e-ISSN 2724-3923
magazén
Vol. 2 – Num. 2 – Decembe 2021
311
Ci a ion Apos olopoulos, P. (2021). “Wha is he Public o Public His o y?
Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency”. magazén, 2(2), 311-328.
DOI 10.30687/mag/2724-3923/2021/01/006
Pee e iew
Submi ed 2021-01-12
Accep ed 2021-09-13
Published 2021-12-10
Open access
©2021 | cb C ea i e Commons A ibu ion 4.0 In e na ional Public License
Edizioni
Ca’Fosca i
Edizioni
Ca’Fosca i
Wha is he Public o Public
His o y? Be ween he Public
Sphe e and Public Agency
Pe os Apos olopoulos
No h Ca olina S a e Uni e si y, USA
Abs ac Public his o y cons i u es a his o ical ield, i includes se e al ela ed jou -
nals, membe ship o ganisa ions, esea ch cen es, unde g adua e and g adua e p o-
g ams all o e he wo ld. Mos impo an ly, Public His o y has been ma ked by g owing
his o iog aphy and an inc easing public in e es in his o y. Howe e , he e is a lack o
esea ch on he mos impo an cons i uen elemen o Public His o y, he ‘public’. The
aim o his pape is o shed ligh on how Public His o y has app oached he public in
he las ou decades. By ocusing on he wo di e en o ms he public has aken, he
public sphe e and he public agency, he pape examines he no ion o he public as i
appea ed in he his o iog aphy and how i de e mined he epis emology and me hodol-
ogy o Public His o y.
Keywo ds Public His o y. Public. Public sphe e. Public agency. His o iog aphy o Pub-
lic His o y.
Summa y 1 In oduc ion. – 2 The Public Be o e Public His o y. – 3 F om Applied o
Public His o y: De ining he Public. – 4 Be ween he Public and he Public Sphe e. –
5 Conclusion: Fu u e O ien a ions o he S udying o he Public.
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
312
1 In oduc ion
In he las ou decades, Public His o y has been ins i u ionalised as
a his o ical ield. Public his o y includes i s main jou nal, The Pub-
lic His o ian, which was published in 1978, i s membe ship o gani-
sa ion, he Na ional Council on Public His o y, which was c ea ed in
1980, i s global membe ship o ganisa ion, he In e na ional Fede a-
ion o Public His o y es ablished in 2010, and Public His o y g ad-
ua e p og ammes in se e al coun ies ac oss he wo ld.1 Howe e ,
he mos impo an de elopmen s, which a e essen ial o he ield,
a e he g owing his o iog aphy o Public His o y and he inc easing
public in e es in his o y.2
The aim o his pape is o explo e he his o iog aphy o Public
His o y by ocusing on he concep o he ‘public’, as i appea ed in
he his o iog aphical p oduc ion and deba es o he Uni ed S a es.
Since he se en ies, se e al his o ians, philosophe s, p ac i ione s,
a chi is s, p ese a ionis s, and social scien is s ha e ied o de
-
ine he public and i s ela ionship o his o ical p oduc ion. The con-
cep ual idea o he public de e mines he epis emology o he ield,
so an explo a ion o i s de elopmen o e ime is signi ican no only
o he s a e o he ield bu mainly o u u e o ien a ions. The pub-
lic is no one single hing bu akes di e en o ms acco ding o he
app oaches ha his o ians ollow and he b oade poli ical, social,
and cul u al con ex o he pe iod. In he his o iog aphy o public
his o iog aphy, he public has aken wo o ms, he public as indi-
iduals and he public as a public sphe e. Be o e ocusing on hese
wo di e en app oaches, I explo e he concep o he public as i ap-
pea ed, o which o he concep s i was ela ed, and how i de e mined
Public His o y. My cen al a gumen is ha in he his o iog aphy o
Public His o y he e a e wo main app oaches o s udying he pub-
lic, one app oach ha ocuses on he public i sel and how i engag-
es wi h his o y, and ano he ha ocuses on he public sphe e. How-
e e , as I will show in his pape , he e is a endency o his o ians o
app oach he public by paying mo e a en ion o he public sphe e
ins ead o he public i sel .3
I would like o hank P o esso Tammy Go don o he hough ul commen s on my pa-
pe and ou ui ul discussions on he his o iog aphy o Public His o y.
