Keyno e
Open Access. © 2018 Ma ko Deman owsky, published by De G uy e . This wo k is
licensed unde he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial-NoDe i a i es 4.0 License.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1515/9783110466133-001
Ma ko Deman owsky
Wha is Public His o y
How we communica e is no sel -e iden . Nei he a a mee ing o colleagues
om di e en language backg ounds, wha e e hei na u e, because social
milieus, egions, eligions, clans, and ibal communi ies also o m di e en
linguis ic codes and ules, e en i hey speak “ he same language” owa d he
ou side wo ld. This lack o sel -e idence applies e en mo e o exchanges be ween
he ep esen a i es o na ional language cul u es. This may s ike he English-
speaking eade as a me e abs ac i iali y. And ye his si ua ion p esen s a
signi ican challenge in o he se ings, o ins ance, in he mul ilingual p ac ic-
ing o public his o y a he edi o ial o ice o Public His o y Weekly (e e since i s
es ablishmen in 2013) o , as is becoming inc easingly common, a con e ences
o he In e na ional Fede a ion o Public His o y. This communica i e challenge
applies in pa icula o e mini echnici and he con en - ela ed me ada a o be
gene a ed om hem.1 This essay, ini ially w i en which in Ge man, endea o s o
an icipa e (and ca e o) he ho izon o he English-speaking communi y al eady
in i s oo no es–as a as possible o he au ho . Ne e heless, i s English e sion,
a ansla ion, will necessa ily di e om he o iginal.
Al eady e e yday expe ience sugges s ha i is o li le help o indica e wha e-
e migh also be co e ed by his o ha e m in such ans-la ions, as long as we
lack speci ic ules o explain pa icula names o designa ions. Ou desi ed ellow
playe o eamma e does no unde s and he game in his way. To be pe ec ly
hones , many o ou concep s ac ually unc ion acco ding o such con en ion-
based deixis and associa ion. E en so, hey only wo k as long as we encoun e
as li le di e si y as possible, i.e., as long as we a e dealing wi h like-minded
people o ones who ha e been socialized he same way. Thus, i is qui e o una e
when Wi gens ein (1953) likens his p oblem o a pa y (o “going on holiday,” in
Anscombe’s ansla ion):
This is connec ed wi h he concep ion o naming as, so o speak, an occul p ocess. Naming
appea s as a quee connexion o a wo d wi h an objec . – And you eally ge such a quee
connexion when he philosophe ies o b ing ou he ela ion be ween name and hing by
1 See Con en s, Public His o y Weekly. The In e na ional BlogJou nal. h ps://public-his o y-weekly.
deg uy e .com/con en s/ (las accessed 1 May 2018).
No e: Many hanks o D Ma k Kybu z (h p://englishp ojec s.ch) o he edi o ial o e haul o my
i s English ex e sion.
4 Ma ko Deman owsky
s a ing a an objec in on o him and epea ing a name o e en he wo d “ his” innume a-
ble imes. Fo philosophical p oblems a ise when language goes on holiday.2
“Public his o y,” a esea ch and p ac ice-o ien ed discipline commi ed o in e -
na ionaliza ion o good easons,3 will he e o e do well o in ensi y i s concep-
ual wo k, o open up a game whose in e nal ules a e explici and whose hidden
inclusi eness does no p e en o he po en ial playe s om pa icipa ion. Thus,
wha we need is no a mo e o less and unin ended closed socie y o p i a e
club, bu an open, and undoub ably plu alis ic discipline. Pa adoxically, we can
achie e his goal by ag eeing on he mos impo an ules be o ehand. Fo i is
only once we ha e done so ha we may keep ying o celeb a e ou academic
“pa ies” inclusi ely and wi h he p ospec o success. This pape seeks o make
a small con ibu ion o accomplishing his objec i e. I does so by o e ing a sub-
s an ial cla i ica ion o wha exac ly public his o y is. This in ol es conside ing
he ule(s) acco ding o which we decide wha public his o y is, and wha i is no .
Since he much-in oked cul u al u n in he la e 1980s, he his o ical sci-
ences ha e also heo ized he ield o “public his o y,” namely, he public and
socie al dealings wi h his o y. These had p e iously been s udied p ima ily by
social psychology and classical s udies, bu also, since he 1960s, by Ge man-
speaking his o y didac ics,4 o easons o hei own and wi h li le in e disciplin-
a y con ac .
Among Eu opean his o ians, only some ew ou s anding academic ep esen-
a i es (my lis is pu ely exempla y) – Johann Gus a D oysen (1868),5 Johann
2 Ludwig Wi gens ein, Philosophical In es iga ions, ansla ed by G. E. M. Anscombe (Ox o d:
Basil Blackwell, 1958), 19.
3 Se ge Noi e , “L’in e na ionalisa ion de’l His oi e Publique / In e na ionalizing Public
His o y / In e na ionalisie ung de Public His o y,” Public His o y Weekly 2 (2014) 34, DOI:
dx.doi.o g/10.1515/phw-2014-2647; Thomas Cau in,“T a e se les on iè es: une his oi e publique
in e na ionale / C ossing Ba ie s: an In e na ional Public His o y / G enzen übe sch ei en: eine
In e na ionale Public His o y,” Public His o y Weekly 5 (2017) 13,DOI: dx.doi.o g/10.1515/phw-
2017–9018.
4 In he Fede al Republic o Ge many, he i s concep seems o ha e p esen ed by Rol
Schö ken in his “Geschich sdidak ik und Geschich sbewuß sein,” GWU 23 (1972), 81–89. In he
Ge man Democ a ic Republic, his wo k began 10 yea s ea lie and was soon concep ualized
empi ically. The esul s, howe e , we e published only o a limi ed ex en . Among o he s, see
Ma ko Deman owsky, “De Beginn demoskopische Geschich sbewuss seins-Fo schung in
Deu schland: Die Fo schungsg uppe ‘Sozialis isches Geschich sbewuss sein’ am Ins i u ü
Gesellscha swissenscha en beim ZK de SED,” Zei sch i ü Geschich sdidak ik 4 (2005), 146–75.
5 Johann Gus a D oysen, G und iss de His o ik (Leipzig: Vei , 1868); ansla ed in o English by
Elisha B. And ews as Ou lines o he P inciples o His o y (Bos on: Ginn & Company, 1897).
Wha is Public His o y 5
Huizinga (1950 [1929]),6 o Al ed Heuss (1959)7 – ecognized he impo ance o a
second-o de his o y o o a his o ies o his o ies ea ly on. Thei wo k, howe e ,
long emained la gely unno iced. Nie zsche’s ea ly impe us, o mula ed ou side
he guild o his o ians (1873), could long be igno ed as a be e piece o euille-
on.8 The long ea ly his o y o public his o y hinking in he English-speaking
academic wo ld has ecen ly been desc ibed by Thomas Cau in.9
These days, once hey ha e gained a ce ain deg ee o public accep ance, i.e.,
ha e become a u n in hei own igh ,10 scien i ic u ns gene a e o ensi ely-minded
lines o inancial suppo om s a e and p i a e dono s. Co espondingly, he b oad-
based en y o he his o ical sciences in o he cul u al u n, and hus also in o public
sel - e lec ion on hei own p ac ice and socie al impac since he la e 1980s, was
associa ed wi h a la ge numbe o applica ions o hi d-pa y unding and wi h he
es ablishmen o young esea che s’ p og ams. These de elopmen s almos ine i a-
bly led o compe i o s clea ly dissocia ing hemsel es om each o he in his new
hi d-pa y unding and employmen ma ke and consequen ly o a la ge numbe o
compe ing concep s. This has no always been help ul o he de elopmen o mu u-
ally in e connec able b oad empi ical esea ch on his opic. I is ime o once again
ac i ely sea ch o possible in e connec ions and o mul iply hese.
P elimina ies
In 2015, he eade s o Public His o y Weekly we e asked whe he he e m “Public
His o y” migh no be sui able o end he meanwhile olde and, in my opinion,
inc easingly ui less dispu e in Ge man-speaking schola ship o e he co ec
e minology o public dealings wi h his o y, as well as o i s consump ion and
6 Johan Huizinga, “O e een de ini ie an he beg ip geschiedenis,” Ve zamelde we ken. Deel
7 (Haa lem: Willink & Zoon, 1950), 95–103. Ge man T ansla ion by We ne Kaegi: “Übe eine
De ini ion des Beg i s de Geschich e,” In Wege de Kul u geschich e (Munich: D ei Masken
Ve lag, 1930), 78–88.
7 Al ed Heuss, Ve lus de Geschich e (Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 1959).
8 F ied ich Nie zsche, “Unzei gemässe Be ach ungen. Zwei es S ück: Vom Nu zen und Nach eil
de His o ie ü das Leben,” In We ke in d ei Bänden, ed. Wal he Linden and Wol gang Deninge
(Ke wig: Phaidon, 1990), 219–20; English ansla ion: Un imely medi a ions, ansla ed by
R.J. Hollingdale (New Yo k: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 1983).
9 Thomas Cau in, “The Rise o Public His o y: An In e na ional Pe spec i e,” His o ia C i ica 68
(2018), 3-26, esp. 5–7.
10 Do is Bachmann-Medick, Cul u al Tu ns: Neuo ien ie ungen in den Kul u wissenscha en
(Reinbek bei Hambu g: Rowohl 2018);English e sion:Cul u al Tu ns: New O ien a ions in he
S udy o Cul u e (Be lin/Bos on: De G uy e , 2016).
