Historian

The time of the chroniclers and compilers

The historians the top Moyen-âge are ecclesiastics or monks. They brush stories ( historiæ ) with character building or draw up annals, hardly more than chronologies of reigns. The national histories tell the origins of the nation of the historian which merge sometimes with those of the dynasty of their sovereign. Edifying character perdure then through the biographies of kings, the Hagiographies, while with the end from the Middle Ages the chronicles made by the laic ones are born.

With the Middle Ages, one of the historical works most read in Europe is the ecclesiastical Histoire of the English people of Bède Worthy the.

Professionals and amateurs

It is only in last quarter of the 19th century, that is set up the Higher education of the French history. The Third Republic creates the institutional framework which will support the training of true professionals of the discipline. Precisely, as of 1877, the students have from now on the possibility of receiving purses; they take part in meetings of studies (of the seminars) which teach them the techniques from analysis of the sources. The reform implies the multiplication of the outlets: in the University S, one increases the number of pulpits of professors and one creates the first stations of university lecturers. The whole of these measurements are inspired in fact by the German teaching which, the shortly after the defeat of 1870-1871, seems a reference. Before this period, the historian was seldom a professional. They were in general amateurs poured in the letters like the ecclesiastics, the men of law or the philosophers.

The university policy of the III {{E}} République ends in a few years in the birth of a community historian. Still restricted in 1914 (55 pulpits of history in French faculties of letters), the latter knows an explosion of her manpower as from the years 1960 with the massification of the students. Today, as recalled by Antoine Prost, this group of historians is linked by a common formation (the university), a network of association and reviews, a deontology (what a historian does have the right to make and not to make?) and a methodology (how must it work to produce a historical book in scientific matter?). Prost is even tempted to speak about “corporation” in their connection. It should be known that at the university, the university lecturers and the professors are recruited by vote of their pars and thus of their future colleagues. However, beyond this apparent unit, the profession has also its internal divisions. Beside the group many of the academics, one finds the members of the prestigious research organizations (École of the high studies in social sciences, National center of the scientific research, French École of Rome, Institut of political studies).

However, the historians do not limit themselves to this occupational class. The historical practice actually is largely shared in the company. Many are the impassioned amateurs who produce historical work and thus, for this reason, deserve the designation of historians. There are the local journalists, scholars, in love ones with the inheritance or more simply the curious ones who launch out in the writing of the history of their village or their family. The exercise seems easy. Some old books, the consultation of old documents, qualities of drafting and composition are enough apparently. In the facts, the shelves are numerous; the methodological gaps, the lack of rigor in the expression and the weak historical culture constitute heavy handicaps among amateurs and lead sometimes to a production of unequal quality. To make history requires a training.

Aspects of the trade of historian

The work of the historian is sometimes compared with that of a Détective. Indeed, the analogies are numerous. Doesn't the word Histoire mean in Greek “inquires”? The historian must seek information sources in order to release from the facts. Its interest goes mainly on documents of files but an oral testimony (for the study of the recent periods), an archaeological discovery can also bring invaluable information. Vis-a-vis these sources, the historian to endeavor to raise the facts, to discover the insinuations and to flush out the errors or the lies. He must also seek causes, mobiles with the human actions. He tracks the least index then. One of the aspects more exciting trade precisely consists in making speak about the apparently dumb or unsuited sources for the studied subject.

The comparison with the Examining magistrate often returns to indicate historical work. Like him, the historian must show of impartiality and distance. This attitude results in the taking into account of the various versions of a fact then of leading to the determination of that which is exact without its passions or its prejudices interfering the judgment. If historian and examining magistrate have the research of the truth in common, Marc Bloch prevents that the comparison stops there. The first does not condemn (in any case, it should be the spirit of the historian). It does not put forth a value judgment: this is good, this is bad. For the simple one and good reason which a judgment would be absurd knowing that the systems of values of today do not correspond to those of formerly. The historian must only include/understand. In some cases, this behavior can shock the public and involve misunderstandings because while trying to include/understand the black periods of the history (Shoah in particular), one with the impression which the historian justifies and thus certain manner excuses the torturers. Sometimes one shows it to relativize certain atrocities of last (the slavery of the Blacks) whereas the step historian simply aims at contextualiser the facts and to establish their true importance.