1 See G eenbe g 1998, 296; Cona d 2003, 11; Me ingolo 2012, xi ; Cau in 2018, 3-26.
2 Rega ding he inc easing in e es o he public in his o y, see Rosenzweig, Thelen
1998; G oo 2009; Landsbe g 2015; G oo 2015, 102-27.
3 I wan o cla i y ha I ha e no been able o include his o hcoming book in
my s udy, which ocuses on he public(s) and i s ole in Public His o y, see Wojdon,
Wiśniewska 2021.
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
313
2 The Public Be o e Public His o y
Almos e e y s udy on Public His o y aces he oo s o he ield and
he connec ion be ween his o y and he public o he a icle o Ca l
Becke , “E e yman His Own His o ian” published in 1932. Becke ,
an Ame ican academic his o ian, saw he connec ion be ween his-
o ical knowledge and public audience in a adical way. He de ined
his o y as “ he knowledge o he e en s ha ha e occu ed in he
pas ” (222). Howe e , he claimed ha his kind o knowledge is no
only placed in he a chi es, his o ical eco ds, and documen s o he
pas , as he dominan his o iog aphical pa adigm o he nine een h
and ea ly wen ie h cen u y a gued.
4
Ins ead, o Becke , his o i-
cal knowledge has se e al cha ac e is ics and one o he mos im-
po an is memo y. Thus, his o y becomes “ he memo y o e en s
ha ha e occu ed in he pas ” (222). He also cla i ied ha his o i-
cal e en s a e no only he g and and spec acula e en s o his o y
(222). In addi ion o ha , Becke a gued ha “his o y is he memo-
y o hings said and done”, and i does no e e only o he dis an
pas (223). Tha pe cep ion o his o y cons i u ed a signi ican dis-
con inui y om Leopold on Ranke’s iew o his o y, which cha ac-
e ised his o ical s udies in he nine een h cen u y.5 Fo Ranke, his-
o ians had o look o he “pa icula ”, which exis s in he his o ical
a chi al sou ces (Igge s 2002, 237).6
Becke opened up his o y by enabling he public o engage wi h
he pas and, mo e p ecisely, o be pa o he pas h ough i s mem-
o ies. He challenged he nine een h cen u y pa adigm ha , as Geo g
Igge s w o e, made a dis inc ion be ween his o y as a science p ac-
iced by p o essional his o ians and his o y as a li e a y ac i i y p ac-
iced by ama eu s (2002, 232). Howe e , Becke did no use he e m
‘public’, bu he e m ‘M . E e yman’ o signi y ha anyone makes
sense o he pas , o he wise hey will no be able o unde s and he
p esen and he u u e (1932, 223). His choice o use he e m ‘M .
E e yman’ signi ied an accep ance o he gende ed and male-cen ic
language o he pe iod, howe e he saw his o y-making as a mo e
democ a ic p ocess.
7
Acco ding o Becke , he only di e ence be-
ween his o ians and M . E e yman is ha M . E e yman is in e -
4 I e e he e o Leopold on Ranke’s iew o his o y as wha happened in he pas
and his belie in he objec i i y o his o ical knowledge. Fo mo e in o ma ion on he
his o iog aphy o his o ical s udies, see Igge s 2002, 225-42.
5 Fo he his o iog aphical con ibu ion o Leopold on Ranke o he his o ical s ud-
ies, see Ranke 2010.
6 Fo a discussion on Public His o y and Ranke’s iew o his o y, see S o ey 1992,
11-22.
7 In his p esiden ial add ess, William C onon men ioned he gende ed language o
Ca l Becke (see C onon 2013).
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
314
es ed in lea ning abou e en s o he pas ela ed o his pe sonal a -
ai s (234). The e o e, Becke sugges ed his o ians o pay a en ion
o M . E e yman, o he wise, as Becke a gued,
he will lea e us o ou own de ices, lea e us i may be o cul i a e
a species o d y p o essional a ogance g owing ou o he hin
soil o an iqua ian esea ch. Such esea ch, aluable no in i sel
bu o some ul e io pu pose, will be o li le impo excep in so
a as i is ansmu ed in o common knowledge. (234)
In o he wo ds, he s o ies o he public should no be neglec ed bu
ha e a place in his o y, as he public engages wi h he pas ac i ely
in he e e yday li e.