6 Ma ko Deman owsky
p oduc ion.11 A he same ime, ha a icle ga e English-speaking eade s a b ie
insigh in o he Ge man deba e and sough o enhance mu ual unde s anding
be ween Ge man- and English-speaking schola s and p ac i ione s. In b ie , he
a gumen wen some hing like his:
1. The compe ing e ms a e so-called umb ella concep s (Jo dano a, G e e ).12
Umb ella concep s a e cha ac e ized by he ac ha behind a speci ic wo d
(denomina ion) ex ends a b oad and pe meable ange o e ms ( ange o de i-
ni ion); he la e is so lexible and ecep i e because i is enabled by weak
e minological in ensi y (inclusion a ibu es), ecognizable as me apho ical
o mula ions. Language gi es a pa y (Wi gens ein). One ecognizes ha
many his o ical heo ies a e basically umb ella concep s ha c ea e a heu-
is ic appa en calming, bu hey a e beyond ha sui able o assembling
schools behind hem as academic loyal y g oups.
2. Mo e o less ha m ul umb ella concep s exis o deba e: he less de imen al
ones do no se e he es ablishmen o academic schools, bu lique y hem
ins ead; besides, hey o e no pseudo-answe s, bu make new ques ions pos-
sible. I is he e o e no abou an ei he -o , as he concep s o his o y cul u e
(Geschich skul u ) and cul u e o ememb ance (E inne ungskul u ) a e also
nego iable; i is a he abou abolishing ui less scholas icism in a o o
in e disciplina y, in eg a ed, and unb idled (“ ee”) esea ch and de elop-
men on his o y in he public sphe e.
3. The umb ella concep “public his o y” mee s hese al e na i e demands o
a ce ain ex en , because i enables bo h Ge man-speaking his o ians and
cul u al scien is s as well as his o y didac icians o pu sue join p ojec s wi h
hei colleagues wo ldwide. No only does his p omo e linkages wi hin a
mul ilingual discussion, bu i also means ha he genuinely didac ic aspec
o he Ge man adi ion migh help o en ich he in e na ional discussion.
My 2015 pape was in ended o paci y, o build b idges, jus as I had a emp ed
as ea ly as 2005 (in he same ein, ye o en misunde s ood since) o limi he
alse claims o sup emacy by hose ep esen ing he concep s o his o y cul u e
(Geschich skul u ) and cul u e o ememb ance (E inne ungskul u ). My pu pose,
11 Ma ko Deman owsky. “Public His o y – Subla ion o a Ge man Deba e? / ‘Public His o y’–
Au hebung eine deu schsp achigen Deba e?”Public His o y Weekly 3, 2 (2015),DOI: dx.doi.
o g/10.1515/phw-2015-3292.
12 Ludmilla Jo dano a, His o y in P ac ice (London and New Yo k: Hodde Educa ion, 2000),
126–149; Ma ia G e e , “Fea o Plu ali y: His o ical Cul u e and His o iog aphical Canoniza ion
in Wes e n Eu ope,” In Gende ing His o iog aphy: Beyond Na ional Canons ed. by Angelika Epple
and Angelika Schase (F ank u /M., New Yo k: Campus Ve lage, 2009), 45–62.
Wha is Public His o y 7
hen and now, was di e en ia ion, and hus cla i ica ion, a he han disco d.13
As my 2005 and 2015 pape s p esen ed he main a gumen s agains he p e ious
e sions o he espec i e concep s, hey need no be epea ed he e in de ail. They
we e also mo i a ed by academic policy, which in ended o coun e he (gene ally
unspoken) disciplina y dimension o he exis ing di e gen cul u es o discussion.
This pape , he hi d one in a se ies o e lec ions, seeks o de elop an in-dep h
concep o public his o y, one ha claims o inc ease i s ope a ionalizable explana-
o y powe and i s empi ical co ela ion, wi hou , howe e , jeopa dizing he indis-
pu able ad an ages o i s open umb ella cha ac e in e ms o scien i ic policy.
Con ex
Howe e , some mo e con ex ualiza ion is i s needed. Concep ual o e -
ings abound, alone on he Ge man “menu.” They include, by way o a quick
eminde , wo a he speci ic and analy ical concep s: No be F ei’s poli ics
o he pas (Ve gangenhei spoli ik) and Edga Wol um’s poli ics o his o y
(Geschich spoli ik).14 Bo h concep s ha e his o ically clea ly delimi ed de ini-
ions. Thus, while hey a e ac ually no ypical umb ella concep s, hei speci ic
de e mina ion is no e iden in hei denomina ion. This explains hei equen
ecu ence in many publica ions o e he pas yea s, e en a beyond hei o ig-
inal scope o de ini ion. In ac , bo h concep s ha e been o e gene alized ime
and again.
Beyond ha , ano he , colo ul spec um o e ms exis s. Employed in non-
scien i ic dealings wi h his o y, hei gene al meaning and explana o y powe ,
encompassing all phenomena o mode n his o y, ha e been claimed om he e y
beginning. One example is Pie e No a’s concep o places o ememb ance (lieux
de mémoi e), which was adap ed by E ienne F ançois, Hagen Schulze, Geo g K eis,
and o he s o he Ge man-speaking deba e.15 Ano he case is Mau ice Halbwachs’s
13 Ma ko Deman owsky, “Geschich skul u und E inne ungskul u : Zwei Konzep ionen des
einen Gegens andes,”In Geschich e, Poli ik und ih e Didak ik 33 (2005), 11–20.
14 No be F ei, Ve gangenhei spoli ik: Die An änge de Bundes epublik und die NS-Ve gangenhei
(Munich: Beck, 1996); Edga Wol um, Geschich spoli ik in de Bundes epublik Deu schland:
de Weg zu bundes epublikanischen E inne ung 1948 – 1990 (Da ms ad : Wissenscha liche
Buchgesellscha , 1999).
15 Pie e No a, Les Lieux de mémoi e, 3 ols (Pa is: Gallima d, 1984–1992; Biblio hèque illus-
ée des his oi es); E ienne F ançois and Hagen Schulze, eds.,Deu sche E inne ungso e, 3 ols
(Munich: Beck, 2001); Geo g K eis, Schweize E inne ungso e: Aus dem Speiche de Swissness
(Zu ich: Ve lag NZZ, 2010).
8 Ma ko Deman owsky
concep o collec i e memo y (1925),16 especially as ep esen ed and u he de e-
loped by Jan and Aleida Assmann.17 Then, o cou se, he concep o he cul u e
o ememb ance: his has made an as onishing ca ee in Ge man his o iog aphy
o e he pas 20 yea s, e iden in an eno mous numbe o disse a ions and majo
scien i ic p ojec s ha ha e p ominen ly p omo ed his concep ,18 and (las bu
no leas ) in i s widesp ead usage in he public and in he media. Based on he
w i ings o Wol gang Ha d wig19 and Jö n Rüsen,20 he concep o his o y cul u e
(Geschich skul u ) subsequen ly became highly in luen ial, mos o all in his o y
didac ics, one o se e al his o ical subdisciplines. Finally, especially in ecen
yea s, he e m public his o y gained g ound and became o ma i e in he Ge man-
speaking communi y, e en i i s li e al ansla ion (“Ö en liche Geschich e”)
was conside ed app op ia e om ime o ime. The main d i ing o ce behind
his concep ual adap a ion was Paul Nol e.21 Based on his wo k in pa icula ,
a numbe o deg ee p og ams ha e ecen ly been es ablished in Ge many and
Swi ze land and, associa ed he ewi h, he successi e es ablishmen o a e y
16 Mau ice Halbwachs, Das Gedäch nis und seine sozialen Bedingungen (F ank u am Main:
Suh kamp, 2008).
17 Jan Assmann, Das kul u elle Gedäch nis: Sch i , E inne ung und poli ische Iden i ä in ühen
Hochkul u en (Munich: Beck, 1992). T ansla ed in o English by he au ho : Cul u al Memo y and
Ea ly Ci ilisa ion (Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2011); Aleida Assmann, Cul u al memo y
and Wes e n ci iliza ion: unc ions, media, a chi es (New Yo k: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2011).
18 See, o ins ance, Ch is oph Co nelißen,“Was heiß E inne ungskul u ? Beg i – Me hoden –
Pe spek i en,”Geschich e in Wissenscha und Un e ich 54 (2003), 548–63. Fo a c i ique, see
Deman owsky (2005).
19 Wol gang Ha d wig, Geschich skul u und Wissenscha (Munich: d , 1990), 7–11.
20 Jö n Rüsen, “Was is Geschich skul u ? Übe legungen zu eine neuen A , übe Geschich e
nachzudenken,” In His o ische Faszina ion: Geschich skul u heu e, ed. Klaus Füssmann e al.
(Cologne: Böhlau, 1994), 3–26. Rüsen’s concep o his o ical cul u e as he “p ac ical a icula ion
o his o ical consciousness” in an aes he ic, cogni i e, and poli ical dimension has since been
equen ly aken up; i is basically also an umb ella concep whose logical consis ency has, how-
e e , a ely been ca e ully examined: i ied in all oo well wi h he his o ical-didac ic discussion
(his o ical consciousness), jus as i s h ee dimensions we e sui ed oo eadily o possible u he
use. One migh ha e no iced ha hese dimensions lie on comple ely di e en le els o logic and
he e o e ail o p oduce a cohe en sys em; in addi ion, cla i ying wha “poli ical,” among o he
e ms, means wi hin each dimension, and wha exac ly belongs o i , occu s wi hou ixed, and
abo e all wi hou common, logical ules. E en “p ac ical a icula ion” emains ague. Thus, o
ins ance, does e e y u e ance al eady cons i u e his o ical cul u e? This iew u ns e e y hing
his o ical in o his o ical cul u e and o e ex ends he concep o he poin o exhaus ion.
