Professional Documents
Culture Documents
:Beyond
To Psychohistory
the Annales
PatrickHalston
'*rffi @
de-t{,$il}
6,
History480
Dr. Baskerville
Dec.I I 1999
The difficultpart of writing apaper onthe Annales school of history is figuring outhowto
include Foucault in with historiansof the Annales school.There is an obvious way to do this:
simply borrow from Peter Burke the explanation that they both sharethree distinctive features,
concern with structure of beliefs; or from Patrick Hutton that they are both concernedwith the
civilizing process. But a clue as to why this might be thelazy person'sapproach,is that Foucault
has come up many times before in earlier readingshaving nothing to do with the Annales, (in
referred to by scholarswho have something more than simply broadening our conceptionsof the
past in mind. Patrick Joyce,for example,has Foucaultin mind when he criticizes institutions
hegemonicbattle with the global capitalistic system. My point is that Foucault's name comesup
when scholarsare not necessarilyconcernedwith the past at alI, but overtly concernedwith
overthrowing certain aspectsof our present.In this regard, Foucault can be read as anti-thetical
challengeto the history professionitself. This essaywill tackle this question:Is Foucaultjust
'history' mansion,or is he a
anothercivilized tenantoccupying a room in a very big
mansion, becauseit is an unfaithful characterizationof the way some historians have included
Foucault within historiography. Instead,we have Hutton who ends his essayon the Foucault
the puzzlesof rhetoric with their ongoing need to addressthe substantiveproblems that have
long servedas the stuff of history" (102). Hutton implies that Foucault is not'tacked' on to
- )!.>
otherwise ignore them) but could infiltrate their studiesmore profoundly dependingon the
historian. For: "The style of the historian's inquiry as well as the quantity of data assembled
'room/mansion' metaphorbecauseof
determinesthe way it is rendered"(101). But, I chosethe
its associationwith Lawrence Stone and his attempt to transform what could be potentially
dangerousideologiesto the history professioninto oneswhich actually help give the profession
legitimacy.
the method and tools of analysisto write a new, political history of culture"(46), as Patricia
O'Brien suggests,then he belongsin any discussionof the Annales school and the history of
"traced new routes upon the map of cultural history. They have visited subjectshitherto
It is with the help of Furet that we can imagine irreconcilable differences between Foucault
and the Annales school. Furet doesnot specifically credit his insightsto Foucault,but he does
'mask' of truth, to seethe true face of power.
what Foucault encourages:to look beneaththe
Furet suggeststhat any attempt to seethe Annales school as a contribution to our understanding
of the past is a farce. Instead,"[h]aving been enticedout of its position as the soothsayerof
national destiny and prophet of human progress,history has studied the social sciencesonly the
History has extendedits rangewith the Annales school,with its focus on ordinary people, in
order to better competewith sociology and anthropology- its rivals among university disciplines
- for supremelegitimacy Q90. The result is a colonizationof the other disciplines and a loss
for the discipline of history. "[T]he tyranny of vaguenessand imprecision (403)" that
is re-constitutedandnot interpreted. Historians,on the other hand, can "still maintain the notion
of [their] superiority on the grounds that fthey] alone can study certain objects exhaustively,
from every angle . . . fand t]hus, in the midst of a crisis in historicist history, the historian has
loss" (394).
structural changethat is important and not changein content. What is important to Furet is how
Foucault, what is important to note in the French Revolution, is that the stateenlarged its
influence and presencein peoples' lives. Furet, I believe, showshow Foucault,can be usedto do
to the Annales historians, what they claim to do to conventional historians: depict their work as
superficial, misleading,as skimming the surfaceof the past, and "neglecting the'deep structures'
This is Foucault "as an Attila [relishing] the scorchedhistorical terrain he leavesin his wake"
(O'Brien, 30). Itis this Foucaultwhich doesnot belong to any particular school of historical
neednot simply awakennew kinds of history, but potentially, work to eliminate the historical
Finally, is this Foucault which does not belong within any of the thematic subdivisions of
say that to provide another impression would require structural change:the coursewould need to
be divided into two sections,perhaps,- one which includesall the voices which maintain
*Ll-
Foucault does,after all, imagine history as being divided into separatestages- epistemes- just
as the Annales scholarsdo, but he refusesto allow anyoneof them the resemblanceof being at
as every other period. Consideringthis coursewas borderedat one end by Carl Becker, who
proclaimed "every man a historian", and at the other with Foucault, we can imagine that the
hundred years, we may yet put out the fire, and contain Foucault after all within a discussion of
mentalites. In order to do this, I will needto spring Hayden White free from the discussionof
narrative, and introduce him to this discussionof mentalities. White introduced us to different to
In this descriptionwe seeFoucault's assaulton theory; Joyce's and Biersack's senseof rapid
changeswhether threatening to make all previous historical work irrelevant as with Joyce, or of
even recognizethe concernsof authorslike PeterBurke that the Annales school lacks details on
how changeoccurs.
Further, Foucault's claim that different epistemesare entirely unrelated to each other is
challengedby White's accountof the petit duree. According to Marcus, White saw a similar
ironic style dominating the nineteentwenties and thirties - a period equally suspiciolF of grand
What Marcus's conceptionof an ironic period doesis deflateFoucault's belief that he stands
Marcus would credit him with (ust) another intellectual current; one which "takes full account of
intractable contradiction, paradox, irony, and uncertainty in the explanation of human activities"
(15). He believesthat this can lead to a lot of creativescholarlywork, but it doesnot repudiate
all the intellectual trends that went before it. "Older dominant frameworks are not so much
sumulative growth in knowledge, through the creative rediscovery of older and persistent
might be encouragedby this conceptualization- all he needsto do is sit still and, like KingLear,
'ironic' fire storm, awaiting a oromantic' new dawn ahead.
endurethrough the fierce
'different' motives for the scholars,
We would be cautiousif we listenedto White, to assume
'power', as Foucault
living in different periods,i.e., they are not primarily motivated by
'truth' in line with what scholarshave been doing for generations:
suggests,but by a pursuit of
Furet's judgement of why scholarshave been attractedto the Annales school. Furet not only
-6-
implied they were motivated by a need to 'colonize' otherdisciplines in an attempt to deny them
'escape'from the trying, tensetimes of the
influence, but also that thesescholarssoughtan
'free space'of the long duree,where political issuescould be
nineteensixties. The unchanging,
ignored as unimportant in the larger schemeof things, is presentedas an antidote to their present
are not primarily interestedin truth, but in solitude. This, again,is not the kind of thinking which
believe) fleeing humansto engagewith numberswhich can't hurt them; or Patrick Joyce's
motives of historians, we could quietly allow White to contain Foucault as another intellectual
trend; but we should at least recognizethat this could be representedasjust another attempt to
'escape'anxieties.
Foucault - there is something apocalyptic about him, and not White, his relativism can be
Whothen...whocouldluse?... Of course!Iknowjusttheone!
annoyingandunhelpful.
There is a scholarI would like to introduceyou to - Lloyd deMause- who although I'm sure
you've heard of him, you may not yet have appreciatedhis importance:for he is a man slightly
aheadof his time. His fellowhistorians respondto him inthe sameway apatient doeswhen his
(DeMause,Foundationsof Psychohistory.301).
communicate that I am now limiting the attention I give other schoolsof historical thought,
(although, be sure, I will give my fellow studentsmy full attention) and that I am merging with
the one school - psychohistory- which will occupy most of my time hereafterin the next