Kollektive Erinnerung. Topographie und Topik in Walthers ›Palästinalied‹

The French sociologist Maurice Halbwachs (1877–1945) conceived re- membrance as a product of ›collective memory‹ and explained this idea in his book on ›La Topographie légendaire des Évangiles en Terre sainte‹ (1941) showing that the topography of the Holy Land was predominantly an imaginary landscape construed by Christian communities. Following this concept, this article studies the ›Palästinalied‹, a text describing the arrival of a pilgrim in the Holy Land in the time of the crusades, abundantly transmitted under the name of Walther von der Vogelweide. The high degree of textual variance in the diverse manuscripts testifies the acting of ›collective memory‹ in the medieval poetic tradition. Of special interest in this context are the strophic arrangements, the variation of deictic markers, the reworking of melodic models documented in the manuscript transmission and the diatopic opposition existing between the emphasis of ›distant love‹ expressed in Jaufré Rudel’s Occitan song ›Lanqand li jorn son lonc en mai‹ (one of the named models) and the attitude of proximity prevailing in the ›Palästinalied‹.

Symbol/Meaning paired-associate recall: an "archetypal memory" advantage?

The theory of the archetypes and the hypothesis of the collective unconscious are two of the central characteristics of analytical psychology. These provoke, however, varying reactions among academic psychologists. Empirical studies which test these hypotheses are rare. Rosen, Smith, Huston and Gonzales proposed a cognitive psychological experimental paradigm to investigate the nature of archetypes and the collective unconscious as archetypal (evolutionary) memory. In this article we report the results of a cross-cultural replication of Rosen et al. conducted in the German-speaking part of Switzerland. In short, this experiment corroborated previous findings by Rosen et al., based on English speakers, and demonstrated a recall advantage for archetypal symbol meaning pairs vs. other symbol/meaning pairings. The fact that the same pattern of results was observed across two different cultures and languages makes it less likely that they are attributable to a specific cultural or linguistic context.