21 Paul Nol e, “Ö en liche Geschich e: Die neue Nähe on Fachwissenscha , Massenmedien
und Publikum: U sachen, Chancen und G enzen,” In Au klä ung, Bildung, “His o ainmen ”?
Zei geschich e in Un e ich und Gesellscha heu e, eds. Michele Ba icelli and Julia Ho nig,
(F ank u am Main: Pe e Lang, 2008), 131–46.
Wha is Public His o y 9
small Ge man-speaking public his o y subdiscipline, which a emp s o dis ingu-
ish i sel om he nume ous exis ing disciplina y ends in his ield o esea ch
and de elopmen .22
The si ua ion in English-speaking his o ical academia is clea ly di e en ,
no leas because he co esponding p ojec s and discussions al eady began
eme ging om he ea ly 1970s. They we e no bound o he cul u al u n, bu
ins ead o he ise o e e yday and social his o y, al hough i s and o emos
and mos dominan ly o coun e s o ies, so-called “his o y om below.” The e m
“public his o y” did no ma k ou an in a-academic ield o compe i ion, bu
a ield o con lic be ween academic his o ical esea ch and eaching and non-
ins i u ionalized, some imes non-academic his o ians, be ween ins i u es and
a g ass oo s mo emen .23 Inciden ally, a simila line o con lic also exis ed in
Ge man-speaking coun ies a ha ime, namely, be ween he “ba e oo his o-
ians” o his o y wo kshops and he academic wo ld.24 Bu , and his is he di e-
ence, he deba e o e unde s anding he exo e ic app oach o his o y, add essed
o laype sons, was no a genuine pa o his con lic . No we e “his o y cul u e”
(Geschich skul u ), “cul u e o ememb ance” (E inne ungskul u ), and “place
o ememb ance” (E inne ungso ) he banne s o a compe ing app oach o he
pas – a he , hey we e and s ill a e an in eg al pa o adi ional academic dis-
cussion.
Public his o y la e became a ecognized ield o schola ship in he USA
and Canada, and mo e slowly in he UK (unde he label “cul u al he i age”)
and Aus alia. Uni e si y posi ions ha e been c ea ed o e ime, li le by li le.
Ne e heless, uni e si y chai s o e en ins i u es o public his o y a e s ill ew
and a be ween. The e a e, howe e , li e ally hund eds o Mas e ’s p og ams, a
e y powe ul Ame ican p o essional associa ion (NCPH), and now also a h i-
ing In e na ional Fede a ion o Public His o y. The u e ly p agma ic handling
o de ini ions and sel -concep decla a ions may be conside ed a s ongly bene-
icial p e equisi e o he admi able success achie ed du ing his s a -up phase.
We migh pe haps imagine his as an in ellec ual on ie , which, du ing a long
pionee ing pe iod, in i ed and en iced explo a ions o his uncha ed e i o y
o knowledge and in which, in he mo emen phase, keeping he eks close
oge he and p o ec ing he ea ly se lemen s was c ucial.
22 Tho s en Logge, “Public His o y in Ge many: Challenges ans Oppo uni ies,” Ge man S udies
Re iew 39 (2016), 141–53.
23 Susan Benson, S ephen B ie , and Roy Rosenzweig, “In oduc ion,” P esen ing he Pas :
Essays on His o y and he Public (Philadelphia: Temple Uni e si y P ess, 1986), XV–XXIV.
24 See, o ins ance, Hube Ch is ian Ehal , Geschich e on un en: F ages ellungen, Me hoden
und P ojek e eine Geschich e des All ags (Kul u s udien 1) (Vienna: Böhlau, 1984).
16 Ma ko Deman owsky
Basic na a i es s. mas e na a i es
A his junc u e, I need o in oduce a e m ha has suddenly sp ung o li e in
he Ge man-speaking deba e in ecen yea s, oughly since he las u n o he
millennium: he “basic na a i e.” On close inspec ion, his is pe haps di icul
o explain, because a he same ime, wo o he e ms, “mas e na a i es” and,
almos by de aul , “na a i es,” also emained in ci cula ion. Ba ely any cul u al
analysis can ope a e wi hou mo e o less speci ic, ye o en me ely uzzy e e-
ences o “na a i es.” As a as can be seen, he di e ences be ween hese e ms
ha e no ye been explici ly cla i ied. No ha I shall do so he e exhaus i ely,
because o my p esen a gumen any such explana ion is me ely a means o an
end.
In a con ibu ion like he p esen one, w i en agains he backg ound o
a Ge man adi ion o hough , and aimed a a mul ina ional, mainly English-
speaking audience, cla i ica ion is p obably s ill necessa y a his poin , no leas
because he common Ge man ansla ion o “mas e na a i e” (Meis e e zählung)
seems o miss some hing essen ial. Mo eo e , i migh e en lead o alse associa-
ions, as i he dominan na a i es in he sense o Glucksmann’s Meis e denke
(1977)51 we e mean , a he han dominan na a i es pe se o e en mo e abs-
ac , dominan na a i e pa e ns.
The oo s o di e en ia ion a e, as usual, hea ily ami ied and complex. We
migh , howe e , no e he pa allel de elopmen in Ame ican analy ical philoso-
phy, which g adually e ealed he na a i e logic o his o iog aphy and his o y
a e he wa and pe haps culmina ed o he i s ime in “Philosophy and
His o y,” a con e ence held in 1963.52 The dis inc ion, howe e , also goes back
o he i s olume o one o Claude Lé i-S auss’s majo wo ks, published jus
a yea la e (like many o he undamen al insigh s on close inspec ion).53 In
his g oundb eaking s uc u alis s udy My hologiques (1964–1971), Lé i-S auss
iden i ies he incommensu abili y o he na a i e s uc u es o indigenous
Sou h Ame ican my hologies and Wes e n obse e s and a emp s o con ey his
hia us me hodically. Hayden Whi e’s amous “emplo men s” (1973),54 and abo e
51 And é Glucksmann, Die Meis e denke (Be lin: Ulls ein, 1989).
52 Sidney Hook, ed., Philosophy and his o y. A symposium (New Yo k: New Yo k Uni e si y
P ess), 1963.
53 Claude Lé i-S auss, My hologiques. Volume 1: The Raw and he Cooked (Chicago: Uni e si y
o Chicago P ess, 1983), 1–34. Ge man ansla ion by E a Moldenhaue : My hologica I: Das Rohe
und das Gekoch e (F ank u a.M.: Suh kamp, 1976), 11–53.
54 Hayden Whi e, Me ahis o y. Die his o ische Einbildungsk a im 19. Jah hunde in Eu opa
(F ank u am Main: S. Fische , 1991), 15–62.
Wha is Public His o y 17
all Jean-F ançois Lyo a d’s c i ique o he “mé a éci s” (o “g and na a i es”)
(1979),55 we e subsequen ly able o build on hese models. In he same yea 1979,
Law ence S one p oclaimed he “ e i ial o he na a i e.”56 This laid he ounda-
ions o a wide a ie y o o he o ms. This heo e ical de elopmen was accom-
panied by he onse o he “memo y boom” in Wes e n socie ies,57 and no leas
by he g adual es ablishmen o a scien i ic public his o y in he USA.58 The es
is as legend has i .
Since a ound 2000, he e m “basic na a i e” has c ep in o schola ly dis-
cussion. Se e al au ho s ha e ecen ly used i p agma ically and inc easingly e-
quen ly, bu ha dly anyone has de ined i speci ically.59 P ecisely his, howe e ,
seems impe a i e: a de ini ion would help o sensibly dis inguish he a ian s ou -
lined abo e, especially he now enowned “mas e na a i e” (Meis e e zählung)60
om he “basic na a i e.”61
Basic na a i es
As a as I can ell, h ee a emp s ha e been since 2006 o de ine basic na a i-
es: i s , om a communica ions science pe spec i e (2008/2016); second, om
wi hin he p agma ic discussion on his o y eaching (2012); hi d, om he pe -
spec i e o empi ical his o ical-cul u al esea ch (2006).
55 Jean F ançois Lyo a d, Das pos mode ne Wissen. Ein Be ich (Vienna: Passagen-Ve lag, 2015).
56 Law ence S one, “The Re i al o Na a i e: Re lec ions on a new Old His o y,” Pas and
P esen 85 (1979), 3–24.
57 Jay Win e , “Die Gene a ion de E inne ung. Re lexionen übe den Memo y-Boom in de zei-
his o ischen Fo schung,” We ks a Geschich e 10 (2001), 5–16.
58 See Benson, B ie , and Rosenzweig, “In oduc ion,” XV–XXIV.
59 Many o he possible examples o his kind o p agma ism migh be ci ed. Recen examples
include Wol gang Mülle -Funk, Die Kul u und ih e Na a i e: eine Ein üh ung, 2nd ed. (Vienna:
Sp inge , 2008), 223–247. In his o y didac ics, we migh men ion Susanne Popp’s in luen-
ial essay “Ein global o ien ie es Geschich sbewuss sein als zukün ige He aus o de ung de
Geschich sdidak ik?” Sowi-Online 2, 1 (2002), 1–13. O mo e ecen ly And ea Kolpa zik’s “His o y
goes Online. Sp achp oduk ion und mediale Wandel im Spiegel,” Geschich e und Sp ache,
eds. Saskia Hand o and Be nd Schönemann, Zei geschich e, Zei e s ändnis 21 (Be lin: LIT-Ve l,
2010). 162.
