Werner Zimmermann Entangled History PDF

Wesleyan University
Beyond Comparison: Histoire Croise and the Challenge of Reflexivity

Author(s): Michael Werner and Bndicte Zimmermann
Source: History and Theory, Vol. 45, No. 1 (Feb., 2006), pp. 30-50
Published by: Wiley for Wesleyan University
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3590723 .
Accessed: 23/10/2014 12:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and Wesleyan University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to History
and Theory.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
History and Theory45 (February2006), 30-50
? Wesleyan University 2006 ISSN: 0018-2656
BEYOND COMPARISON: HISTOIRE CROISEE

AND THE CHALLENGE OF REFLEXIVITY1
MICHAELWERNERAND BENEDICTEZIMMERMANN
ABSTRACT
This article presents, in a programmaticway, the histoire croisee approach,its methodological implications and its empirical developments. Histoire croisde draws on the
debates about comparativehistory, transferstudies, and connected or shared history that
have been carriedout in the social sciences in recent years. It invites us to reconsiderthe
interactionsbetween differentsocieties or cultures,eruditedisciplines or traditions(more
generally,between social and culturalproductions).Histoire croisee focuses on empirical
intercrossingsconsubstantialwith the object of study, as well as on the operations by
which researchersthemselves cross scales, categories, and viewpoints. The article first
shows how this approachdiffers from purely comparative or transfer studies. It then
develops the principles of pragmaticand reflexive induction as a major methodological
principleof histoire croisee. While underliningthe need and the methods of a historicization of both the objects and categories of analysis, it calls for a reconsiderationof the way
history can combine empirical and reflexive concerns into a dynamic and flexible
approach.
I. INTRODUCTION
Over the past twenty years, ideas about the conditions and ways in which sociohistorical knowledge is produced have undergone significant changes. Two sets
of factors, stemming both from internal developments in the social sciences as
well as from the more general political context, have jointly produced their
effects. On the political side, the changes that have taken place since 1989, coupled with the expansion and proliferation of spaces of reference and actionglobalization, to use the now standard term-have left their mark on research
paradigms, bringing new importance to the question of reflexivity. On the intelthe
lectual side, the "culturalist turn," by emphasizing the specificity-indeed,
irreducible nature-of the local has contributed to refining our understanding of
the differentiated functioning of societies and cultures, while at the same time
bringing about a fragmentation of knowledge, thereby showing it in a relativist
1. This article draws upon argumentsfirst developed in Annales HSS 58:1 (January-February
2003), 7-36 and in De la comparaison a l'histoire croisde, ed. Michael Werner and B6nedicte
Zimmermann(Le Genrehumain42) (Paris:Seuil, 2004), 15-49. We extend our warmthanksfor their
suggestions and comments to Sebastian Conrad,Yves Cohen, AlexandreEscudier, HeidrunFriese,
Jean-YvesGrenier,RainerMariaKiesow, Andr6Orlean,JacquesPoloni, Jay Rowell, LucetteValensi,
and PeterWagner,with whom we have discussed various aspects of our histoire croisde proposal.

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY
31
light.2The questions resultingfrom the collapse of colonialism have, moreover,

