Version classiqueVersion mobile

Encyclopédie des historiographies : Afriques, Amériques, Asies

 | 
Nathalie Kouamé
, 
Éric P. Meyer
, 
Anne Viguier

Volume I of The Encyclopaedia of Historiography: Historical Sources and Genres

Nathalie Kouamé, Éric P. Meyer et Anne Viguier

Résumé

Le choix d’ouvrir l’Encyclopédie des historiographies sur le thème des sources et genres historiques procède de la volonté de considérer d’abord ce qui fonde, justifie et nourrit les récits sur le passé, soit d’une part les traces matérielles laissées par celui-ci, et d’autre part les diverses catégories de discours et de pratiques censés rendre compte de ce passé. Cette première étape dans la fabrication de l’Encyclopédie n’est pas sans soulever de redoutables questions, aussi bien sur le plan pratique que sur le plan épistémologique : à partir de quel moment peut-on dire qu’une source historique est « africaine », « asiatique », « sud-américaine » ou « océanienne », lorsque l’Occident pèse plus ou moins dans l’histoire de sa production et/ou de son usage ? Comment représenter de manière équilibrée dans l’Encyclopédie les multiples sociétés humaines ? Cette recherche d’une certaine représentativité est-elle d’ailleurs pertinente ? De quelle manière rendre compte des innombrables connexions et circulations entre les mondes – passés ou présents – qui racontent leur histoire ?

Texte intégral

1The first volume of the Encyclopaedia of Historiography: Africa, America, Asia (EHA) "The Impetus Behind the Encyclopaedia of Historiography", is concerned primarily with the question of historical “sources” and “genres”. Since the production of the EHA represents a long-term work and so requires us to proceed in stages, it seemed important first to consider what determines, justifies, and sustains narratives about the past: first, material traces left by the past, or traces acknowledged as such (historical sources); second, the various categories of discourse and practices which report this past, real or imaginary (historical genres).

2Therefore, the question of historical content is not directly raised in this volume, even if our presentation of sources and genres opens up to view whole chapters of the past and present history of non-Western societies. This first part of the EHA is, in fact, very much a work of history: individuals and societies are to be found in it; the facts and events they produce or undergo; their habitus and their dreams; and the time which passes and transforms the entirety of the social and cultural matter of which they are made.

Defining “Sources” and “Genres”

3The EHA considers as “source” any human trace from the past, or whatever is considered a legacy of the past that is de facto used, or potentially usable, in formulating an historical narrative. A source may be a newspaper article, a song, a piece of pottery, a skeleton, a monument, a tool, a picture scroll, a map, a speech, a legal text, a religious object, a film, a coin, the outline left in the ground by a building. In fact, the list of sources is endless, for almost everything that humans and their societies have produced, may, more or less, aid in shaping their historical narratives—when there is a historical narrative. It goes without saying that historical sources are not necessarily produced with the intention of restoring or commemorating the past: a good number were intended only to talk about the present of the people who made them.

4The EHA means by “genre” the way a past narrative is constructed and presented. Examples of genre include biography, epic, myth, poetry, theatre, ritual performance, pictorial art, music. These terms represent some of the different forms that narratives of the past may take.

5While written documents are numerous, they have not been privileged. This is why we have not a priori excluded the “prehistoric” periods from our field of study. This is why as well certain archaeological sources and the narratives created to interpret them also appear in this volume, although we do not aim to be exhaustive.

6These sources and genres, which intermingle with one another, and are even perfectly joined at times (for example, a book may be autobiographical, or an epic may take the form of a film), enable the creation of a variety of historical narratives. These narratives may be individual or collective — noting that the distinction between individual and group is itself subject to discussion—, voluntary or involuntary, spontaneous or sophisticated, uncultured or learned, simple or complex, esoteric or “exoteric” (and in this latter case, the question is that of specialization, or professionalization of the one who produces the historical narrative, as well as the problem of the multiplicity, difference and divergence of the discourses and practices of historiography). Of course, these narratives may hold themselves up, rightly or wrongly, as being just and true, or they may be clearly biased, erroneous and/or fallacious (posing the problem of the truth of historical discourse).

Historiography and the Passion for the Archive

  • 1 See Ibn Khaldûn, 1958, The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History, Translated from the A (...)