60 Kon ad H. Ja ausch and Ma in Sab ow, eds., “Meis e e zählung – Zu Ka ie e eines
Beg i s,” In Die his o ische Meis e e zählung. Deu ungslinien de deu schen Geschich e nach 1945
(Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 2002), 9–32.
61 Pe e Gau schi, Ma kus Be nha d , and Ul ich Maye , “Gu e Geschich sun e ich -
P inzipien,” In Handbuch P axis Geschich sun e ich , eds. Michele Ba icelli and Ma in Lücke
(Schwalbach/Ts.: Wochenschau, 2012), 326–48, esp. 332–34.
18 Ma ko Deman owsky
Following Fasulo and Zucche maglio (2008),62 Pe in and Wyss (2016) obse ed:
Na a ion no only de elops ac s o discu si e a gumen s, bu combines incommensu a-
ble discou ses om he con ex o speci ic si ua ions by causally linking hem and hus
making sense o na a o s and ecipien s. These include basic na a i es ha a e pa o
e e y cul u e and a e handed down om gene a ion o gene a ion.63
Much comes oge he in his e sion, bu wha seems mos impo an – alas, only
implici ly – a e he e e ences o Lé i-S auss, especially he ele ance o e e y-
day li e, adi ion, and incommensu abili y. No is he gene a i e imp in ing o
hese communica i e amewo ks uly execu ed; a e e ing o he w i ing o he
e hnologis Jan Vansina (1985)64 would seem p omising; Jan Assmann, as is well
known, u he de eloped his app oach in his heo y o cul u al memo y a ew
yea s la e .65
Ma kus Be nha d , Pe e Gau schi, and Ul ich Maye wen abou de ining
“basic na a i es” in 2012.66 Re e ing o he p oblems o he school cu iculum,
as Susanne Popp had done p e iously (2002), hey ook a s and in he deba e
agains a na ional-his o ical and ch onological s uc u e. They use he e m
“mas e na a i e” in his con ex o nega i e cha ac e iza ion. Fo Be nha d
and his colleagues, “basic na a i es,” on he o he hand, deno e opics so ele-
an o “collec i e memo y” ha hey mus be augh , no ma i ely. Two o he
undamen al e ms a e de i ed by Be nha d e al. om such a concep o basic
na a i es: “basic knowledge,” as he knowledge aspec o hese na a i es, and
“indi idual ep esen a ion”. E en i he la e subdi ision seems somewha a bi-
a y, e en i he espec i e heo y is ba ely con ex ualized, e en i he polemical
con as wi h wha is ac ually obsole e, and e en i , inally, he con ining na ional
“mas e na a i es” can be ques ioned agains he backg ound o heo y de elop-
men since 1960, bo h he a emp ed di e en ia ion and he cu so y e e ence o
he ca ego y o “iden i y” seem o ad ance he sea ch o de ini ion.
A ew yea s ea lie (2006), I had al eady made a s ab a de ini ion. A he
ime, howe e , my a emp ed dis inc ion – be ween basic na a i es and mas e
62 Alessand a Fasulo and C is ina Zucche maglio, “Na a i es in he wo kplace. Fac s, ic ions,
and canonici y,” Tex & Talk 28 (2008), 351–76, esp. 371–72.
63 Daniel Pe in and Vinzenz Wyss, “In die Geschich en e zählen. Die Analyse on Na a ion
in ö en liche Kommunika ion,” In Handbuch nich -s anda disie e Me hoden in de
Kommunika ionswissenscha , eds. S e anie A e beck-Lie z and Michael Meye (Wiesbaden:
Sp inge , 2016), 241–56, esp. 247.
64 Jan Vansina, O al T adi ion as His o y (Madison: The Uni e si y o Wisconsin P ess, 1985),
21–24.
65 See Assmann, Das kul u elle Gedäch nis (1992).
66 Gau schi, Be nha d , and Maye , “Gu e Geschich sun e ich - P inzipien,” 332–34.
Wha is Public His o y 19
na a i es – a ac ed li le a en ion.67 Twel e yea s la e , I e u n o i , albei in
a modi ying and c i ical manne . I goes like his: basic na a i es a e collec i e
na a i e pa e ns. No only do hey in ol e na ional-his o ical symbol o ma ion,
bu also and abo e all eligious, pseudo- eligious, ibal, and occupa ion- ela ed
symbol o ma ion. These o ma ions, howe e , canno be a ibu ed o speci ic
au ho s as a ule. These basic na a i es a e he seman ic essel o collec i e
iews o he pas .
Basic na a i es a e anonymous and p o ound iden i ica ion s uc u es
o opinion and meaning in socie ies. They o en appea as unspoken p econ-
di ions. Mo eo e , hey o e a sys em o coo dina es o e e y kind o collec-
i e sel -concep and hus o exe cised no mali y68 – combined wi h he usual
ewa ds and o cou se also wi h some imes sublime, some imes explici punish-
men s. Basic na a i es can ha e such e ec s because hey a e no simply
blu ed, opaque ideas, bu ins ead ins i u ionalized and socially p o en belie s
inca na ed in ou e e yday ins i u ions, which Mau ice Halbwachs (1925) desc i-
bed as social amewo ks.69 This idea is pa icula ly ob ious when we look a
educa ional ins i u ions, school sys ems, his o y lessons and cu icula. Bu hese
basic na a i es also li e in museums, a chi es, memo ials, ele ision se ies,
Bollywood mo ies, in ou pa liamen s, a ic ules, and house numbe s, and
no leas in uni e si ies. They a e an essen ial pa o ou cul u al sys em and
unde s anding. Thus, in his espec , we may indeed encoun e basic na a i es.
They a e nei he simply a heo e ical cons uc no an eccen ic idea. Each o us
is o cou se in i ed o gi e his issue di e en names, and ye e ms a e no jus
wo ds no a ma e o one-upmanship. In he in e es s o ad ancing discussion,
we would do well o ensu e ha ou s a emen s can be ollowed up, made cohe-
en , and ope a ionalized.
In his sense, basic na a i es a e no mé a éci s à la Lyo a d; hey ep esen
no hing, he e o e, which could be b ough o a ges al by a e lec i e a ange-
men o a base o measu ed and app op ia e alidi y and dissol ed in o quasi-
na u al, speci ically, case- ela ed bound back na a i es and be dissol ed in o
67 Ma ko Deman owsky, “Ös e eichische Schulbüche als Quellen de Geschich skul u -
Fo schung. Die Behandlung de 48e Re olu ion und des magya isch-habsbu gischen Kon lik s,”
Geschich sdidak ische Schulbuch o schung, eds. Saskia Hand o and Be nd Schönemann,
Zei geschich e - Zei e s ändnis 16 (Be lin: LIT-Ve l, 2006), 149–76 (162).
68 O , as Foucaul pu i : “Eine No malisie ungsgesellscha is de his o ische E ek eine au
das Leben ge ich e e en Mach echnologie”; see Die O dnung de Dinge. Eine A chäologie de
Humanwissenscha en (F ank u am Main: Suh kamp, 1971), 172. The quo e ansla es as: “A
no malizing socie y is he his o ical e ec o a li e-o ien ed echnology o powe ” ( ansla ed by
Ma k Kybu z).
69 See Halbwachs, Das Gedäch nis und seine sozialen Bedingungen.
20 Ma ko Deman owsky
quasi-na u al, locally oo able na a i es. Ra he , hey a e ela ed o he implici
heo ies o “al e na i e amewo ks”70 ha appea indi idually bu a e always
collec i ely ancho ed: hey claim alidi y in he consciousness o g oup membe s,
ye wi hou hese ei he wan ing o e en being able o accoun o hem. On he
con a y. They ha e always exis ed, endowed wi h emendous pe sis ence,
because hei bea e s de i e a subs an ial pa o hei iden i y om such implici
heo ies. Typical o ms o such heo ies include pe sonaliza ion, men aliza ion,
pe soni ica ion (as desc ibed by Halldén 1997), which would ce ainly comple-
men , also a di e en le els, hypos asis and p esen ism. On close inspec ion,
he ela ionship be ween basic na a i es and implici heo ies can be seen as
one o implica ion. Implici heo ies, in Halldén’s sense, o m – ac oss g oups –
he speci ic o m o basic na a i es. These acqui e hei iden i ying, g oup-con-
s i u ing powe h ough e e ence o con en - ela ed p o isions. Ideologies o all
s ipes ha e hei place he e. The ac o s o all basic na a i es may be said o
shape hei ma e ial in a se o equal o ms. In subs ance, howe e , hey o en
pi hei e o s agains each o he , o he pu poses o sel - ecogni ion and dis-
inc ion. This p ac ice necessa ily has ecou se o a “limi ing s uc u e”71; wha
eme ges om his is ha basic na a i es cons i u e cul u al en i ies, he ehicles
o collec i e iden i y.
Na a i e di e ences
The p oduc i i y o an analy ical pe spec i e on he connec ion be ween he
ca ego ies o “na a i e” and “iden i y” has al eady been explo ed by Ma g e R.
Some s (1994)72:
... we mus ejec he decoupling o ac ion om on ology, and ins ead accep he same
no ion o social being and social iden i y is, willy-nilly, inco po a ed in o each and e e y
knowledge-s a emen abou ac ion, agency, and beha iou . ... he e aming o na a i e
allows us o make ha enla gemen .73
70 Ola Halldén, “Concep ual Change and he Lea ning o His o y,” In e na ional Jou nal o
Educa ional Resea ch 27 (1997), 201–210.
71 Wilhelm Emil Mühlmann, “E hnogenie und E hnogenese. Theo e isch-e hnologische und
ideok i ische S udie,” In S udien zu E hnogenese, Abhandlungen de Rheinisch-Wes älschen
Akademie de Wissenscha en, 72 (Opladen: Wes deu sche Ve lag, 1985), 9–27, esp. 19.