had an impact on the previouslydominantposition of "Western"social sciences.
Suspected of intellectual "imperialism"and strategies of political domination,
their universalistic ambition has been weakened.3 These developments have
promptedinternalreorganizationswithin each discipline, as well as new stances
regardingthe place of the social sciences within the largerapparatusof the production of knowledge.
These shifts raise questions relating directly to research practices, the way
sources and the fields themselves are approached.The proposal for histoire
croisee that we elaborateon herein fits within this general trend. The notion of
histoire croisde, which has been employed for almost ten years now in the social
and human sciences, has given rise to differing usages. In most cases, it refers,
in a vague manner,to one or a group of histories associated with the idea of an
unspecifiedcrossing or intersection;thus, it tends towarda mere configurationof
events that is more or less structuredby the crossing metaphor.Sometimes, these
usages refer to crossed histories in the plural. However, this common and relatively undifferentiateduse should be distinguishedfrom researchpractices that
reflect a more specific approach.In the latter case, histoire croisde associates
social, cultural,and political formations,generally at the nationallevel, that are
assumed to bear relationships to one another.4 It furthermoreengages in an
inquiryregardingthe very process of intercrossingin practicalas well as intellectual terms. The present article aims at clarifying this more specific approach
throughan explorationof the concept of histoire croisee within currenttheoretical and methodological debates. Once so specified in empirical and theoretical
terms, histoire croisle can make a useful contributionto most of the humanand
social-science disciplines.
Three preliminaryremarkswill guide our examination.First, histoire croiste
belongs to the family of "relational"approachesthat, in the mannerof comparative approachesand studiesof transfers(mostrecentlyof "connected"and "shared
history")examine the links between varioushistoricallyconstitutedformations.5
2. For a presentationof the problematicin a Germanresearchfield, see Ute Daniel, Kompendium
Kulturgeschichte:Theorien,Praxis, Schliisselwdrter(Frankfurt:SuhrkampVerlag,2001).
3. The literaturein this area is flourishing. For a recent overview, refer to the dossier "Une histoire a l'6chelle globale" in Annales HSS 56:1 (2001), 3-123. For an example of a case study, see
Daniel Dubuisson,L'Occidentet la religion: Mythes,science et iddologie (Paris:Editions Complexe,
1998).
4. On this type of usage, see in particularMichael Werner,"Le prismefranco-allemand:a propos
d'une histoirecrois6e des disciplines litt6raires,"in EntreLocarno et Vichy:Les relations culturelles
franco-allemandes dans les anndes 1930, ed. Hans Manfred Bock, Reinhart Meyer-Kalkus, and
Michel Trebitsch(Paris:CNRS-Editions, 1993), I, 303-316; Le travail et la nation: Histoire croisde
de la France et de 1'Allemagne,ed. B6n6dicteZimmermann,Claude Didry,and PeterWagner(Paris:
Editionsde la Maison des sciences de l'homme, 1999). For a more completepresentationof the concept of histoire croisee applied to problems of transnationalhistory, see Michael Werner and
B6n6dicteZimmermann,"Vergleich,Transfer,Verflechtung:Der Ansatz der Histoire croisee und die
Herausforderungdes Transnationalen,"Geschichte und Gesellschaft 28 (2002), 607-636.
5. Ourinterestin histoire croisee first arose throughour own practiceof comparativemethodsand
transferstudies. The limits that this practice came up against for certainobjects of study were the
startingpoint for this reflection.That is why we preferto discuss histoire croisde in relationto comparativehistory and transferstudies, while considering"connected,""shared,"and "entangled"histories more as alternativesto these first two approaches,in the same manneras histoire croisde,even

