In recent years, a pronounced methodological self-reflexiveness has been established as a standard in studying language and literature. Methodological pluralism and a specific methodological adaptation to the objects of study are a characteristic feature of present-day literary and cultural studies. In keeping with this tendency, introductory textbooks on literary studies often provide an overview of the broad discussion and spectrum of methods and their seemingly boundless possible applications and the options for combining them. But this is not the first time that the boundaries of our discipline have undergone dissolution. Beginning with early examples of accounts of methodological variety and methodological reflection (Oscar Benda, Harry Maync, Emil Ermatinger, Julius Petersen), the present article discusses the ways in which an awareness of a surprisingly long tradition of discussions concerning methodological competence affects the present self-conception and identity of philology