72 Ma g e R. Some s, “The na a i e cons i u ion o iden i y,” Theo y and Socie y 23 (1994),
605–649.
73 Ibid, 615–16.
Wha is Public His o y 21
This app oach, Some s a gues, means ha esea ch does no look o isola ed
seman ic assignmen s in o de o analyze g oup-speci ic iden i ies, bu ins ead
ollows a basic claim:
... ha we disce n he meaning o any single e en only in empo al and spa ial ela ionship
o o he e en s. Indeed, he chie cha ac e is ic o na a i e is ha i ende s unde s anding
only by connec ing ... pa s o a cons uc ed con igu a ion o a social ne wo k o ela ion-
ships ... composed by symbolic, ins i u ional, and ma e ial p ac ices.74
The dis inc ion be ween hese p ac ices would need o be ques ioned, in pa i-
cula whe he he h ee ypes exis on a logical le el. Wha is essen ial, howe e ,
is ha iden i y e e ences can only be su icien ly unde s ood in hei na a i e
cha ac e . Mo eo e , hey gene a e g oup cohesion and mani es hemsel es sub-
cu aneously in p ac ices.
Impo an ly, Some s dis inguishes ou dimensions o g oup- ela ed na a i i y:
– On ological na a i es: “These a e he s o ies ha social ac o s use o
make sense o – indeed, o ac in – hei li es. On ological na a i es a e
used o de ine who we a e; his in u n can be a p econdi ion o knowing
wha o do.”
– Public Na a i es: “Public na a i es a e hose na a i es a ached o cul u al
and ins i u ional o ma ions la ge han he single indi idual, o in e subjec i e
ne wo ks o ins i u ions, howe e local o g and, mic o- o mac o-s o ies ...”
– Me ana a i i y: “This hi d dimension o na a i i y e e s o he ‘mas e -
na a i es’ in which we a e embedded as con empo a y ac o s in his o y and
as social scien is s. Ou sociological heo ies and concep s a e encoded wi h
aspec s o hese mas e na a i es – P og ess, Decadence, Indus ializa ion,
Enligh enmen , e c.”
– Concep ual Na a i i y: “These a e he concep s and explana ions ha we
cons uc as social esea che s.”75
The doubling o “On ological Na a i es,” as indi idual achie emen s o iden i i-
ca ion, compa ed o “Public” and “Me ana a i es,” as g oup- ela ed, ins i u io-
nalized phenomena, p o ides aluable insigh s, e en i hei conc e e in e ac ion
emains unclea . The dis inc ion be ween he la e wo e ms does no seem
en i ely ob ious. Thei espec i e de ini ions encompass much o wha has been
discussed abo e as “basic na a i es,” and may hus be summa ized below. The
me ana a i e aspec co esponds o he abo e app oach o implici heo ies.
74 Ibid, 616.
75 Ibid., 618–620.
22 Ma ko Deman owsky
I conce ns ecu ing o mal pa e ns, which a e used by di e en g oups and
cha ged di e en ly.
S ikingly, wha Some s e e s o as “Concep ual Na a i i y” lies on a di e-
en le el han he i s h ee dimensions. This conce ns speci ically add essa-
ble, au ho ial achie emen s. Some s’s con inemen o scien is s does no s ike
me as compelling, because such na a i e c ea ions can no only be in odu-
ced in o discou se by jou nalis s, poli icians, a is s, e c. Ra he , his is o en
done by pe sons possessing a highe social e icacy. He e, we a e dealing wi h
nameable p essu e g oups and hei na a i e o e ings. These a e in luen ial
bu no iden ical wi h he social amewo k o collec i e memo y (Halbwachs
2008 [1925]) as hey ind in he basic na a i es hei own al e na i e exis ence.
This is pe haps wha he Ge man-speaking discussion collapses in o a “mas e
na a i e,” a ca ego y pe haps concei ed o by “old whi e men.” Allego ically
speaking, hey a e he lags o banne s ( isible om a a ) o collec i e his-
o ical sense-making and hei basic na a i es. Gi en hei popula i y and
pe sonaliza ion, hey easily conceal he deep and ins i u ionally ubiqui ous
sys em o oo s om which hey ha e g own. Mas e na a i es a e a case o
his o y poli ics and alue-o ien ed educa ion o o he ecu ing celeb a ions
o o icial holidays. In con as , basic na a i es ep esen he ma ix o ou
his o ical hinking, he implici heo ies o collec i es. They a e ou e e yday
his o ical ame o hough .
To es ablish he g ea es possible cla i y o ou discussion, I consis en ly
ollow Some s’s “Concep ual Na a i es” in wha ollows.
The dis inc ion be ween basic na a i es and concep ual na a i es seems
impo an o he esea ch me hodological dis inc ion and delimi a ion o scien-
i ic public his o y p ojec s: we need o he esea ch me hods in o de o, on he
one hand, unde s and he o igin, li e, and possible decline, o ins ance, o he
T ei zschke, Michele , o McNeill na a i e and hei espec i e his o ical o ms;
o whe he , on he o he hand, we a e ying o explain he s uc u e o collec i e
his o ical impu a ions, he s uc u es o collec i e memo y. Fo he la e , he me-
neu ic in e p e a ions o published o a chi ed ma e ial a e simply no adequa e
enough; we need se ial sou ces, s a is ical analyses, quali a i e social esea ch,
and also he a ious ins umen s o cul u al an h opology.
Fou analy ical aspec s o basic na a i es
Fo esea ch pu poses, i s ill seems use ul o conside he analy ical aspec s o
basic and concep ual na a i es. A c i ical app oach based a he leas on he
Wha is Public His o y 23
wo ks o Klaus P. Hansen (1995),76 Jan Assmann (1992), and Be nd Schönemann
(2000)77 is capable o dis inguishing ou aspec s:
a. Social oles, o ins ance, p o essions and unc ions, which a e de e mined by
basic na a i es and hei speci ic ec ui men p ocedu es, cul i a ions, and
social si ua ion. Rele an g oups include, jus o example, p ies s, museum
guides, communis p opagandis s, and eache s.
b. The social and linguis ic ules o he basic na a i es as limi a ions o no -
mali y and o de . He e, i seems pa icula ly ui ul o sys ema ically include
esea ch on implici heo ies in public his o y esea ch, and he eby o make
me ana a i es empi ically angible in Some s’s e ms.
c. The media o he basic na a i es as he o ces shaping hei social in e ac ion.
Pe haps his needs no u he explana ion, o he han he hin ha we ha e
been empha ically made awa e o he mediali y o public his o y h ough ou
cu en gene a ion’s expe ience o he digi al e olu ion. O en imes, ac s,
and ci cums ances mus become non-sel -e iden in o de o ende hei
meaning isible.
d. Finally, he i uals o he basic na a i e as i s social eali y. This aspec
has no ye been discussed su icien ly he e, because claiming ha basic
na a i e p ac ice is essen ially i ualis ic is admi edly qui e da ing. I mus
o go a de ailed discussion o easons o space, bu wo hin s a e possible.
On he one hand, in he empi ical analysis o he places o public his o y,
be hey museums, cinemas, class ooms o e en memo ials, i is appa en
ha hese places can only be obse ed h ough hei s uc u al design,
a chi ec u e, speci ic pa hs, communica ions, consume ac ions, e c. This
is a ui ul ield o esea ch.78 On he o he hand, he limi ed s uc u e o
basic na a i es has also been add essed (Mühlmann 1985). This s uc u e
is p ac ically and empi ically obse able in he social ac ions in ol ed, o
ins ance, wi h g oup admission, wi h p o ing onesel wo hy in g oups,
and wi h sanc ion and exclusion p ocesses: ha is o say, socially haza d-
ous i es o passage cha ac e ized chie ly by limi ali y, being challenged o
o e come all kinds o bounda ies. These i ual p ocesses we e o iginally
76 Klaus P. Hansen, Kul u und Kul u wissencha . Eine Ein üh ung (Tübingen: UTB, 1995).
77 See Schönemann, “Geschich sdidak ik und Geschich skul u .”.
78 Ma ko Deman owsky, “Gedenks ä en de 48e Re olu ion als His o ische Le n-O e.
Eine Übe sich ,” In O e his o ischen Le nens, eds. Saskia Hand o and Be nd Schönemann,
Zei geschich e – Zei e s ändnis 18. (Be lin: Li , 2008), 149–164. See also, Ma co Ze was, “Le no
‘Deu sches Eck’. Zu Va iabili ä geschich skul u elle Deu ungsmus e ,” Geschich sdidak ische
S udien 1 (Be lin: Logos, 2015), 49–73.
24 Ma ko Deman owsky
in es iga ed by an Gennep (1960 [1909])79 and la e by Vic o Tu ne (1997
[1969]).80 Pu simply, hey cons i u e iden i y.
“Recogni ion” as pi o al o iden i ica ion
A he la es since Hegel, we know ha indi iduals necessa ily s i e o o ms
o social ecogni ion.81 They do his no leas wi h ega d o hei ela ionship o
he pas and hei iden i y.82 While such e o s may succeed o ail, g oups and
socie ies a e also s ongly in e es ed in in e oga ing young people, o eigne s, o
79 A nold Van Gennep, The Ri es o Passage (Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago P ess, 1960).
80 Vic o Tu ne , The Ri ual P ocess. S uc u e and An i-S uc u e (New B unswick and London:
Aldine T ansac ion 1997).