Howe e , Ca l Becke ’s a gumen s abou his o ical knowledge e-
mained ma ginal o he nex decades and he e we e no wo ks ha
engaged wi h he concep o public. A an impo an ex en , in he hi -
ies, he his o ians o he F ench jou nal Annales, such as Lucien Fe-
b e and Ma c Bloch, s a ed o de elop a simila iew o his o ical
knowledge by expanding his o y o include b oade g oups o he popu-
la ion (Igge s 2002, 237).
8
Howe e , he ocus o Annales school was no
he public i sel bu he b oade social p ocesses and s uc u es (237).9
In he six ies, while he e was a b oade democ a isa ion o poli -
ical ins i u ions in he wes e n wo ld and mo e social g oups we e
en e ing in he public sphe e, he Ge man philosophe Jü gen Habe -
mas published he book The S uc u al T ans o ma ion o he Pub-
lic Sphe e. An Inqui y in o a Ca ego y o Bou geois Socie y. Habe -
mas explo ed he e ms ‘public’ and ‘public sphe e’, and how hese
concep s changed om he se en een h o he mid- wen ie h cen u-
y by ocusing on he bou geois cul u e (1991, 1). While mos social
scien is s we e de ining he public as a ‘s a e ins i u ion’ o ‘public
au ho i y’, o ‘public ecep ion’, Habe mas de ined i as “a ca ie o
public opinion” (2). In he mid- wen ie h cen u y, he public sphe e
signi ied a public domain o ac ion e sus he p i a e domain (2). The
main a gumen o Habe mas, as he sociologis C aig Calhoun w o e,
was ha he bou geois public sphe e signi ied a public sphe e o p i-
a e indi iduals, who we e pa icipa ing in a deba e o issues unde
he s a e au ho i y (1996, 7).
The book o Habe mas cons i u ed one o he i s wo ks on he
public and public sphe e. His s udy has been pe cei ed wi h bo h
8 Fo some wo ks o Lucien Feb e and Ma c Bloch, ep esen a i e o Annales school,
see Feb e 1985; Bloch 1966; 2014.
9 This does no mean ha Public His o y as i was ins i u ionalised in he se en ies
was no in luenced by he Annales school o his o ical hough . My poin is ha he pub-
lic was nei he he subjec no he objec o hei s udies. Fo mo e in o ma ion o he
Annales school o his o ical hough , see Bu ke 1990; Igge s 1997.
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
315
en husiasm and c i icism by se e al social scien is s.
10
I is in e -
es ing ha mos o hose schola s we e philosophe s, sociologis s,
media, and communica ion schola s, while his o ians we e absen
om hese discussions. Habe mas b ough he public sphe e in o
he discussion as a social a ea, whe e indi iduals exchange opinions
and de elop poli ical ac ions. Habe mas managed o go beyond he
F ank u school’s ocus on he p ole a ia as a ehicle o he soci-
e al ans o ma ion and ocused on “ he in e subjec i e communica-
i e p ocesses o bou geois”, as Calhoun has men ioned (1996, 5-6).
3 F om Applied o Public His o y: De ining he Public
In 1978, in he i s issue o The Public His o ian, he his o ian Rob-
e Kelley in oduced he e m “public” by a guing ha “public his-
o ians a e a wo k whene e , in hei p o essional capaci y, hey a e
pa o he public p ocess” (Kelley 1978, 16 ci ed in Cona d 2003, 11).
This issue signi ied he eme gence o a new ield o his o y. Howe e ,
he use o he e m ‘public’ was no el du ing ha ime and aimed o
eplace he olde e m o ‘applied his o y’ (Cona d 2003, 11). In he
nex issues o he jou nal, as Rebecca Cona d w o e, se e al his o i-
ans looked back a he e m “applied his o y”, which was in oduced
by Benjamin Shambaugh in 1909 and ep esen ed a p oduc o a mo e
scien i ic his o y (Cona d 2003, 12). Acco ding o Shambaugh, ‘ap-
plied his o y’ was based on New His o y and signi ied discipline and
objec i i y in he me hod o his o ical esea ch and aimed o make
his o y use ul (Cona d 2003, 12). Thus, a deba e among his o ians i
hey will use he e m ‘Public His o y’ o ‘applied his o y’ s a ed.