7The “passion for the archive” and its demands is not an invention specific to the West. Professional historians of other epochs and cultures have shared this passion. An example of such a passion for the archive is that of the Arab historian Ibn Khaldûn (1332-1406), who in the 14th century in his famous Book of Lessons (Kitâb al-‘Ibar), established a list of the qualities required of an historian. The historian must, for instance, make use of “numerous (written) sources”. Ibn Khaldûn states that in order to write his own magisterial work on universal history, he “read the works of others and probed into the recesses of yesterday and today”. However, Ibn Khaldûn also notes that his work was the result of information he collected during his various voyages. He also emphasizes the need to evaluate older material in light of more recent information, the obligation to make use of “greatly varied knowledge”, and the importance of having “a good speculative mind and thoroughness”. Finally, he recommends the historian use critical judgement, for “blind trust in tradition is an inherited trait in human beings (…) the evil of falsehood is to be fought with enlightening speculation”.1

  • 2 We note here that the sinologist Séraphin Couvreur (1835-1919), translator of Shujing, b (...)

8The Chinese tradition of historiography rivals the Arab tradition in the importance it accords to the study of source material. The oldest of all history books still in existence is the Book of documents (Shujing), which has been compiled from the beginning of the Zhou dynasty (12th century B.C.) to the beginning of the Han dynasty (3rd century B.C). As its English title indicates, the book is a collection of documents relating to the history of China, from its foundation (i.e. from the first —mythical—monarchs, Yao and Shun) up to the Zhou dynasty.2 These documents are mainly decrees, speeches, and the counsels of monarchs and ministers. A millennium later, in his magisterial history of China (from 403 B.C. to 959 A.D.) entitled Comprehensive Mirror in Aid of Governance (Zizhi tongjian), Sima Guang (1019-1086) well illustrates the desire to construct an historical narrative founded on varied source material carefully considered by a developed critical sense, following in the footsteps of Sima Qian (c.145 – c. 87 B.C.), the Chinese “Father of History” in his Records of the Grand Historian.

9It therefore appears proper to open the EHA with a discussion of sources and genres. Such a beginning is certainly representative of the current Western historiography that, as the rightful inheritor of 19th century Positivism, considers the study of sources as the very foundation of the historian’s craft. Indeed, the editors and contributors to the present volume have been trained, for the most part, in European and North American traditions of historiography and reflect their methods and aims: basing a narrative of the past upon sources that have been meticulously and rigorously sought, inventoried, dated, collated, and analysed in an objective manner free of all political, religious, and moral considerations. It is true as well that these protocols may possibly not correspond to the reality of a great deal of historical writing in the African, South American, Asiatic, and Oceanic worlds. Yet, to those who may perhaps think that in its structure and in its content, the EHA means to impose perspectives on historiography which are not usual practice outside of contemporary Western culture and its zones of influence, thereby insidiously reintroducing this Western way of thinking precisely in the place it wishes to keep free of it, we insist on the fact that it is desirable not to oppose too hastily Western and non-Western in terms of the production of historiography.

Taking into Account Cultural Inter-Mixing and Cultural Hybridization and Giving Priority to Local Examples of Historiography

10In addition to the problem of the legitimacy of the two topics chosen for the first published volume of the EHA, there is also the question of the cultural identity of the sources and genres treated. At what point can we say, for example, that a source is “African”, “Asiatic”, “South-American”, or “Oceanic”—just to take a couple of the epithets nearest at hand—when the West has more or less influenced the production of a source and/or its use? Without situating itself in the usual perspective of global history, the EHA nevertheless naturally raises the issues of military, political, economic and/or cultural imperialism present in societies situated outside of Europe and North America. But what is an encyclopaedia of historiography about “Africa, America, Asia” expected to do with all the instances of contact, connection, circulation, and assimilation, as well as influence, borrowing, inter-mixing, and hybridization which inevitably leave their traces on those regions which have been the target of diverse Western imperialist designs since at least the 15th century? What do we make of the historical sources and genres produced by Christian missionaries, who themselves took into account the history and the socio-culture of the zones converted to Christianity, and even actively promoted these native cultures in their letters, chronicles, bi-lingual dictionaries, and maps? Should these documents produced by missionaries be compiled by the EHA? Or should the Encyclopaedia ignore the sources and the genres of Western colonial administrations which, quite often, make up for the absence or the paucity of purely indigenous sources, constituting, as it were, the only available body of documents that nevertheless reveal something about the regions treated and have often served as a reference to formulate the historical discourse critical of the colonial enterprise? Is a source or an historical genre produced under Western influence (in other words, in the language and within the framework of the thinking of the colonizer) by local peoples who are not, wrongly or rightly, perceived as having emerged from the class of Western elites (such as the “Blacks” or the “Indians” of the Americas) the subject of the EHA?