81 The ca ego y o “ ecogni ion” is cen al no only o Hegel’s en i e ea ly philosophy, bu
also o his la e e lec ions on social p ocesses. Thus, i we go back behind Rüsen, we need
o hink o he He -Knech passage in he Phenomenology o he Spi i (1807), and beau i-
ully explained also in he Philosophy o Law, § 192 (1820). See G.W.F Hegel, G undlinien de
Philosophie des Rech s (F ank u a.M.: Suh kamp, 1986), 349; see also Phänomenologie des
Geis es (F ank u a.M.: Suh kamp, 1986), 150–153. Some con empo a y philosophy does
no in e p e he He -Knech chap e om a social-philosophical poin o iew, whe eas
in ac he con ex also jus i ies he philosophy o law om a social-philosophical poin o
iew. In any case, he la e became e ec i e in Hegel’s poli ical and philosophical ecep-
ion. Especially impo an is he young Ma x (1844). See his “Ökonomisch-philosophische
Manusk ip e. D i es Manusk ip ,” In Ma x Engels We ke E gänzungsband 1 (Be lin: Die z
Ve lag, 1968), 530–588.
82 The ela ionship be ween his o y and iden i y has been discussed o a long ime. See, o
ins ance, He mann Lübbe, “Die Iden i ä sp äsen a ions unk ion de His o ie,” In Iden i ä , eds.
Odo Ma qua d and Ka lheinz S ie le (Munich: Wilhelm Fink, 1979) 277–292; see also o he con i-
bu ions o his olume. As i is, schools and pa ies ha e eme ged wi hin such a b oadly de el-
oped discussion, some imes c i icizing his concep ou igh ( igh ly so, i i is ins umen alized
no ma i ely), and some imes pos ula ing i a i ma i ely. This con ibu ion does no see i sel
as belonging o any o hese ac ions. Ins ead, i employs “iden i y” as a desc ip i e ca ego y o
indi idually and collec i ely expe ienced sel -unde s anding, expe ienced sel -knowledge, i.e.,
as an empi ical ac guiding human beha io . This ac has di e en ace s, o which he ime-
ela ed one is o in e es he e. As Rüsen pu i , “Sinnbildung übe Zei e ah ung [sense-making
o e he expe ience o ime]”; see his His o ische Ve nun (1983), 51–57. Jü gen S aub p o ides
a good o e iew o he deba e in “Iden i ä ,” Handbuch de Kul u wissenscha en, ol. 1, eds.
F ied ich Jaege and Bu kha d Liebsch (S u ga : Me zle , 2011), 277–363. This a emp can be
based on Samuel’s insigh , no sys ema ically de eloped, o link “iden i y” wi h public his o y.
See Raphael Samuel, Thea es o Memo y: Pas and P esen in Con empo a y Cul u es (London:
Ve so, 2012), 278.
Wha is Public His o y 25
ou side s. The ailu e o ejec ion o iden i ica ion eques s emains he main ool
o social disciplining.
The explana ion o socie y’s handling o his o y is no ye comple e. The e is
ano he p ocess o ecogni ion, one which uns in he opposi e di ec ion. As we
ha e seen, indi iduals seek collec i e ecogni ion – bu no basic na a i e g oup
exis s wi hou compe ing al e na i es. This may be seen as a ma ke o o e bid-
ding, symme ical and asymme ical iden i y o e s.
This is pa icula ly e iden when one ecalls Eas e n Eu opean dissiden s
du ing he Cold Wa . Thei ejec ion o he communis na a i e made hem dissi-
den s o he i s ime. I one conside s indi idual scopes o ac ion and beha io-
al oppo uni ies in ela ion o iden i ica ion o e s wi h a o ali a ian claim, hen
a wide spec um o di e en indi idual non- ecogni ions o collec i e meanings
opens up. No only s aigh o wa d ejec ion exis s, bu so do many ypes o es-
ilien , esis an , o dissen ing beha io .83 Mind you, howe e , hese op ions a e
alid no only in dic a o ships, bu also in plu alis ic socie ies and in he many,
many g oups compe ing o con esso s and consume s. Collec i es a e cons i u-
ed by hei basic na a i es and need o wo y abou hei his o ical capaci y o
in eg a ion, hei powe o pe suasion, and hei emo ional e iciency. Collec i es
ha lose he ways in which hey iden i y membe s usually collapse one day in
No embe .
In he ue sense, we a e alking abou a pe manen and complex his o ical
and pas - ela ed discou se on iden i y.84 Cul u ally and his o ically, i is always
newly cons i u ed. I is an ac ual con on a ion o anonymous powe , wi hin a
powe sys em, wi h and by he indi idual; and i is a pe manen , ye haza dous
op ion o e u e hese claims.
I is a complex and mo e o less con inuously ci cula ing sys em o success,
pa ial success, and ailu e in he business o mu ual accep ance. I is abou
powe , sel -de e mina ion, and collec i e in eg a ion. The concep o discou se
allows us o unde s and he posi ion o he indi idual, o de e mine his o he
agile space o eedom – ha is limi ed by indi idual needs and he ules o
83 See he long deba e abou he esis ance agains he Nazi dic a o ship, o ins ance, Ian
Ke shaw’s “Wide s and ohne Volk? Dissens und Wide s and im D i en Reich,” In: De Wide s and
gegen den Na ionalsozialismus, eds. Jü gen Schmädeke and Pe e S einbach (Munich: Pipe ,
1986), 779–98.
84 The e m “discou se” is legenda y in i sel . While I ha e e e ed o Foucaul se e al imes,
many o he ele an con ibu ions o his deba e ob ious exis , o ins ance, by Habe mas,
Bou dieu, o mos ecen ly also by Laclau and Mou e (2000). Fo an o e iew, see Achim
Landweh , His o ische Disku sanalyse (F ank u a.M.: Campus, 2008), 91–99.
32 Ma ko Deman owsky
The oles can be clea ly dis inguished, bu no he people who some imes play
hese oles, some imes hose and some imes a comple ely di e en one. Howe e ,
ole awa eness and ole so e eign y a e help ul bo h o he add essees o com-
munica ion and o he communica o himsel .
Ou look
The in e na ional public his o y scene is li ely, ichly ace ed, and di e se –
which is saying a g ea deal abou an in e disciplina y cul u al ield o inqui y.
Is his scene al eady plu alis ic? This ques ion calls o a mo e skep ical assess-
men . Hi he o dominan concep ual nominalism, which has enabled a cons-
an ly expandable addi i e consensus on wha can be added o “public his o y,”
has ended o conceal undamen al di e ences in con en abou he o ien a ion,
unc ion, and ac o s o he public uses o his o y, a leas in academic discus-
sions, con e ences, and publica ions. La ge public his o y con e ences may he e-
o e s ike he ou side as colo ul ai s han as pla o ms o necessa y dispu es
and ui ul con o e sy.
Howe e , such p o ound di e ences may be sa ely assumed o exis , no
leas because iden i y discou ses ha e become inc easingly ele an poli ically
and ha e subsequen ly been ins umen alized h oughou he wo ld, om China
h ough India o he A ab wo ld, Russia, Eu ope, and so on, in ecen yea s. The
much- aun ed e u n o eligion and he clash o cul u es de e mine he agenda
o he public sphe e, bo h as domes ic and as o eign policy. An in e na ional
mul ilingual ans-academic discipline may ei he mi o his si ua ion o lose
i sel in mu ual backslapping and in his o ical an iqua ianism. O as Nie zsche
amously pu i (1874):
The an iqua ian sense o a man, a communi y, a whole people, always possesses an
ex emely es ic ed ield o ision; mos o wha exis s i does no pe cei e a all, and he
li le i does see i sees much oo close up ans isola ed; i canno ela e wha i sees o any-
hing else and i he e o e acco ds e e y hing i sees equal impo ance and he e o e o each
indi idual hing oo g ea impo ance. The e is a lack o ha disc imina ion o alue and
ha sense o p opo ion which would dis inguish be ween he hings o he pas in a way
ha would do ue jus ice o hem; hei measu e and p opo ion is always ha acco ded
hem by he backwa d glance o he an iqua ian na ion o indi idual.93
93 F ied ich Nie zsche, Un imely medi a ions, ansla ed by R.J. Hollingdale (New Yo k:
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 1983), 74.
Wha is Public His o y 33
In his ho izon, he p oposed de ini ion o public his o y gains u he g ound: i
opens he doo o a poli ically commi ed ans-academic discipline ha is always
able o see and commen on i s objec s in he ligh o hei public ins umen a-
liza ion. The e lec ions o e ed he e ha e iden i ied and subs an ia ed bo h he
guiding p inciple and he quali y c i e ion: he de ense and he de elopmen o
democ a ic plu alism.
Li e a u e Ci ed
Angeh n, Emil. Geschich e und Iden i ä . Be lin (Wes ): De G uy e , 1985.
Angeh n, Emil. “De Mensch in de Geschich e. Kons ella ionen his o ische Iden i ä ”.
In: Iden i ä und Geschich e ed. by Emil Angeh n, Ge d Jü emann, 7–52. Gö ingen:
Vandenhoeck & Rup ech . 2018.
A endes, Co d, Angela Siebold. “Zwischen akademische Be u ung und p i a wi scha lichem
Be u . Fü eine Deba e um E hik- und Ve hal enskodizes in de his o ischen P o ession”.
In Geschich e in Wissenscha und Un e ich 66 (2015): 152–66.
Assmann, Aleida. Cul u al memo y and Wes e n ci iliza ion: unc ions, media, a chi es.
NewYo k: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2011.
Assmann, Jan. Das kul u elle Gedäch nis: Sch i , E inne ung und poli ische Iden i ä in ühen
Hochkul u en. München: Beck, 1992.