As Rebecca Cona d w o e, many his o ians we e agains he e m
‘applied’, as he his o ians who we e wo king ou side academy did
no apply he heo ies o his o ical schola ship (2003, 13). They nei-
he wan ed o use he e m ‘applied’ no o ollow a posi i is iew o
his o y. Thei a gumen was ha his o y canno become a ha d sci-
ence and in eg a e a “ echnical a ionali y” (13). People canno use
his o y o sol e p oblems o p edic he u u e (13). Also, he e m
‘applied his o y’ was no compa ible wi h he p o essional iden i y
o his o ians du ing ha ime, which was s ongly connec ed o he
p ac ices o esea ching, w i ing, and eaching (14). The e m ‘ap-
plied his o y’was based on he “p ac ice o his o y” while he e m
Public His o y esponded o he “s udy o his o y” (14). Ano he as-
pec o he ansi ion om he ‘applied’ o he ‘public’ his o y is he
b oade his o iog aphical de elopmen s o new social his o y, his o-
10 See o example, F ase 1990, 56-80; Cossley, Robe s 2004; Goode 2005; McK-
ee 2005.

magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
316
y om below, bo om-up his o y ha had aken place in he six ies
(Cau in 2018, 8).11 E en i hese his o iog aphical ends we e mo e
dominan in Eu ope han in he US, hey c ea ed a amewo k o dis-
cussion and in luenced se e al his o ians in he wes e n coun ies
(Cau in 2018, 8; Cona d 2018, 30).
Howe e , he domina ion o he ‘public’ o e he ‘applied’ signi ied
he c ea ion o an epis emological amewo k o he ield and ook
place h ough se e al his o iog aphical discussions and publica ions.
Many public his o ians, local his o ians, p ac i ione s, a chi is s, p es-
e a ionis s, begun o discuss wha Public His o y is, wha he cha -
ac e is ics o Public His o y a e, how i di e s om academic his o-
y, wha i aims o do, and how he public is ela ed o he p oduc ion
o his o ical knowledge.12 These discussions de ined he me hodolo-
gy and he esea ch in e es s o he ield and i s u u e o ien a ions.
In ha amewo k, Ronald G ele, an o al his o ian, and a o me
Di ec o a he O al His o y P og am a UCLA, published he a icle
“Whose Public? Whose His o y? Wha is he Goal o a Public His o i-
an?” in The Public His o ian in 1981. He poin ed ou ha i we wan o
unde s and wha Public His o y is and does, we should explo e wha
he public is, as he e is no much esea ch on he public (41). G ele
a gued ha his o ians always had a public, and his o y was always
a public ac . The poin is how he public changed o e imes (41).
Fo G ele, Public His o y has h ee main elemen s: 1) he educa-
ion o g adua e s uden o jobs as a chi is s, museum di ec o s,
p ese a ionis s e c. This means ha Public His o y a ac ed acade-
my, as Public His o y could o e job oppo uni ies (45). 2) Public His-
o y becomes mo e p o essional and acqui es academic cha ac e -
is ics (45). Fo G ele, his is a nega i e cha ac e is ic, as he Public
His o y mo emen ollows a e y na ow de ini ion o wha i is, e y
simila o he iew o p o essionalism by he academy (46). The ea-
son o ha is ha he Public His o y mo emen has igno ed all hose
deba es ha ook place in he six ies, so Public His o y has seen i -
sel as jus a p o ession and no as “a oca ion-a calling”, which was
impo an cha ac e is ic o he local his o y mo emen in he six ies
(46). 3) many public his o ians wo k as go e nmen ad ise s o em-
ployees, namely p o essions, which we e no impo an o his o ians.
Thei olde iew o his o ical p o ession was no ha na ow. They
did no aim o wo k o hose who ule and ha e he ins umen s o
social powe (46). O cou se, some his o ians did ha in he pas , bu
hey did no iden i y hei p o ession as doing only ha (47). Thus,
11 Rega ding he his o iog aphical de elopmen s o new social his o y and cul u al
his o y be ween he six ies and he eigh ies, see Reddy 2002.
12 Rega ding he ins i u ionalisa ion o Public His o y, see he ollowing s udies, Co-
na d 2015; 2003; Cau in 2018.
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
317
all he e o s o Public His o y ha e been ela ed o he go e nmen-
al wo ld. In ha way, o G ele he public o Public His o y has be-
come jus one public, among o he s. Public his o y should hink he
communi y wo k as an impo an his o ical wo k (47). G ele closed
his a icle by a guing ha he public ede ines he ole o he his o-
ians and p omises “a socie y in which a b oad public pa icipa es in
he cons uc ion o i s own his o y” (48).
