A new Special Issue re-examines the journal Acta Comparationis Litterarum Universarum (1877–1888), which has been hailed in recent years as the first journal of comparative literature. The Special Issue is called “Introduction: Acta Comparationis—An Alternative Genealogy of World Comparatism” and the authors are Anca Parvulescu, Alex Goldis, and Levente T. Szabó. The study was published in the journal Transilvania, no. 4, in 2025.
Rather than engaging in a hagiographic celebration of its editor, Hugo Meltzl, the collection of essays highlights the journal’s complex connection with the political, linguistic, and epistemological frameworks of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and its wider inter-imperial context. The Special Issue aims to move beyond a narrow, celebratory view of Meltzl’s work, which is often tied to the idea of a newly global Comparative Literature.
The journal, co-edited by Hugo Meltzl and Sámuel Brassai at the newly founded university in Kolozsvár/Cluj/Klausenburg (the historical capital of Transylvania, then part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire), is framed not as a unified medium but as an unstable and contradictory “microcosm of nineteenth century Comparative Literature”. Scholars argue that the journal’s project was an open-ended experiment, functioning as a stage for the emergence of comparative literature, and that its flexibility led it to oscillate between theoretical pronouncements and practical applications.
A central focus of the re-evaluation is the journal’s extensive network of collaborators, which created its own heterogeneous “world”. This network was materially anchored in the global postal system, allowing editor Meltzl to correspond with and receive contributions from scholars and writers worldwide. Collaborators included figures like the Wallachian princess Elena Ghika, who wrote under the pen name Dora d’Istria, and who was recognized by Meltzl as a fellow comparatist and genius. Other collaborators included Enrique de Olavarría y Ferrari in Mexico, Paul Mayet in Japan, and Herbert Augustus Strong in Australia.
The essays in the Special Issue collectively identify five key structural dimensions of the journal, including its production within the Hungarian side of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and its selective and asymmetric multilingualism, which needs to be historicized within Transylvania and the broader empire. The journal’s practice of comparatism is seen to intersect with anthropology and ethnography, often focusing on oral literatures (folklore) framed within an evolutionist understanding of literary development.
Several articles address the “occluded voices and archival silences” of the journal. The issue challenges the traditional focus on Meltzl, instead proposing a network-centric perspective that foregrounds the pivotal roles played by women (proto)comparatists like Dora d’Istria, Lucy Lloyd, and Juliette Adam. Other articles place the journal’s texts in Romani and about Romani literary traditions within the context of nineteenth-century Gypsylorism, noting that Romani collaborators were often treated as exotic objects of study rather than as producers of knowledge. Similarly, the limited representation of Jewish culture, despite its prominence in late nineteenth-century Transylvania, is discussed in relation to the inherently comparatist dimension of Jewish folklore studies at the time.
The journal’s principles, particularly its commitment to polyglottism, are critically examined. Although Meltzl advocated for a multilingual approach, the study argues that this polyglottism was the policy of the Austro-Hungarian empire and often materialized as an unevenly implemented practice. Furthermore, a closer look at the linguistic theories informing the journal reveals that the restrictive framework of “decaglottism” reflected the prevalent ideological pressures of the era, which hierarchized languages based on civilizational and political terms.
The collection ultimately contends that to fully understand the journal, one must expose the “historical conditions” and political tensions that enabled its emergence, recognizing its limitations rooted in the epistemic contradictions of the European nineteenth century. By engaging an expanded archive, the Special Issue makes a forceful case for a relational history of comparatism, positioning Acta Comparationis as one complex, entangled node in the global emergence of the discipline.
The dissemination of research results at UBB is part of a project funded by the National Recovery and Resilience Program (PNRR), run by UBB Core, a career guidance center for researchers that aims to make the field of research more accessible to Romanian society.
Comments
comments