Assmann, Jan. Cul u al Memo y and Ea ly Ci ilisa ion. Camb idge: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 2011.
Bachmann-Medick, Do is. Cul u al Tu ns. Neuo ien ie ungen in den Kul u wissenscha en.
Reinbek bei Hambu g: Rowohl 2018. English e sion:
Bachmann-Medick, Do is. Cul u al Tu ns: New O ien a ions in he S udy o Cul u e. Be lin/
Bos on: De G uy e , 2016.
Benson, Susan, S ephen B ie , and Roy Rosenzweig. In oduc ion. In P esen ing he Pas .
Essays on His o y and he Public, XV–XXIV. Philadelphia: Temple Uni e si y P ess, 1986.
Be y, Chad, Lo i A. Schmied and Jose Chad Sch ock. “The Role o Emo ion in Teaching and
Lea ning His o y: A Schola ship o Teaching Explo a ion”. In The His o y Teache 41 (2008):
437–452.
Cau in, Thomas. ”T a e se les on iè es: une his oi e publique in e na ionale/C ossing
Ba ie s: an In e na ional Public His o y/G enzen übe sch ei en: eine In e na ionale Public
His o y”. In Public His o y Weekly 5 (2017) 13, DOI: dx.doi.o g/10.1515/phw-2017-9018.
Cau in, Thomas. “The Rise o Public His o y: An In e na ional Pe spec i e”. In His o ia C i ica
68 (2018): 3–26.
Cau in, Thomas. Public His o y. A Tex book o P ac ice. New Yo k and London: Rou ledge, 2016.
Co nelißen, Ch is oph: ”Was heiß E inne ungskul u ? Beg i – Me hoden – Pe spek i en”. In
Geschich e in Wissenscha und Un e ich 54 (2003), 548–63.
De G oo , Je ome. Consuming His o y. His o ians and he i age in con empo a y popula cul u e.
London dand New Yo k: Rou ledge, 2009.
Deman owsky, Ma ko. „De Beginn demoskopische Geschich sbewuss seins-Fo schung in
Deu schland. Die Fo schungsg uppe ‚Sozialis isches Geschich sbewuss sein’ am Ins i u
ü Gesellscha swissenscha en beim ZK de SED“. In Zei sch i ü Geschich sdidak ik 4
(2005): 146–75.
34 Ma ko Deman owsky
Deman owsky, Ma ko. “Geschich skul u und E inne ungskul u . Zwei Konzep ionen des einen
Gegens andes”. In Geschich e, Poli ik und ih e Didak ik 33 (2005): 11–20.
Deman owsky, Ma ko. “Geschich sbild”. In Wö e buch Geschich sdidak ik, 82–83.
Schwalbach/Ts.: Wochenschau, 2006.
Deman owsky, Ma ko. “Ös e eichische Schulbüche als Quellen de Geschich skul-
u -Fo schung. Die Behandlung de 48e Re olu ion und des magya isch-habsbu gischen
Kon lik s”. In Geschich sdidak ische Schulbuch o schung, ed. by Saskia Hand o and
Be nd Schönemann, 149–76. Zei geschich e - Zei e s ändnis 16. Be lin: Li -Ve lag, 2006.
Deman owsky, Ma ko. “Gedenks ä en de 48e Re olu ion als His o ische Le n-O e. Eine
Übe sich ”. In O e his o ischen Le nens ed. by Saskia Hand o, Be nd Schönemann,
149–164. Zei geschich e – Zei e s ändnis 18. Be lin: Li , 2008.
Deman owsky, Ma ko. “Public His o y – Subla ion o a Ge man Deba e?/‘Public His o y’ –
Au hebung eine deu schsp achigen Deba e?” In Public His o y Weekly 3, 2, 2015, DOI:
dx.doi.o g/10.1515/phw-2015-3292.
D oysen, Johann Gus a : G und iss de His o ik. Leipzig: Vei , 1868.
D oysen, Johann Gus a . Ou lines o he P inciples o His o y ( ansla ed by Elisha B. And ews).
Bos on: Ginn & Company, 1897.
Ehal , Hube Ch is ian. Geschich e on un en: F ages ellungen, Me hoden und P ojek e eine
Geschich e des All ags (Kul u s udien 1). Wien: Böhlau, 1984.
Fasulo, Alessand a, C is ina Zucche maglio. “Na a i es in he wo kplace. Fac s, ic ions, and
canonici y”. In Tex & Talk 28 (2008): 351–76.
Fes , Joachim: Die schwie ige F eihei . Übe die o ene Flanke de o enen Gesellscha . Be lin:
Siedle , 1993.
Foucaul , Michel: Die O dnung de Dinge. Eine A chäologie de Humanwissenscha en.
F ank u am Main: Suh kamp, 1971.
F ançois, E ienne, Hagen Schulze (eds.): Deu sche E inne ungso e, 3 Bände. München: Beck,
2001.
F ei, No be . Ve gangenhei spoli ik. Die An änge de Bundes epublik und die NS-
Ve gangenhei . München: Beck, 1996.
Gadame , Hans-Geo g. Wah hei und Me hode. G undzüge eine philosophischen He meneu ik.
Tübingen: J.C.B. Moh , 1990.
Gau schi, Pe e , Ma kus Be nha d , and Ul ich Maye . „Gu e Geschich sun e ich –
P inzipien“. In Handbuch P axis Geschich sun e ich , ed. by Michele Ba icelli und Ma in
Lücke, 326–48. Schwalbach/Ts.: Wochenschau, 2012.
Gehlen, A nold. De Mensch. Seine Na u und seine S ellung in de Wel . Wiesbaden: Aula,
1986.
Glucksmann, And é. Die Meis e denke . Be lin: Ulls ein, 1989.
G een, Alix. “Back o he u u e? Public his o y and he new academc ci izen./Zu ück in die
Zukun ? Public His o y und de neue ‘Academic Ci izen’.” In Public His o y Weekly 3, 7
(2015), DOI: dx.doi.o g/10.1515/phw-2015-3590.
G e e , Ma ia. “Fea o Plu ali y. His o ical Cul u e and His o iog aphical Canoniza ion in
Wes e n Eu ope”. In Gende ing His o iog aphy: Beyond Na ional Canons ed. by Angelika
Epple, Angelika Schase , 45–62, F ank u /M., New Yo k 2009.
Halbwachs, Mau ice. Das Gedäch nis und seine sozialen Bedingungen. F ank u am Main:
Suh kamp, 2008.
Halldén, Ola. “Concep ual Change and he Lea ning o His o y”. In In e na ional Jou nal o
Educa ional Resea ch 27 (1997): 201–210.
Wha is Public His o y 35
Hansen, Klaus P. Kul u und Kul u wissencha . Eine Ein üh ung. Tübingen: UTB, 1995.
Ha d wig, Wol gang. Geschich skul u und Wissenscha . München: d , 1990.
Hegel, G.W.F. G undlinien de Philosophie des Rech s. F ank u a.M.: Suh kamp, 1986.
Hegel, G.W.F.. Phänomenologie des Geis es. F ank u a.M.: Suh kamp, 1986.
Heuss, Al ed: Ve lus de Geschich e. Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 1959.
Hook, Sidney (ed.). Philosophy and his o y. A symposium. New Yo k: New Yo k Uni e si y P ess,
1963.
Huizinga, Johan: “O e een de ini ie an he beg ip geschiedenis”. In Ve zamelde we ken. Deel
7, 95–103. Haa lem: Willink & Zoon, 1950.
Huizinga, Johan. “Übe eine De ini ion des Beg i s de Geschich e”. In Wege de Kul u -
geschich e ( ansla ion by We ne Kaegi). München: D ei Masken Ve lag, 1930, pp. 78–88.
Jeismann, Ka l-E ns . “Didak ik de Geschich e. Die Wissenscha on Zus and, Funk ion und
Ve ände ung geschich liche Vo s ellungen im Selbs e s ändnis de Gegenwa ”. In
Geschich swissenscha . Didak ik – Fo schung – Theo ie ed. by E ich Kos ho s , 9–33.
Gö ingen, Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 1977.
Ja ausch, Kon ad H., Ma in Sab ow. “Meis e e zählung – Zu Ka ie e eines Beg i s”. In Die
his o ische Meis e e zählung. Deu ungslinien de deu schen Geschich e nach 1945, 9–32.
Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 2002.
Jo dano a, Ludmilla: His o y in P ac ice. London, New Yo k: Hodde Educa ion, 2000.
Kean, Hilda. “In oduc ion”. In The Public His o y Reade ed. by Hilda Kean and Paul Ma in,
XIII–XXXII. London, New Yo k: Rou ledge, 2013.
Kelley, Robe . “Public His o y. I ’s O igins, Na u e, and P ospec s”. In The Public His o ian 1
(1978): 16–28.
Ke shaw, Ian: “Wide s and ohne Volk? Dissens und Wide s and im D i en Reich”. In: De
Wide s and gegen den Na ionalsozialismus ed. by Jü gen Schmädeke, Pe e S einbach,
779–98. München: Pipe , 1986.
Kolpa zik, And ea. „His o y goes Online. Sp achp oduk ion und mediale Wandel im Spiegel“.
In Geschich e und Sp ache, ed. by Saskia Hand o and Be nd Schönemann. Zei geschich e,
Zei e s ändnis 21. Be lin: Li -Ve lag, 2010.
K aus, Wol gang. Das e zähl e Selbs . Die na a i e Kons uk ion on Iden i ä in de
Spä mode ne. P a enweile : Cen au us, 1996.