The discussions abou he epis emology o Public His o y con in-
ued and he de ini ion o he public ook di e en di ec ions. In he
same yea , he u ban and o al his o ian Michael F isch published
he a icle “The Memo y o His o y”, in which he discussed he ela-
ionship be ween memo y and his o y o show how a di e en iew
o he pas can c ea e he po en ial o a di e en u u e (1981). His
a gumen was ha he e is mo e emphasis in he ‘how’ a he han
he ‘why’ in Public His o y (9). Rega ding he ‘why’, F isch a gued
ha mos o he wo ks in Public His o y poin ou he need o en-
cou age a wide sha ing o knowledge, a b oade pa icipa ion in
he his o y-making, a challenge o con en ional schola ship (9). Fo
F isch, he cen al issue o public his o ians is o examine he ela-
ionship be ween his o y and memo y, bo h collec i e and indi idual
(9). He sugges ed his o ians o emo e Public His o y om “ he ci -
cle o demand and supply”, and ocus on he ela ion be ween mem-
o y and his o y, which can enhance ou abili y o imagine and c e-
a e a di e en u u e (10).
O e all, F isch ollowed Ca l Becke ’s sugges ions o he impo -
ance o memo y in he p oduc ion o his o ical knowledge and poin -
ed ou ha Public His o y canno be public i i is no s ongly con-
nec ed o memo y. Fo ha eason, e en i a memo y is his o ical o
ahis o ical, public his o ians should ac i a e he p ocess o emem-
be ing and make he public able o encoun e “ he sense o hei own
pas ” (22). Rega ding he ‘how’ o Public His o y, F isch de eloped
a me hodology o doing Public His o y in his book, A Sha ed Au ho -
i y, published some yea s la e (1990).13 He connec ed o al and Pub-
lic His o y o he s udy o memo y h ough he concep o sha ed
au ho i y (1990, xx). Tha me hod can challenge he his o ical au ho -
i y. As F isch a gued, his au ho i y “migh be sha ed mo e b oadly
in his o ical esea ch and communica ion a he han con inuing o
se e as an ins umen o powe and hie a chy” (xx). Public his o i-
ans should no ega d he public as no able o communica e i s his-
o ies ou side i s own immedia e expe ience and knowledge (xxi). In-
s ead, public his o ians should unde s and ha hei me hods can
do mo e han jus ex ac he knowledge om he people, and hey
13 F isch has also analysed “sha ed au ho i y” in o he wo ks. Fo a mo e con empo-
a y iew o “sha ed au ho i y” in he digi al age, see F isch 2011.
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
318
should also ealise ha hey can do mo e han jus communica e he
his o ical knowledge (xxii). Fo F isch, public his o ians should c e-
a e a space o collabo a ion be ween hemsel es and he na a o s
(xxii; see Cau in 2018, 8).
G ele and F isch, he i s heo is s o Public His o y, unde lined
he ac i e ole ha he public – he indi iduals – should ha e o p o-
duce his o ical knowledge. Bo h schola s we e in luenced by ea lie
discussions in o al his o y, which had s a ed in he hi ies in he
US bu de eloped all o e he wo ld in he six ies (Cau in 2018, 8).
O al his o y placed ma ginal social g oups, communi ies, and indi-
iduals a he cen e o he his o ical s udy. The me hod o o al his-
o y c ea ed e ms, such as collec i e memo y, which showed ha
his o y is media ed by he na a o s’ collec i e memo ies (8). Thus,
he heo ies o G ele and F isch, and mo e speci ically he concep o
sha ed au ho i y, signi ied he collabo a i e ela ionship be ween he
his o ian and he na a o o p oduce his o y and c ea ed a b idge
be ween o al his o y and Public His o y (8).
Following he same line o hinking, he his o ian Douglas G een-
be g discussed Public His o y and i s unc ion o communica e his-
o ical knowledge o a b oade public (1998). His main poin was ha
many his o ians ha e ailed o communica e his o ical knowledge o
a b oade public (297). As he w o e, his o ians ha e a ely hough
abou hei social esponsibili ies and hei ole in he socie y. A he
same ime, many his o ians igno e o diminish his o ians, who y
o communica e hei his o ical knowledge (297). The dange o ha
logic is ha his o y will become a “luxu y” (298). Fo G eenbe g, he
concep o public does no mean ha his o ians should p oduce he
his o ical knowledge ha he audience wan s and s op s udying he
“useless knowledge” (308-9). Ins ead, bo h academic and public his-
o ians should unde s and ha he e is a public audience “hung y
o mo e and be e his o y” (308-9).
