Abstract

The aim of this essay is to analyze what I consider the three methodological pillars of the microhistory practiced by Carlo Ginzburg: the concepts of explication de texte, strangeness and logosformel. The first, one of the essential elements present in the works of Erich Auerbach, is seen here as fundamental to understanding the way in which the Italian historian examines and constructs his narrative. Likewise, I will examine the notion of strangeness, departing from Russian literature, but formulated by Ginzburg through Marcel Proust’s filter. In addition, I will reflect on the main and little analyzed inspiration assumed by Ginzburg in his work: the concept of Pathosformel, developed by Aby Warburg and later reelaborated by the author of Storia Notturna through the concept of Logosformel. Without understanding these concepts and how Ginzburg uses them, I believe that full understanding of the whole of his work and his most experimental and radical microanalytical theses is unlikely.