Rovelli gives the nice example of the Cathedral of Strasbourg, France to manifest these changes: it still has a statue of an angel holding a sun clock – meaning time as a religious domain from medieval times, another later one with a scientist holding another sun clock – with men now controlling time –, on to the more impressive astronomical clock started in the 16th century.

Much of this seems natural today: clocks and calendars have spread over the world e.g. through colonisation and other processes. But other time notions and chronologies existed and exist. An example would be the calendars in Islamic countries or in China that can at times be used in parallel to the Gregorian one.

From this short intro I want to turn to theories of Historical Time; and then look at time conceptions in a few regions – Iberia, Mesoamerica, colonial Mexico - serving as examples.

Some guiding questions that I'm still asking myself would be: Are European & non-European notions of time too different to be compared? Or on the other hand: Is it even helpful to distinguish between European and native concepts in a colonial society? The idea is not to give a complete overview over Historical Time concepts but rather to present some ideas that I find helpful in my research, and I'd be glad for any comments or feedback.

Historical Time I: Time as category

Reinhart Koselleck (1923 –2006) was a German historian who had major influence on a variety of fields: incl. conceptual history (Begriffsgeschichte), the epistemology of history, and time and temporality in history. For Koselleck, experience and expectation form knowledge categories that aid in analysing possible histories. Their changing correlation shows that historical time transforms itself together with history. To put it another way: Experience and expectation build a connection between before, today or tomorrow, between past and future. They aim at investigating concrete units of action in their social or political frameworks.

Tied to this is for Koselleck the idea of an “open future“ as new, accelerated and unknown time, which only became accessible from the 18th century. In medieval times then an open future would have been impossible due to Christianity's influence; it only became possible with the history of philosophy and esp. the French Revolution. Koselleck's examples for this include the famous incidents of destroying clocks, and the institution of new months during the French Revolution.

So: time can be analysed as categories, and directly connected to action within socio-political processes. I should note some later criticism of Koselleck's Historical Time as Euro-centric – e.g. it was critiziced that some new time was only possible with the french revolution (as in many theories of „Western modernization“), as well as his focus on European time notions. But still, Koselleck's ideas on Historical Time (and other topics) stay influential through his students, and I believe can still prove helpful. For one thing they led to some interesting post-colonial approaches to Historical Time. They also influenced another scholar interested in time and history who would take up some of Koselleck's concepts: Francois Hartog.

Historical Time II: Regimes of historicity

François Hartog is a French historian (b. 1946) whose interests include the intellectual history of ancient Greece, historiography, and historical forms of temporalisation. One of his main concepts on time is called „Regimes of historicity“. This means the relation a given society has to past, present and future – and not simply a periodisation of time. Hartog highlights a focus on specific time categories and their implementations. They serve to compare not only different forms of history, but also methods of relating to time in different societies

Another interesting concept of his is that of „Crises of time“ (crises de temps): When expressions of past, present and future become ambiguous. Some examples for him are again the French Revolution, as well as the fall of the Berlin Wall 1989 (as central for Europe). But he would also see the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 as such a crisis of time from the perspective of Palestine. This last example points to Hartog's focus on the diversity of relations to time, always depending on the respective society. Such regimes of historicity then show the specific relations different societies have to time categories – and can be related to different (also non-European) temporalities, as I'll try to show in the end. First we come to some different time notions.

Time conceptions I: Iberia (Castile)

I'm discussing some huge and diverse areas, and so can only touch on some major points for Castile here. I'll first look at time notions in Iberia and then Mesoamerica, in order to then turn to ways in which they interacted in colonial Mexico - the area I'm especially interested in and do my research on. For my focus on time conceptions I'll jump a bit in space and time, so please bear with me.

We should note that there's not one single notion of time or history in medieval Castile - for example those tied to Castilian rulers and those tied to the Roman Catholic church coexisted. These were connected to ideals developed during the so-called „reconquista“ and to an increasing religious dualism piting Christinity against Islam and Judaism. In this context the Visigoth kings' right to rule over Iberia was invoked by Castilian kings. The past was understood as organically advancing through time, whereby human insight was enhanced and European societies became more “civilised” - a clear example of linear time.