32
But, while these approaches mainly take the perspective of "reof buriedreality,the stresslaid by histoirecroisee on
establishment/rehabilitation"
a multiplicity of possible viewpoints and the divergences resulting from languages, terminologies,categorizationsand conceptualizations,traditions,and disciplinary usages, adds anotherdimension to the inquiry.In contrastto the mere
restitutionof an "alreadythere,"histoire croisde places emphasis on what, in a
self-reflexive process, can be generativeof meaning.
Second, histoire croisee takes up anew the discussions carriedout over recent
years regardingcomparativeapproaches,transfers,and, more generally, sociocultural interactions. In particular,it offers new leads for getting beyond the
stalematein the debate between comparativistsand transferspecialists,6without
diminishing the contributionsmade by these two approacheson which it draws
heavily. It therebymakes it possible to apprehendentirely new phenomenausing
renewed frameworksof analysis, and insofar as it does so, it presentsopportunities for exploring, from a particularangle, more general questions such as those
concerningscales, categories of analysis, the relationshipbetween diachronyand
synchrony,and regimes of historicityand reflexivity.Third,histoire croisle raises the question of its own historicity througha threefold process of historicization: throughthe object, the categories of analysis, and the relationshipsbetween
if each of them has particularities.On Connected History, see The Making of the Modern World:
ConnectedHistories, Divergent Paths (1500 to the Present), ed. Robert W. Strayer(New York:St.
MartinsPress, 1989); SanjaySubrahmanyam,"ConnectedHistories:Notes towarda Reconfiguration
of Early ModernEurasia," ModernAsian Studies 31:3 (1997), 735-762; Serge Gruzinski,"Les mondes mel6s de la Monarchiecatholiqueet autres 'connectedhistories',"Annales HSS 56:1 (2001), 85117. The expression "sharedhistory"was originally used to designate the sharedhistory of different
ethnic groups and was then extended to the history of gender,before being used in the discussion of
"post-colonialstudies."See Ann LauraStoler and FredericCooper,"BetweenMetropoleand Colony.
Rethinkinga ResearchAgenda,"in Tensionsof Empire: Colonial Culturesin a Bourgeois World,ed.
Ann LauraStoler and FredericCooper (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1997), as well as
StewartHall, "Whenwas the Post-Colonial?Thinkingat the Limit,"in The Post-Colonial Question:
CommonSkies, Divided Horizons, ed. lain Chambersand Lidia Curti(London:Routledge, 1996). For
the concept of Entangled History, see Jenseits des Eurozentrismus:Postkoloniale Perspektivenin
den Geschichts- und Kulturwissenschaften,ed. Sebastian Conrad and Shalini Randeria(Frankfurt:
Campus Verlag, 2002), as well as Shalini Randeria, "EntangledHistories of Uneven Modernities:
Civil Society, Caste Solidarities and Legal Pluralism in Post-Colonial India," in Unraveling Ties:
From Social Cohesion to New Practices of Connectedness,ed. Yehuda Elkana et al. (Frankfurt:
CampusVerlag,2002), 284-311.
6. See, in particular,Michel Espagne, "Sur les limites du comparatismeen histoire culturelle,"
Geneses 17 (1994), 112-121; Heinz-GerhardHaupt and JtirgenKocka, Geschichte und Vergleich:
Ansditzeund Ergebnisse international vergleichender Geschichtsschreibung(Frankfurt:Campus
Verlag, 1996); ChristopheCharle, "L'histoirecompar6edes intellectuels en Europe:Quelques points
de m6thodeet propositionsde recherche,"in Pour une histoirecompardedes intellectuels,ed. Michel
Trebitsch and Marie-Christine Granjon (Paris: Editions Complexe, 1998), 39-59; Johannes
Paulmann, "InternationalerVergleich und interkulturellerTransfer:Zwei Forschungsansitze zur
europdiischenGeschichte des 18. bis 20. Jahrhunderts,"Historische Zeitschrift 3 (1998), 649-685;
Hartmut Kaelble, Der historische Vergleich: Eine Einfiihrung zum 19. und 20. Jahrhundert
und historischeKomparatistik,
(Frankfurt:CampusVerlag, 1999); MatthiasMiddell, "Kulturtransfer
Thesen zu ihrem Verhiltnis," Comparativ 10 (2000), 7-41; Michael Werner,"Comparaisonet raison," Cahiers d'dtudes germaniques 41 (2001), 9-18; Gabriele Lingelbach, "Ertriigeund Grenzen
zweier Ansditze:Kulturtransferund Vergleich am Beispiel der franz6sischen und amerikanischen
Geschichtswissenschaftwiihrenddes 19. Jahrhunderts,"in Die Nation schreiben: Geschichtswissenschaft im internationalen Vergleich, ed. Christoph Conrad and Sebastian Conrad (Gtittingen:
Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht,2002), 333-359.