All hose s udies placed he public a he o e on o Public His o-
y and de ined Public His o y acco ding o he agency o he public.
These heo ies ep esen ed a b oade ansi ion om public his o i-
ans who p ac ised his o y and wo ked o go e nmen s, his o ical so-
cie ies, and a chi es be ween he mid-nine een h and he mid- wen-
ie h cen u ies, o public his o ians who wan ed o c ea e a sha ed
au ho i y wi h he public and communica e his o y o a b oade au-
dience.14 P esen ing his o y and s udying he public’s use o his o y
became mo e impo an han applying his o y (Cau in 2018, 18; Kn-
e el 2009, 8). These concep ual ideas de e mined he ield o Public
His o y and shaped i s wo ks in he ollowing decades.
14 Fo a genealogy o Public His o y be ween he mid-nine een h and he wen ie h
cen u ies, see Me ingolo 2012.
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
319
4 Be ween he Public and he Public Sphe e
In he his o iog aphy o public his o iog aphy, he public has ak-
en wo o ms: indi iduals and he b oade con ex in which he pub-
lic ac s, he public sphe e. I is di icul o disce n hese wo o ms
acco ding o ch onological pe iods, as he e is no a ansi ion om
one o m o he o he . Ins ead, hey coexis and cons i u e he wo
majo app oaches o do Public His o y. This sec ion is no a comple e
his o iog aphical o e iew o Public His o y wo ks ha engage wi h
he public. I e e only o wo ks ha ep esen b oade pa e ns and
me hods o app oaching he public.
In 1998, Roy Rosenzweig and Da id Thelen, published one o he
mos in luen ial wo ks o Public His o y, The P esence o he Pas :
Popula Uses o His o y in Ame ican Li e. The wo his o ians ollowed
he me hod o su ey and explo ed wha Ame icans did know and
hink abou he pas , bu also how hey unde s and he pas . Thei
s udy was based on he assump ion ha , e en hough i is widely be-
lie ed ha Ame icans do no know abou he pas , he e is a g ow-
ing public in e es in his o y (3). They did no s udy how he pas is
ep esen ed in popula and public cul u e, bu how he pas is un-
de s ood by people (4). Thei indings challenged he common belie
ha Ame icans do no ca e abou he pas . They showed ha Ame -
ican a e in e es ed in he pas bu no in his o y as i was de ined in
academic ex books (9). Fo example, mos o he in e iewees el
s ongly connec ed wi h he pas a amily mee ings (177). Thus, by
ocusing on he public i sel , he wo his o ians showed ha he pub-
lic looks o a pas ha can espond o wha Ca l Becke called “ he
necessi ies” o he p esen (178).
In Rosenzweig and Thelen’s s udy, he agency o he public and i s
app oach o he pas was a ached o wo impo an concep s, “his o -
ical consciousness” and “his o ical memo y” (3). The o me e m sig-
ni ied he public unde s anding o he pas as i is de ined by he ex-
pe iences, in e es s o indi iduals. The la e was bo owed om Ca l
Becke ’s and Michael F isch’s wo ks on he ac i e p ocess o emem-
be ing, which de e mined he pe cep ion o he pas and he p oduc-
ion o his o y. Bo h concep s o e ed wo di e en app oaches o how
he public as ‘his o y make s’ ac i ely engages wi h he pas , while
he book cons i u ed a no el example o how his o ians can place
he public a he cen e o his o ical inqui y (Glassbe g 2001, xiii).
Following a simila line o hinking, Da id Glassbe g explo ed how
Ame icans ha e unde s ood and used he pas in he wen ie h cen-
u y (xiii). He ollowed a dis inc ion be ween he “in e p e a ion o
his o y” ha p o essional his o ians do and he “sense o his o y”
ha he public has. The sense o his o y is a “pe spec i e on he pas
a he co e o who hey a e and he people and he places hey ca e
abou ” (6). Glassbe g’s wo k did no ollow he app oach o Rosenz-
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
326
Clough, P. Ticine o; Halley, J. (2007). The A ec i e Tu n: Theo izing he Social.
Du ham: Duke Uni e si y P ess.
