Suchergebnisse

In history, the idea of uncertainty has taken on many forms, both in the methodological field, with for example the definition of historical sources as traces, and in epistemological terms, with the major question of causality or even ontological with the infinite extension of the "historian's territory". Nevertheless, more than an operative notion perhaps, it has long remained as an invariant, a kind of epistemological madguard (a "residue" according to the term adopted by Marc Bloch) of historical knowledge. The question of the historicization of the idea of uncertainty in the historical discipline is related to the place assigned to it in the epistemology of historians, always in tension with the desire for scientificity and truth that has long structured the disciplinarization and professionalization of history. Where do we place the cursor between uncertainty and truth for historical knowledge? This could be the guiding question to periodize the place of the idea of uncertainty in history and roughly distinguish after a predominantly scientist phase linked to the professionalization of the historical discipline (19th-first 20th century), a phase of doubts about history's ability to tell the truth, which became clear at the end of the 1970s and could conveniently be characterized as the great reversal of uncertainty in history, which, from an embarrassing limitation to reducing as much as possible, became an operating principle for defatalising history. However, it will be necessary to question this periodization, more or less modelled on the general evolutions of the sciences, marked in particular by the rise in power of probabilistic and indeterministic approaches and more or less directly related to what is perceived by the majority as the rise of uncertainty in the historical world itself ; this will require taking into account another level of analysis that adds to the weight of uncertainty in history, the moral and political dimension around the question of the social function of history.

"How important has the sea been in the development of human history? Very important indeed is the conclusion of this ground-breaking four-volume work. The books bring together the world's leading maritime historians, who address the question of what difference the sea has made in relation to around 250 situations ranging from the earliest times to the present. They consider, across the entire world, subjects related to human migration, trade, economic development, warfare, the building of political units including states and empires, the dissemination of ideas, culture and religion, and much more, showing how the sea was crucial to all these aspects of human development. Specific maritime subjects covered include shipbuilding, navigation, the exploitation of maritime resources, the social background of sailors and maritime communities, piracy, the financing and organisation of maritime endeavour, and many other subjects. Overall, the books represent an immense resource for all historians, providing concise overviews of virtually every subject in maritime history

This introductory article presents a short overview of the evolution of populism since the late-19th century forms to the most recent Western European formulas. Starting from a short conceptual inquiry, the article provides a precise analytical picture of the different changes in the form and content of populism across time and space. Previously connected with radical right formulas, the article illustrates how different new populist parties have partly embraced a left-wing program such as in the case of Podemos in Spain or La France insoumise in the French case. The last part of the article provides possible scenarios for the future. In particular, despite the recent evolutions in the Austrian, Dutch and French elections, the analysis stresses the fact that the populist mood has progressively influenced traditional politics (i.e. the topic of immigration, the search of charismatic figures, the questioning of representative democracy). The article concludes with an open question about the future of a populist from below.

The Modern French Political History has been significantly transformed over the last twenty years. Apart from the pluralism of disciplinary approaches -law, political science, history- Pierre Rosanvallon's seminal work represents a landmark for the specialists of the political period inaugurated by the French Revolution. After presenting this historiography, we take a precise example in order to show the interest of these new approaches. Even though the history of the Conseil économique et social has been relatively neglected by scholars, it remains the third French constitutional assembly of the twentieth century. It held a specific position within the institutional framework in that it was not elected by universal suffrage but was considered by its members to be one of the rare "institutional representations of civil society". The successive attempts to create the Conseil économique et social during three different republics -in 1925, 1946 and 1958- offer an opportunity to connect the theoretical debates on the competing forms of democracy and the specific institutional experiences. By focusing on the composition, responsibilities and functioning of the different councils as well as on the debates which consistently accompanied their establishment, a series of questions emerge about elections, notions of representation, and sovereignty in modern political regimes. Inspired by Pierre Rosanvallon's political historical perspective, this study offers a new approach on the institutions, "corporate" tendencies, and interest groups of the French republican model.