The Oral Historian as Memorist

This paper explores some issues in relation to oral historyand memory that emerge in Alessandro Portelli's The Order HasBeen Carried Out. I examine the contemporary role of the oralhistorian, the relationship between the present and the pastin memory work, and make some comments about how we might articulatethe field of oral history with memory studies more closely forthe enrichment of both.     

Beyond the Foreign Office Papers: The Making of an International Historian

This article reflects on the changing discipline of diplomatic history/international history through the author's own experience in the field since the 1950s. It also draws wider lessons about the craft, especially the importance of understanding the people behind the papers – illustrated with vignettes of diplomats whom the author interviewed, including Harold Nicolson, William Strang and Owen O'Malley. Woven into this is some discussion of the author's own books, especially those on the pre-1914 Foreign Office, Britain and the origins of the First World War and, most recently, her two volumes on Europe's international relations between the world wars.     

History, Memory, and the Law: The Historian as Expert Witness

There has been a widespread recovery of public memory of the events of the Second World War since the end of the 1980s, with war crimes trials, restitution actions, monuments and memorials to the victims of Nazism appearing in many countries. This has inevitably involved historians being called upon to act as expert witnesses in legal actions, yet there has been little discussion of the problems that this poses for them. The French historian Henry Rousso has argued that this confuses memory with history. In the aftermath of the Second World War, judicial investigations unearthed a mass of historical documentation. Historians used this, and further researches, from the 1960s onwards to develop their own ideas and interpretations. But since the early 1990s there has been a judicialization of history, in which historians and their work have been forced into the service of moral and legal forms of judgment which are alien to the historical enterprise and do violence to the subleties and nuances of the historian's search for truth. This reflects Rousso's perhaps rather simplistically scientistic view of the historian's enterprise; yet his arguments are powerful and should be taken seriously by any historian considering involvement in a law case; they also have a wider implication for the moralization of the history of the Second World War, which is now dominated by categories such as "perpetrator,""victim," and "bystander" that are legal rather than historical in origin. The article concludes by suggesting that while historians who testify in war crimes trials should confine themselves to elucidating the historical context, and not become involved in judging whether an individual was guilty or otherwise of a crime, it remains legitimate to offer expert opinion, as the author of the article has done, in a legal action that turns on the research and writing of history itself.     

The Task of the Historian

Book reviewed in this article:
Gabrielle M. Spiegel, The past as Text: The Theory and Practice of Medieval Historiography     

The Journalist as Historian: Anthony Lewis, Civil Liberties, and the Supreme Court

The genesis of the column that Anthony Lewis wrote for The New York Times between 1969 and 2001 was a red face—not Lewis's, but that of Arthur Ochs Sulzberger. The Times ' publisher offered Lewis the column as a consolation prize after outgoing executive editor James Reston mistakenly informed Lewis that the job of deputy to A. M. Rosenthal, the new executive editor, was open and that Lewis was a logical candidate. ¹     

St Anselm of Canterbury: the philosopher-saint as politician

From the beginning of Anselm's career as abbot of Bec he was a shrewd and skilful politician. Eadmer describes him as using a certain ‘holy guile’, having great psychological insight, and using methods of kindly persuasion supplemented by logical argument to gain his ends.This pattern is reflected in the church-state controversies in England. Anselm outlined this method to his successor at Bec, showing him an effective way of advancing and enriching his monastery.Anselm had a definite program of reform for the English church. From the beginning he had a vision of the archbishop of Canterbury as primate of Britain, a co-ruler of the kingdom. Anselm also claimed certain specific rights: to recognize and contact the papacy; to hold councils for the reform of the church; to receive the archbishopric free from simony; to hold the lands of Canterbury free from the king's control or from extraordinary taxes; and to ban lay investitute.During his rule Anselm accomplished all these goals, one by one, by taking advantage of times when the kings were faced with political crises and pressing his claims just then. He acted shrewdly, at times with ‘holy guile’, at times with skilful negotiation, but always aware of the potent effect of public opinion. Thus Anselm reflected the growing concept of raison d'état in the Anglo Norman state, and thereby used his raison d'église more effectively.