Then again with church and religious orders we can also see a providential view of history: According to this, God and Devil directly interfere into human history (esp. Voiced by the Franciscans, but also in royal chronicles. Up until 16th century, before the Reformation, the conviction that the apocalypse was imminent was also regularly invoked by the mendicant orders and the Spanish church. Here get overall a teleological concept of time: Castilian power would increase through divine favour, which was coupled with propagandistic portrayals of the reconquista and Iberia's Christian past

Time conceptions II: Mesoamerica

As with medieval Castile, pre-Hispanic Mesoamerica knew a wide variety of time notions, both linear and cyclical – my focus will be on the Aztecs of central Mexico. A central figure here were the tlamatinime (or wise men). For their communities they presented a link to the past, and a guide to the future. They were concerned with astronomy, historical annals and codices (made up of often geographical drawings, glyphs and signs). The tlamatinime preserved the records of their people: recording the historical events of each year in order of occurrence, sorted by day, month and hour through annals writings. As above in Castile we can see here a linear conception of time. The verbal transmission of history was based on numerical signs and paintings, and only complete when performed ritually and orally.

I'll briefly mention only two calendars here. There existed other calendars and systems in different Mesoamerican regions. So one calendar is the Xiuhpohualli, a 365-day solar cycle (here's a schematic image from the sun stone). It includes 18 named "months" of 20 days each, totaling 360 days, including monthly sacred festivals. There were also left over 5 days (nemontemi) that were described as "unlucky.

The Tonalpohualli calendar (here from a colonial source) forms a 260-day cycle and is most important for daily and religious life. It includes 20 named daysigns that cycle through 13 day periods (trecena), named after the respective sign that started it. A Calendar Round occured every 52 years when both calendars aligned, with the number 52 holding special ritual significance. I mention these calendars also to give a point of comparison to the much better known Gregorian calendar.

It's important to note that portraying Aztec (or maybe better: Mesoamerican) time as simply cyclical is problematic, since the seemingly fixed calendar dates were often manipulated. E.g. with birth dates holding special signifance, these would be changed according to which date was connected to a better omen.

What is more, the spreading of the calendars had important organizational and integrative functions for the Aztecs. According to Ross Hassig the distinction between cyclical and linear time was not fixed, rather they were used in different contexts. So that cyclical time was especially important for religious purposes, as is manifest in the round calendars; as well as in the natural rhythms of agriculture. Linear time was more central for political purposes – as shown in the annals genre, where the deeds of rulers and nobles were listed in order to raise their legitimacy.

Historical Time III: Colonial Mexico

This overview has reveales some interesting parallels between notions of time in Iberia and Mesoamerica - although of course many differences exist as well). In regions prior to Spanish colonisation we can find:

• Historical writing concerned with the deeds of rulers/elites, set down by official scholars

• The importance of the imminent end of the world, be it in the legend of the Four Suns or the Christian apocalypse

• Here as in other societies time and specifically calendars can be seen as forms of political control (especially clear in the Aztecs' case)

The existence of various conceptions of time and history in medieval Castile and pre-Hispanic central Mexico undermines the more traditional claims of a “substitution” of indigenous cyclical with Spanish linear time through European colonisation. This parallel existence of linear and cyclical within a given society can be seen in many (most?) societies, and again contradicts any facil linear=European, cyclical=non-Euroean oppositions. I'd also note here that there were many more parallels between Aztec and Castilian societies already remarked in that time, including a hierarchical organisation with nobles and commoners and a learned priestly class. Scholars like James Lockhart suggest that such parallels in some ways facilitated the development of a colonial society where many Mesoamerican elements continued to hold influence, being transformed in the process (not meant to excuse colonisation as “easy” by any means). Is it a stretch of the imagination to think that European time notions could have undergone a similar process, due to such parallels with their Mesoamerican counterparts?

Introduction of European chronologies and calendars

Ross Hassig has noted that the important political functions of Aztec calendars were undermined in early colonial times – through the targeted burning of such calendars by Spaniards. As calenders were strongly tied to Nahua cosmology, they were often burned by priests, conquistadors and administrators, as were codices with any religious content more generally. These were seen as promoting „idolatrous“ beliefs by the Crown and Catholic Church, with the Crown forbidding any writings on indigenous beliefs (even by Spaniards) in the 1570s. Hassig argues that the lack of indigenous calendars further undermined native resistance to colonial rule, since they had been so central to political organisation before colonial times – especially so because the Aztec Triple Alliance was not a centralized and very strictly organized entity, with the many city states (altepeme) holding much autonomy while recognizing Aztec rule (depending on their interests and rulers).