Cona d, R. (2003). “Facepain His o y in he Season o In ospec ion”. Public
His o ian, 25, 9-24.
Cona d, R. (2015). “The P agma ic Roo s o Public His o y Educa ion in he Uni -
ed S a es”. The Public His o ian, 37(1), 105-20.
Cona d, R. (2018). “Complica ing O igin S o ies: The Making o Public His o y
in o an Academic Field in he Uni ed S a es”. Dean 2018, 19-32.
Co be , K.T.; Mille , H.S. (2006). “A Sha ed Inqui y in o Sha ed Inqui y”. Pub-
lic His o ian, 28, 15-38.
Cossley, N.; Robe s, J.M. (2004). A e Habe mas: New Pe spec i es on he Pub-
lic Sphe e. Ox o d: Blackwell.
C onon, W. (2013). “P esiden ial Add ess. S o y elling”. Pape p esen ed a
27 h annual mee ing o he Ame ican His o ical Associa ion 2013. h -
ps://www.his o ians.o g/abou -aha-and-membe ship/aha-his-
o y-and-a chi es/p esiden ial-add esses/william-c onon.
Dean, M.D. (ed.) (2018). A Companion o Public His o y. Hoboken (NJ): John Wiley
& Sons L d.
Doss, E. (2008). The Emo ional Li e o Con empo a y Public Memo ials. Towa ds a
Theo y o Tempo a y Memo ials. Ams e dam: Ams e dam Uni e si y P ess.
Doss, E. (2010). Memo ial Mania: Public Feeling in Ame ica. Chicago: Chicago
Uni e si y P ess.
Feb e, L. (1985). The P oblem o Unbelie in he Six een h Cen u y. The Religion
o Rabelais. Camb idge (MA): Ha a d Uni e si y P ess.
Filene, B. (2012). “Passiona e His o ies: ‘Ou side ’ His o y-Make s and Wha
They Teach Us”. Public His o ian, 34, 11-33.
F ase , N. (1990). “Re hinking he Public Sphe e: A Con ibu ion o he C i ique
o Ac ually Exis ing Democ acy”. Social Tex , 25(26), 56-80.
F isch, M.H. (1981). “The Memo y o His o y”. Radical His o y Re iew, 25, 9-23.
F isch, M.H. (1990). A Sha ed Au ho i y: Essays on he C a and Meaning o O al
and Public His o y. New Yo k: S a e Uni e si y o New Yo k P ess.
F isch, M.H. (2011). “F om A Sha ed Au ho i y o he Digi al Ki chen, and Back”.
Bill, A.; Filene, B.; Koloski, L. (eds), Le ing Go? Sha ing His o ical Au ho
-
i y in a Use -Gene a ed Wo ld. Philadelphia: Pew Cen e o A s & He i -
age, 126-37.
Glassbe g, D. (2001). Sense o His o y: The Place o he Pas in Ame ican Li e. Am-
he s : Uni e si y o Massachuse s P ess.
Goode, L. (2005). Jü gen Habe mas: Democ acy and he Public Sphe e. Lon-
don: Plu o.
Go don, T. (2010). P i a e His o y in Public. Exhibi ion and he Se ings o E e y-
day Li e. Lanham (Ma yland): Rowman & Li le ield Publishe s, INC.
Go don, T. (2013). The Spi i o 1976. Comme ce, Communi y, and he Poli ics
o Commemo a ion. Amhe s ; Bos on: Uni e si y o Massachuse s P ess.
G eenbe g, D. (1998). “‘His o y is a Luxu y’: M s. Tha che , M . Disney, and (Pub-
lic) His o y”. Re iews in Ame ican His o y, 26, 294-311.
G ele, R.J. (1981). “Whose Public? Whose His o y? Wha is he Goal o a Public
His o ian?”. Public His o ian, 3, 40-8.
G oo , J. de (2009). Consuming His o y. His o ians and he i age in con empo a y
popula cul u e. London; New Yo k: Rou ledge.
G oo , J. de (2015). “In e na ional Fede a ion o Public His o y Plena y Ad-
d ess: On Genealogy”. The Public His o ian, 37, 102-27.
Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency

Pe os Apos olopoulos
Wha is he Public o Public His o y? Be ween he Public Sphe e and Public Agency
magazén e-ISSN 2724-3923
2, 2, 2021, 311-328
327
Habe mas, J. (1991). The S uc u al T ans o ma ion o he Public Sphe e. An In-
qui y in o a Ca ego y o Bou geois Socie y. Camb idge (MA): MIT P ess.
