Who Owns History

Abstract

This paper consists more of questions about comparative historiography than of answers. They fall under four headings: Who defines what counts as history? Who lets histories get published and sold? Who controls the documents which are the raw material of history? What can historians do if ownership in one or more of these areas is obstructing their work? Comparative historians of historiography face a dilemma: should works from some cultures, or by some members of our culture, which they would have regarded as histories but which don't meet the criteria of modern academic historiography, be included? Outright or more subtle political censorship, repressiveness of the academic institutions which prepare professional historians, and market forces vary widely; comparative historians must take these into account rather than relying simply on reading historical literature. Historians can seldom get access to all the evidence they need because of the interests of governments and private citizens in concealing some of their actions. Various forms of legal action, such as freedom of information laws, can be used to gain such access but these have been passed in only a minority of countries. The paper concludes with a discussion of the difficulties in taking these factors into account in comparative historiography and of the logic of comparison, concluding that taking some point of view is essential if intended comparisons can rise above the level of juxtapositions.