Hassig also mentions the introduction of clock towers and churches as disrupting pre-colonial time notions. With them time became much more structured – similar to the above-noted changes brought about by this in medieval Europe. For me, such an analysis of calendars and church clocks can be tied to some of Koselleck's ideas. We can observe through such objects human experience and expectation – here how Aztec experiences were profoundly transformed through the substitution of their pre-Hispanic means of measuring time. Koselleck's focus on investigating concrete units of action in their social or political frameworks might fit here as well, as we have seen once more the political functions calendars could hold.

Nonetheless, it's important to note that Mesomaerican time notions were and are not simply lost. They could be transported through calendars and codices that did survive; but especially through those produced by native scholars in colonial times, sometimes clandestinely. Examples include Nahua myths of the creation of the world, with the division into Four „Suns“ or periods reflecting time's cyclical nature carried forward in colonial writings (like the “Leyenda de los soles”). Furthermore, while Spanish control was stronger in administrative centers like central Mexico, in more rural areas indigenous beliefs and customs often continued with much less European interference throughout the colony. Some parts of New Spain - aka colonial Mexico - were not conquered by the Spaniards until very late (parts of Yucatán) and/or would rebel continually against Spanish rule (e.g. in Northern regions of New Spain).

I'd like to tie these developments back to some of Hartog's ideas as well. I mentioned how Regimes of historicity is a concept to compare methods of relating to time in different societies & periods, highlight their diversity. While this seems very general at first glance, I hope to have shown that in colonial situation like that of colonial Mexico various notions of time could coexist quite concretely – with parts being substituted and others being transformed. Historical writings like those of native scholars of colonial Mexico offer concrete and fascinating examples of such uneasy coexistence of time notions, or regimes of historicity.

The last point I want to raise is Hartog's idea of „Crises of time“: When expressions of past, present and future become ambiguous. Colonial Mexico for most people brings associations of the dramatic fall of the Aztec Triple Alliance. More recent research has highlighted how from indigenous people's points of view this was not such a dramatic change after all, but simply another big military event in Mesoamerica. For the Spanish , the conquest of the Triple Alliance could be framed as such a crisis of time. Spanish authors would often describe Cortés' campaigns as a monumental change, the start of the European colonisation of Americas, or even in Gomára's words the most monumental event in human history (to paraphrase).

As a stark contrast, native chroniclers and annalists sometimes almost ignored conquest or describe it in a few lines – for them it was just another one in a long line of Mesoamerican conquests (as happens in Hernan Tezozomoc's, Cronica Mexicaytol). Probably this was the view of many native people of central Mexico. Another interesting example is that we can sometimes even find prophesies of the Spaniards' coming framed as an implicit criticism of colonial rule (as arguably happens in Alva Ixtlilxochitl's Historia de la nacion chichimeca). Bringing this back to Hartog, I would say that the Crisis of time concept can be helpful here to conceptualize such a supposedly monumental event that did lead to major changes in chronologies: how it was judged contrasted very strongly depending on which society or group of people we look at.

So to sum up, simply describing a a substitution of Mesoamerican time notions and chronologies through European ones would be too simple, and would reinforce ideas put forward by colonial Spanish writers.

Going beyond the cases I described I tried to show that history can be studied not only by way of dates, people, or places. Beyond these lie time notions that can offer us important perspectives, and can by analysed by focusing on time as categories to be traces through specific experiences, objects and expectations. Time does not simply end, and so temporal notions of societies past and present help us reflect on our own times. After all, isn't time still “dancing, boogalooing-away all memories of past experience“?

[Edit:] Would be glad to hear any ideas on chronologies, historical time or any related topics.

*(A list of sources cited in the text, but I can provide others that I used as well)*

* Carlo Rovelli: The Order of Time, 2018

* Reinhart Koselleck: Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time (German original 1988)

* François Hartog: Régimes d'historicité. Présentisme et expériences du temps, 2003

* Ross Hassig: Time, History, and Belief in Aztec and Colonial Mexico, 2001)