11We have considered these issues in a pragmatic manner, by deciding to remain true to the spirit of this Encyclopaedia: first, to make the general public aware of historical sources and genres that are little known outside of their place of production; second, to present these sources and genres in such a way so as to place into relief the non-Western aspect of their form, content and use, while emphasizing all the aspects of re-appropriation if they do bear the signs of any kind of Western influence. In the end, what is at stake is the act of writing, which requires choosing the means of representing the complexity of reality.

Finding a Balance?

  • 3 We commend in passing the classic magisterial General History of Africa carried out by (...)

12If our object is the ensemble of societies and cultures other than those born of or developed within the geographical boundaries we call Europe and North America, how then do we guarantee that within the Encyclopaedia of Historiography there will not only be a place for each one of these worlds, but one that faithfully reflects its reality in historiography? Is it possible to do so? Should it be attempted? The present version of the EHA forces us to confront these painful questions because, in fact, all these cultural regions and periods have not produced historical sources and genres in equal quantities. Nor have professional historians investigated them in equal degrees. And it is obvious that without looking for sources and genres, there are no sources or genres. We are forced to admit that counterbalancing “worlds that are (almost) empty historiographically speaking” (if they were completely empty, they would be completely unknown) are “worlds that are (nearly) full historiographically speaking” (if they were completely full, the historian would have nothing to discover). Of course, between these two worlds there exists a whole spectrum of various circumstances. In the first category would be included the ancient worlds of Sub-Sahara Africa, where the professional historian today can barely collect tangible sources for close analysis (architectural sources, written or graphic sources).3 The second category would include regions under Chinese cultural influence, in which the written texts number in the millions, and the archaeological sites in the hundreds of thousands. The present content of the EHA naturally reflects this state of affairs: the entries concerning imperial China (221 B.C. – 1911 A.D.), gathered with the aim of being exhaustive and often representing ancient epochs, are numerous in comparison to those entries devoted to Africa. It is useful to note as well that there are more historians today specializing in Chinese culture than specialists of the various African worlds (and for reasons other than the relative quantity of available sources and genres).

The Limits of an Encyclopaedia in the Making

  • 4 P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs (eds), 1960-2005, (...)

13The limits of the first volume of the EHA may be explained as well by the difficulty at times in recruiting authors, when, for example, potential authors feel that there already exists an adequate number of bibliographic tools at their disposal and/or they are currently working on other projects. The reader will note the limited number of entries devoted to the Middle East, to the Maghreb, to Central Asia and South East Asia, not to mention Egypt, ancient Mesopotamia, medieval Islam, and the Persian and Ottoman Empires and Tibet. These are key areas of study that an encyclopaedia of historiography cannot afford to overlook. The existence of the magisterial Encyclopaedia of Islam, a long-term undertaking, may explain, but only makes up for a part of the gap in the present volume.4 In addition, the required professional networks are lacking to help address certain types of sources: disciplines such as archaeology or literature may appear to be insufficiently developed. Consequently, we plan later to publish a group of new entries on sources and genres all the while keeping in mind that no work can do justice to all these topics. Furthermore, the reader will find the question of historical sources and genres raised in the next volume of the EHA, which will be devoted to the figures, schools of thought, and debates of historiography.

Notes

1 See Ibn Khaldûn, 1958, The Muqaddimah. An Introduction to History, Translated from the Arabic by Franz Rosenthal in Three Volumes, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London, p. 7-15.

2 We note here that the sinologist Séraphin Couvreur (1835-1919), translator of Shujing, believed that the “Chou King is not strictly speaking a history, but rather a collection of old documents relating to the history of China”.

3 We commend in passing the classic magisterial General History of Africa carried out by UNESCO since 1964.

4 P. Bearman, Th. Bianquis, C.E. Bosworth, E. van Donzel, W.P. Heinrichs (eds), 1960-2005, Encyclopaedia of Islam, Second Edition, Brill, Leiden, 12 volumes. Publication of the third edition (K. Fleet, G Krämer, D. Matringe, J. Nawas, E. Rowson, eds) started in 2007.

Le texte et les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont sous Licence OpenEdition Books, sauf mention contraire.

Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search