The political agency of historiography: Consequences and context

The article proposes to understand the concept of historiography as a canon, despite the existing criticism of the use of this category in academic texts, and focus on the political aspects of historiography as a method of intellectual action and research optics, through understanding both the agency of historiographic models, which carries political consequences, and the analysis of the political context that influences the construction of historiographic models. This does not mean that historiography is a narrative about politics (the study of political history, etc.), but that it itself acts as a political phenomenon. The following political manifestations of historiographic models are noted: (1) the historical narrative itself, including that designed as a historiographic model, it can be interpreted politically, this also applies to projects of history depoliticization; (2) unlike historical knowledge, historiographic models preserve the linearity of the narrative; a consequence of this processual temporality is that any historiographic model has some goal, mission, connected with realization of interests of certain groups, which allows speaking about it, among other things, as a political project; (3) historiography performs a function of legitimation, as something that explains the past, defines the present and softens the impact of the past on it. Thus, the historiographic model can be interpreted as an authoritarian practice, reflecting interests of a certain community. Political agency of historiography also raises the question about the context of the canon, which functions through historiographic works, that is, it is necessary to consider what political conditions and in what way influence construction of certain historiographic models. The following factors seem to be determining: (1) the existence of a normative structure, within the framework of which different communities, interested in their vision of the past, evaluate themselves, implement their decisions and use ideas about history for their own purposes; (2) the established language of description is important, which is then transmitted through historiographic models, representing a resource associated with the interests of specific groups, and its transmission by other groups contributes to the strengthening of the influence of communities that speak the language; (3) the politicization of historiography is also strengthened by the context of post-normal science, which presupposes a temporary rejection of the search for truth as a traditional scientific ideal in the context of uncertainty of facts, values and the need to present a specific result. It is worth noting that the modern political reality is characterized by the action of several contexts simultaneously. The author declares no conflicts of interests.

Keywords

Authors

References