Igge s, G.G. (1997). His o iog aphy in he Twen ie h Cen u y: F om Scien i ic Ob-
jec i i y o Pos mode n Challenge. Hano e (NH): Wesleyan Uni e si y P ess.
Igge s, G.G. (2002). “The P o essionaliza ion o His o ical S udies and he Guiding
Assump ions o Mode n His o ical Though ”. K ame , L.; Maza, S. (eds), A Com-
panion o Wes e n His o ical Though . Ox o d: Blackwell Publishe s, 225-42.
Kelley, R. (1978). “Public His o y: I s O igins, Na u e, and P ospec s”. The Pub-
lic His o ian, 1(1), 16-28.
Kelman, A. (2005). A Misplaced Massac e: S uggling o e he Memo y o Sand
G eek. Camb idge: Ha a d Uni e si y P ess.
Kne el, P. (2009). “Public His o y. The Eu opean Recep ion o an Ame ican
Idea?”. Le end E goed. Vakblad oo Public Folklo e & Public His o y, 6(2), 4-8.
Landsbe g, A. (2004). P os he ic Memo y: The T ans o ma ion o Ame ican Re-
memb ance in he Age o Mass Cul u e. New Yo k: Columbia Uni e si y P ess.
Landsbe g, A. (2015). Engaging he Pas . Mass Cul u e and he P oduc ion o His-
o ical Knowledge. New Yo k: Columbia Uni e si y P ess.
Linen hal, E. (1995). P ese ing Memo y. The S uggle o C ea e Ame ica’s Hol-
ocaus Museum. New Yo k: Columbia Uni e si y P ess.
McKee, A. (2005). The Public Sphe e: An In oduc ion. Camb idge: Camb idge
Uni e si y P ess.
Me ingolo, D. (2012). Museums, Monumen s, and Na ional Pa ks: Towa d a New
Genealogy o Public His o y. Amhe s : Uni e si y o Massachuse s P ess.
Plampe , J. (2010). “The His o y o Emo ions: An In e iew wi h William Red-
dy, Ba ba a Rosenwein, and Pe e S ea ns”. His o y and Theo y 49, 237-265.
Ranke, L. on (2010). The Theo y and P ac ice o His o y. Edi ed by G.G. Igge s.
London; New Yo k: Rou ledge.
Reddy, W.M. (2002). “An h opology and he His o y o Cul u e”. K ame , L.;
Maza, S. (eds), A Companion o Wes e n His o ical Though . Ox o d: Black-
well Publishe s, 277-96.
Roge , A. (2015). Sla e y, he P esiden ’s House a Independence Na ional His o -
ical Pa k, and Public Memo y. Philadelphia: Temple Uni e si y P ess.
Rosenwein, B.H. (2002). “Wo ying Abou Emo ions in His o y”. The Ame ican
His o ical Re iew, 107, 821-845.
Rosenwein, B.H. (2006). Emo ional Communi ies in he Ea ly Middle Ages. New
Yo k: Co nell Uni e si y P ess.
Rosenzweig, R.; Thelen, D. (1998). The P esence o he Pas . Popula Uses o His-
o y in Ame ican Li e. New Yo k: Columbia Uni e si y P ess.
Rymsza-Pawlowska, M.J. (2017). His o y Comes Ali e: Public His o y and Pop-
ula Cul u e in he 1970s. Chapel Hill: Uni e si y o No h Ca olina P ess.
Soda o, A. (2018). Exhibi ing A oci y. Memo ial Museums and he Poli ics o Pas
Violence. New Je sey and London: Ru ge s Uni e si y P ess.
S an on, C. (2006). The Lowell Expe imen . Amhe s : Uni e si y o Massachu-
se s P ess.
S o ey, B.A. (1992). “Hanging by Fou Pine Needles (O , Con essions o a Pub-
lic His o ian)”. Public His o ian, 14, 11-22.
Up on, D. (2015). Wha Can and Can’ Be Said: Race, Upli , and Monumen Build-
ing in he Con empo a y Sou h. New Ha en: Yale Uni e si y P ess.
Wojdon, J.; Wiśniewska, D. (eds) (2021). Public in Public His o y. London; New
Yo k: Rou ledge.