The article is a critical analysis of the renowned book by D.J. Goldhagen Hitler’s Willing Executioners. Using comparative historiography the author of the article reconstructs Goldhagen’s narrative model and compares it with the achieved cognitive effects. In doing so, he demonstrates weaknesses both of the model and of the effects.
Taking debates on the historiography of Quebec as the base of his considerations, the Author presents various reflections and postulates concerning comparative historiography. In particular His attention is drawn to the various types and aspects of historical identity. The awareness of those is necessary for the correct comparative analysis.
The conversation concerns mayor questions in the theory of historical writing, both raised or elaborated in Hayden White’s work. It focuses on the relation between history and its closest others: science and literature, as well as the issue of the function of historical studies. Conversation includes the discussion of the concepts of fiction, figure, fullfillment, figurative and conceptual language, modernism.
The Author discussed in his article the problem of ethic foundations of promoters of psychohistory. He argues that psychotherapeutic inclinations of scholars resulted in the alienation of this approach within historical sciences, what — in the end — did not prevent psychohistorians from becoming active outside the closed circle of the discipline.
The French revolution should be conceived in its entirety: not as a coup by reformist elites or a retrogressive people’s movement, but a phenomenon transforming social mentality by means of opposing and related factors such as fear and violence, hope etc. The scope of influence of revolutionary mentality was considerable, especially considering more than just those social circles directly involved in the revolution.
This essay is constructed of two parts: the first is a historiographical sketch of several theories concerning nationalism and gender; the second part puts some of these theories into practice in interpreting an article from a fin-desiècle Polish illustrated weekly magazine.
The abolition of traditional territorial divisions in 1789 was an indirect reason for the rise of new regions comprising adjacent departments. The phenomenon is exemplified by the notion of Midi, a land in the south of France. The author discusses factors that led to the distinction of the southern departments (Méridionaux): the tradition of political activity in the region; peculiar religious relations; distinctive language and customs.
The aim of this article is substantially devoted to explore which factors have, and have had. an impact on the way history is actually explained. The main topics are: 1. The fundamental passage from a monological interpretation of history to a “plurality of voices”, linked to post-modern culture. The complex debate about Post-modern culture is significantly marked by the disappearance of the monology (a great cultural uniting discourse) and by the emergence of different interpretations and visions. This process has a clear influence on the way history is now explained and the way the “official history” has been substituted by different narratives. 2. The meaning of collective memory. The role of collective memory has acquired a renewed significance today, scholars belonging to different disciplines have underlined its importance in the nation-building processes or in the re-affirmation of identity. For example, ten years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the passing of time is producing peculiar interpretations and alterations about the recent history of the former socialist countries. The history of these new democratic societies has been re-written, not in the oriented and “orwellian” way. followed by the previous regimes, but through the subtle, complex and spontaneous work of the collective memory. 3. The political and ideological action oriented to “create” or to “erase” historical events, which can be functional to the elites legitimisation. Elites need a symbolic background to support their political action and to maintain the consensus of society. They are able both to create new myths or partisan visions that can undermine the legitimacy of a political system and to support real democratic societies.
This paper aims to open the discussion about historian’s emotions during the research process that has mostly been covered up. It does not pretend to be a thorough account of the topic but a modest essay that might encourage other researcher to reflect on their experiences. Firstly, we briefly describe the current situation in a few neighboring disciplines. Secondly, we explain how we understand emotions and use the terms emotion, feeling and sentiment. Thirdly, we discuss the reasons why most historians keep silent about their feelings. Fourthly, with two examples, we illustrate how historians have written about their emotions. Fifthly, we present a model of emotional phases of research by the Danish social psychologist Steinar Kvale and evaluate its relevance to historical research. Then we look at the causes and/or objects of feelings of students or beginning scholars in cultural history. Finally, we suggest some ways we historians could make our scholarly community emotionally a more supportive one. It might be good to remember that our discussion concerns primarily the Finnish academic world, and the situation in other countries might be slightly different.
In contemporary historical writings there is a noticeable retreat from the rational methodological tradition dating back to the Enlightenment. This trend should be stopped by a new, deeper awareness of possibilities open to a rational approach to the three main spheres of historical culture, i.e. cognitive, political, and esthetic. All these spheres should be harmoniously developed in mutual interrelationship.
In the article the Author presents the typology of alternative history and in its light he characterises the historical writings of Jerzy Łojek, in particular his approach towards history of November Uprising, 1830–1831.
This article traces the process by which Ricoeur establishes the character of the discipline of history as a form of narration which expresses the relation between the experience of ‘belonging-to-history’ and the capacity to place this experience at a distance and, thereby, to experience it reflectively.