K eis, Geo g. Schweize E inne ungso e. Aus dem Speiche de Swissness. Zü ich: Ve lag NZZ,
2010.
Landweh , Achim. His o ische Disku sanalyse. F ank u a.M.: Campus, 2008.
Lé i-S auss, Claude. My hologiques. Volume 1: The Raw and he Cooked, 1–34. Chicago:
Uni e si y o Chicago P ess, 1983.
Lé i-S auss, Claude. My hologica I: Das Rohe und das Gekoch e, 11–53. F ank u a.M.:
Suh kamp, 1976.
Logge, Tho s en. “Public His o y in Ge many. Challenges ans Oppo uni ies”. In Ge man S udies
Re iew 39 (2016): 141–53.
Lübbe, He mann. “Die Iden i ä sp äsen a ions unk ion de His o ie”. In Iden i ä ed. by Odo
Ma qua d, Ka lheinz S ie le, 277–292. München: Wilhelm Fink, 1979.
Lyo a d, Jean F ançois. Das pos mode ne Wissen. Ein Be ich . Wien: Passagen-Ve lag, 2015.
Ma x, Ka l. “Ökonomisch-philosophische Manusk ip e. D i es Manusk ip ”. In Ma x Engels
We ke E gänzungsband 1, 530–588. Be lin: Die z Ve lag, 1968.
Meye -Hamme, Johannes, Bodo on Bo ies: “Sinnbildung übe Zei e ah ung? Geschich s le nen
im Spannungs eld on Subjek - und Ins i u ionspe spek i e.” In: Sinnkons uk ion und
36 Ma ko Deman owsky
Bildungsgang. Zu Bedeu ung indi iduelle Sinnzusch eibungen im Kon ex schulische
Leh -Le n-P ozesse ed. by Hans-Ch is oph Kolle , 107–135. Opladen: Ve lag Ba ba a
Bud ich, 2008.
Meye -Hamme, Johannes, Bodo on Bo ies. “>I ne e likes his o y a school<. Iden i äen und
Emo ionen beim his o ischen Le nen”. In Emo ionen, Geschich e und his o isches Le nen
ed. by Juliane B aue , Ma in Lücke, 125–37. Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 2013.
Mühlmann, Wilhelm Emil. „E hnogenie und E hnogenese. Theo e isch-e hnologische und
ideok i ische S udie“. In S udien zu E hnogenese, 9–27. Abhandlungen de Rheinisch-Wes -
älischen Akademie de Wissenscha en, 72. Opladen: Wes deu sche Ve lag, 1985.
Mülle -Funk, Wol gang. Die Kul u und ih e Na a i e: eine Ein üh ung. Vienna: Sp inge , 2008.
Nie zsche, F ied ich. “Unzei gemässe Be ach ungen. Zwei es S ück: Vom Nu zen und Nach eil
de His o ie ü das Leben”. In We ke in d ei Bänden ed. by Wal he Linden, Wol gang
Deninge , 201–271. Ke wig: Phaidon, 1990.
Nie zsche, F ied ich. Un imely medi a ions ( ansla ed by R.J. Hollingdale). New Yo k:
Camb idge Uni e si y P ess, 1983.
Nol e, Paul: “Ö en liche Geschich e. Die neue Nähe on Fachwissenscha , Massenmedien und
Publikum: U sachen, Chancen und G enzen”. In Au klä ung, Bildung, «His o ainmen »?
Zei geschich e in Un e ich und Gesellscha heu e ed. by Michele Ba icelli, Julia Ho nig,
131–46. F ank u am Main: Pe e Lang, 2008.
No a, Pie e. Les Lieux de mémoi e, 3 omes (Biblio hèque illus ée des his oi es). Pa is:
Gallima d, 1984–1992.
Noi e , Se ge. “L’in e na ionalisa ion de’l His oi e Publique/In e na ionalizing Public His o y/
In e na ionalisie ung de Public His o y”. In Public His o y Weekly 2 (2014) 34, DOI: dx.doi.
o g/10.1515/phw-2014-2647.
Oexle, O o Ge ha d. Memo ia als Kul u . Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech 1995.
Poppe , Ka l R. Die o ene Gesellscha und ih e Feinde, 1, 2. München: F ancke Ve lag, 1957/58.
Pe in, Daniel, Vinzenz Wyss. „In die Geschich en e zählen. Die Analyse on Na a ion in
ö en liche Kommunika ion“. In Handbuch nich -s anda disie e Me hoden in de
Kommunika ionswissenscha ed. By S e anie A e beck-Lie z and Michael Meye , 241–56.
Wiesbaden: Sp inge , 2016.
Popp, Susanne. “Ein global o ien ie es Geschich sbewuss sein als zukün ige He aus-
o de ung de Geschich sdidak ik?” In Sowi-Online 2, 1 (2002): 1–13.
Ricoeu , Paul. “Na a i e Iden i ä ”. In Heidelbe ge Jah büche 31 (1987): 55–67.
Rüsen, Jö n. His o ische Ve nun . G undzüge eine His o ik I: Die G undlagen de
Geschich swissenscha . Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 1983.
Rüsen, Jö n, Klaus F öhlich, Hube Ho s kö e , Hans-Gün e Schmid . “Un e suchungen zum
Geschich sbewuss sein on Abi u ien en im Ruh gebie ”. In Geschich sbewuss sein
empi isch ed. by Bodo . Bo ies e al., 221–344. P a enweile : Cen au us, 1991.
Rüsen, Jö n. “Was is Geschich skul u ? Übe legungen zu eine neuen A , übe Geschich e
nachzudenken”. In His o ische Faszina ion. Geschich skul u heu e ed. by Klaus Füssmann
e al., 3–26. Köln: Böhlau, 1994.
Rüsen, Jö n. “Die Mach de Ge ühle im Sinn de Geschich e. Theo e ische G undlagen und das
Beispiel des T aue ns”. In Emo ionen, Geschich e und his o isches Le nen ed. by Juliane
B aue , Ma in Lücke, 27–44. Gö ingen: Vandenhoeck & Rup ech , 2013.
Samida, S e anie: “Public His o y als His o ische Kul u wissenscha . Ein Plädoye ”. In:
Docupedia-Zei geschich e (17 Juni 2014), DOI: h p://dx.doi.o g/10.14765/zz .dok.2.575. 1
(las accessed 2 May 2018).
Wha is Public His o y 37
Samuel, Raphael. Thea es o Memo y. Pas and P esen in Con empo a y Cul u es. London:
Ve so, 2012.
on Sa igny, Eike. G undku s im wissenscha lichen De inie en. München: Deu sche Taschen-
buch-Ve lag, 1970.
Schneide , Ul ich Johannes. Michel Foucaul . Da ms ad : Wissenscha liche Buchgesellscha ,
2004.
Schöch, Ch is o . “Quan i a i e Analyse”. In Digi al Human ies. Eine Ein üh ung ed. by Fo is
Jannidis e al., 279–298. S u ga : J.B. Me zle , 2017.
Schönemann, Be nd. “Geschich sdidak ik und Geschich skul u ”. In Geschich skul u .
Theo ie– Empi ie – P agma ik ed. by Be nd Mü e e al., 26–58. Weinheim: Bel z, 2000.
Schö ken, Rol . „Geschich sdidak ik und Geschich sbewuß sein“. GWU 23 (1972): 81–89.
Some s, Ma g e R. “The na a i e cons i u ion i iden i y”. In Theo y and Socie y 23 (1994):
605–649.
S one, Law ence. “The Re i al o Na a i e. Re lec ions on a new Old His o y”. In Pas and
P esen 85 (1979): 3–24.
S aub, Jü gen. “Iden i ä ”. In Handbuch de Kul u wissenscha en, Bd. 1 ed. by F ied ich
Jaege , Bu kha d Liebsch, 277–363. S u ga : Me zle , 2011.
Tu ne , Vic o . The Ri ual P ocess. S uc u e and An i-S uc u e. New B unswick/London: Aldine
T ansac ion 1997.
Ueding, Ge . Klassische Rhe o ik. München: Beck, 2004.
Van Gennep, A nold. The Ri es o Passage. Chicago: Uni e si y o Chicago P ess, 1960.
Vansina, Jan. O al T adi ion as His o y. Madison: The Uni e si y o Wisconsin P ess, 1985.
Whi e, Hayden. Me ahis o y. Die his o ische Einbildungsk a im 19. Jah hunde in Eu opa,
15–62. F ank u am Main: S. Fische , 1991.
Win e , Jay. “Die Gene a ion de E inne ung. Re lexionen übe den Memo y-Boom in de zei his-
o ischen Fo schung”. In: We ks a Geschich e 10 (2001), 5–16.
Wi gens ein, Ludwig. Philosophische Un e suchungen. K i isch-gene ische Edi ion. F ank u
a.M.: Suh kamp, 2001.
Wi gens ein, Ludwig. Philosophical In es iga ions (T ansla ed by G. E. M. Anscombe). Ox o d:
Basil Blackwell 1958.
Wol um, Edga . Geschich spoli ik in de Bundes epublik Deu schland: de Weg zu bundes e-
publikanischen E inne ung 1948 – 1990. Da ms ad : Wissenscha liche Buchgesellscha ,
1999.
Ze was, Ma co. Le no `Deu sches Eck’. Zu Va iabili ä geschich skul u elle Deu ungsmus e .
Geschich sdidak ische S udien 1. Be lin: Logos, 2015.
Zündo , I mga d. “Con empo a y His o y and Public His o y”. In Docupedia-Zei geschich e
(16 Ma ch 2017), DOI: h p://dx.doi.o g/10.14765/zz .dok.2.1017. 2 (las accessed 1 May
2018).
