to, other professional groups?