The historian is finally a writer. Certain historical works appear also literary works. With the 19th century, Augustin Thierry in Accounts of Times Mérovingiens or Jules Michelet in his French history used all the strings of the novel, sometimes with the detriment of the reality of the facts. Multiplying lyric formulas and metaphors, they could dramatize their account and give the picturesque key necessary to describe the scenes of formerly. Today, the French Academy accommodates some authors of the discipline: Pierre Nora and max Gallo acquired their armchair, according to their famous elder Fernand Braudel, Georges Duby, François Furet and Rene Rémond.

Social roles of the historian

Hérodote which one regards as the first historian justifies the writing of its book Histoire : “it is the talk of investigation to prevent which the past of the men forgets with time and to avoid only admirable exploits, as well as regards Greek as of that of the Barbarians, lose any celebrity of it, to establish, finally and especially, the cause of the war which they delivered”. In other words, the function of a historian is to maintain the memory the last events and to explain their unfolding. D' Hérodote with today, nothing changed. One awaits from him that they tell us what really occurred. This request does not appear to be blown when the success of the commemorations is noted (thousand-year-old capétien, bicentenary of the French revolution, 60e birthday of the unloading of Normandy…) in which the historian has the appearance of an obliged actor.

Moreover, the company asks the historians to explain the present in the light of the past. Vis-a-vis the extreme topicality, it awaits them an analysis which allows contextualiser the event, to replace it in a temporal evolution and to include/understand the more total stakes. In short, the knowledge of the historian is convened to bring retreat.

“To destroy the false stories, to dismount the directions impostors”: it is in these terms that the academic rouennais Olivier Dumoulin described the role of his/her colleagues historians. It is followed in this idea by Arlette Farge for which “the history is at each time the account reasoned of the events, that which avoids of it the falsification and the shame of the obvious skids or the denials mortifères”. In the Assassins of the memory , Pierre Vidal-Naquet also held of the similar remarks by warning against the “lies” of the car-proclaimed pseudo-historians “revisionists” who bait themselves to deny the existence of the Gas chambers and, more largely, of the Shoah.

The attempts at instrumentalisation of the past, especially in these times of identity assertions, require parapets indeed. The objective account (Antoine Prost prefers to say “distancié and impartial”) of the historians carry out them out of the amphitheaters and the classrooms. Recently, some passed “from the pulpit to the court”. French or foreign academics Jean-Pierre Azéma, Marc-Olivier Baruch, Philippe Burrin, Robert Paxton, Rene Rémond came to testify as experts (although they did not always live the period of Vichy) at the time of the lawsuit Papon in 1998, the objective being to restore the chronology of the acts of the shown prefect, and to clarify the judges and sworn on his room for maneuver and the operation of a prefecture under the Occupation. In the same way, the historians Henry Rousso, Annette Becker, Philippe Burrin and Florent Brayard were engaged as experts to make the light on the practices negationnists of certain students and professors of the Université Lyon III. This investigation gave place to the publication of the Rapport Rousso .

The historian thus finds himself implied in the movement of “judiciarisation” of the company. With the the United States, this tendency takes shape even more clearly. At the time of lawsuit, historians are paid by the charge or defense to seek evidence in the files.

At the same time, the profession slips towards another tendency of the current society: the marchandisation. On the other side of the Atlantic (and more and more in France), the historians receive orders on behalf of private individuals, of companies, lawyers. They take part thus in projects as varied as the drafting of a booklet commemorative or history of a factory, the animation of local companies or museums or the search for a responsibility in a toxic matter deposit. This history applied that the Americans appoint Public history place the researcher in the action and not in the neutral observation. Under will these conditions, the historian be able to preserve his deontologic requirements suitable for the historical step? While becoming a provider of services, doesn't it rock in this “history-serf” denounced by Lucien Febvre, in other words in a history which serves as the interests? The credibility of its speech is likely to be questioned.

Random links:

Blaabjerg | Something' S Got to Give | Géoportail | Philippe Etesse | 1809