' Periodization | and Sovereignty How Ideas of Feudalism and Secularization Govern the Politics of Time Kathleen Davis University of Pennstly PhiladelphiaIntroduction In the early eighth century, the Northumbrian monk and scholar now known as the Venerable Bede offered his own etymology for the Latin As usual for him, he considers it in the plaral: from *measure’™ (dempora igitura “temperamento” nomen accipiund.* Taken in its various senses, the word “meastre” nearly captures the force of temperamentumy, which derives from the verb tempera, wen to divide, to The verb aceipio ("wo take with: lfort, receive, gota n the active and the pas sive, and thereby disp muological relation: tempura are so called because they do moderate, divide, andl regu have tended to auribute this em daily monastic re and in so doing nd effective, historical asa regulating thor to use anno domini (8.0.) aching his 1 oF Chistian potities, to the saered at the point of « division in time? This Periodization, which is not entirely autibutable to Bede of course, con tinues today to regulate calendars and politcal lite In recent decades there has been much attention to the time,” and it has not come untethered from the proble history with the sacred, Indced, studies ofthe polities oft this relation as their conceptual fit, almost assays expressed in the form of a divide between Middle Ages and a secul: nity. The a along these lines: medieval people subordin the mov n history and the ent, and therefore had Wo sense of read, meaning under such circumstances history i val politics of time is therefore an oxymoron." These argu derive explanatory power from economic models of pe ng a transition from ecclesiastical (0 secular society with ion from a medieval, rural, agrarian economy to mercial economy, most typically expressed sw the transition from2 sntroduetion anonplace are these ideas that—even stood to be a constructed Ca statis of common Sense face of all challenges onvliths medieval developed”) Sur capitalism So co feudalism hough the Middle Ages is well und igorye-they have taken on the selFevieny principal yoal ofthis book iso ask why. We" ta tacological and stage-oriented histories de (he igen Tena and moxtern/seeary/ capil renal what purposes da they serve? What docs the regulating princi ple of medieval wodern periodization f ald in place, ane what de politi sastumptions go unncalenged ashen stb Tabeled Feuetat™ and aligned with the Midd -adignns flourish ashen a Christian polities of 1 apolitical. ar pre-political tes requires that the aisision medieval, ode Ih categories such as “feudal” ane A which it holes in help to obscure? Wh juugation and stesst fle Ages? What cultural oe such as Bede's is declared ti A sincere cengagenn cern be pu secur ith these is estion together wit iy constitu into q vith atic it aay et rigid historical jocization. In his place Ironically, th wligmis usually {que of anthropol sets ont his claim fat is ue that Time belongs to the political pevween individuals, classes, andl vations, th ctnthrapology’s object through temporal cance isa ‘Palities of Time.” Fal boldest, most celebrated critiques of inforce rather than disrupt this pe og itn io ad the Othe For example ath which Fewe wold mows iste ny af rekations p justly Famous Johannes Fab econ 1 the construction of sand devices isa poh necessary, Howe’ an Finds eal act sor aipatate thatthe studs of such posttes must esty ny recognizing gaitative ste fron avetival wo moder Ue conceptions.” which Times? Mthough he is “chievedd secularization of resulted from the to consider fare that there are ater ways a reall te “sere vs. secular ide samp teres PAY Mong ark ek with a essentials mevtenshe C0 (or JewsChristian) vision of Time. ‘That break ws Wo sa eameeption of syapace in terms of a history of salvation 9 one ultimately aan the secutarization of Tine as natural history." tus ot Chugh he insists that “Time belongs to the politi! econ of te tions.” Fabian posits a foundations jwaitative break in the nature of time that is apparentiy outside polities. Rather ‘than considering the na vee of seeutarized Gime” as politcal, as part of Pres ¢ like Mirepoligy, "at nce comstites and emotes #y obies ian mehieved.” Like Bede, he thereby grounds a polit via with the sacred, at the point of 3 1 vekation with the uli his history. he describes glwten teansicers it simply teal avdler by attaching i800 30 The fact that this attachment Fhmient tos avot atten this 1 division in time akes the form ofa claim to deta