33
researcherand object. It thus provides a toolbox that, over and beyond the historical sciences, can be appliedacross a numberof otherdisciplines thatcombine
past and presentperspectives.7
II. COMPARISONAND THE HISTORICITYOF ITS OBJECTS
Those who engage in the comparativemethod and attemptto control the effects
thereof--whether they work on past or contemporarymaterials-are aware of a
numberof difficultiesthat, while presentin diverse situations,all involve the tension between the method andthe object. To simplify, these difficulties arise from
the fact that, on the one hand, comparison is a cognitive operationthat, by its
nature,functionsin accordancewith a principleof binaryoppositionbetween differences and similarities and, on the other hand, is applied in the social sciences
to empirical subjects that are historically situated and consist of multiple interpenetratingdimensions. The problems of self-monitoring and the continuous
readjustmentof the process resulting therefrom are not in themselves insurmountable;they are partof the work of comparativists,all of whom deal with this
in their own manner.8The basic questions neverthelessremain;five of them that
underliethe problematicof histoire croiselewill be addressedmore precisely.
(1) The first difficulty concernsthe position of the observer. From the standpoint of the basic scheme of the cognitive process, the comparative approach
assumes a point of view externalto the objects that are compared.In addition,to
limit optical illusions, the vantage point should ideally be situated at equal distance from the objects so as to producea symmetricalview. Finally,logical consistency in the comparisonimplies that the point of observationbe stabilized in
space and in time. In the areaof observationof social and culturalfacts, however, such a vantage point, even if it is theoretically imaginable, is impossible to
attainin the practiceof research.Scholars are always, in one manneror another,
7. Histoire croisde is partof a long-standingdebate on the relationshipbetween history and social
sciences. The debate was initiated at the startof the last centuryin France by Simiandin "M6thode
historiqueet science sociale," Revue de synthese historique (1903), 1-22 and 129-157. In Germany,
it was led by Simmel and Weber,in particularin the latter'swork on economic history,which, while
relying on case studies, reasons on the basis of epistemological considerations.For more recent steps
in the debate, see the dossier "Histoireet sciences sociales," Annales ESC 38:6 (1983), and the special edition devoted to the "critical turn" (Annales ESC 44:6 [1989]); Jean-ClaudePasseron, Le
raisonnementsociologique: L'espace non-poppdriendu raisonnementnaturel (Paris:Nathan, 1991);
and L'historicit, de l'action publique, ed. Pascale Laborierand Danny Trom (Paris,PUF [Collection
Curapp],2003).
8. On recent French discussions concerning comparison, see in particularStrategies de la comparaison internationale,ed. Michel Lallementand Jan Spurk(Paris:CNRS-Editions,2003); Marcel
Detienne, Comparerl'incomparable (Paris: Seuil, 2000); Qui veut prendre la parole, ed. Marcel
Detienne (Le genre humain) (Paris: Seuil, 2003); the dossier in Annales introduced by Lucette
Valensi, "L'exercicede la comparaisonau plus proche, a distance: le cas des societes plurielles,"
Annales HSS 57:1 (2002), 27-30; the collective Franco-Americanwork on repertoiresof evaluation
coordinatedby Michele Lamontand LaurentTh6venot,RethinkingComparativeCulturalSociology:
Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States, ed. Michble Lamont and Laurent
Thevenot (Cambridge,Eng.: CambridgeUniversity Press, 2000); as well as PatrickHassenteufel,
'
"Deux ou trois choses que je sais d'elle: Remarques propos d'experiences de comparaisons
in
au
concret:
Les
Dimarches, formes de l'experience et terrains
ne'thodes
europeennes," Curapp,
d'investigation en science politique (Paris,PUF [Collection Curapp],2000), 105-124.

34
engaged in the field of observation.They are involved in the object, if only by

language,by the categories and concepts used, by historicalexperience or by the
preexistingbodies of knowledge relied upon. Their position is thus off center.It
is also subject to variationsin time and is never perfectly stabilized. The question of positioningleads to seeking correctiveproceduresthatwould make it possible to account for these dynamics.
(2) The second difficulty is related to the first. It concerns the choice of the
scale of the comparison.Whether situated-to take but a few examples-at the
level of the region, the nation-state,or the civilization, none of these scales is
absolutelyunivocal or generalizable.They are all historicallyconstitutedand situated, filled with specific content and thus are difficult to transposeto different
frameworks.One need only think, for example, about the problemsraised by the
concept of civilization, as developed underparticularhistoricalconditions, when
trying to establish it as a generic basis of comparison.9In practice,it is certainly
possible to get aroundthis obstacle by integratinginto the comparativegrid a margin of deviationadaptedto each particularcase under study.But such deviations
may well underminethe relevance of the results, in particularin cases of multilateralcomparisonsthatrequiretakinginto accounta largenumberof parameters.
(3) In addition,the questionof scale exercises indirectinfluence upon the definition of the object of the comparison. Such definition is never neutral,but is
instead always markedin advance by a particularrepresentationbringing into
play specific historically-constitutedcategories. Whether dealing with objects
that are clear and simple in appearanceand thus endowed with a certain degree
of obviousness (such as the unemployed, college students, or kinship ties), or
more complex configurations(such as the educationalsystem'0 or the relationships between public and privatespaces), it can easily be shown that the analytical grids diverge not only on the basis of the scale selected but also as a function of the particularityof the field areas, and the designations and the research
traditionson which the scholar relies. This can lead to great distortions; for
instance, for one and the same object of study, the scale chosen for one of the
entities of the comparisonturns out not to be relevant for the other.This raises
the problemof the historicaland situatedconstitutionof the objects of the comparison.To avoid the trapof presumingnaturalnessof the objects, it is necessary
to pay attentionto their historicity,as well as to the traces left by such historicity on their characteristicsand their contemporaryusages."I
9. On comparisonof civilizations, see Kaelble, Der historische Vergleich,79-92, as well as Jtirgen
Osterhammel,Geschichtswissenschaftjenseits des Nationalstaats: Studienzu Beziehungsgeschichte
und Zivilisationsvergleich(G6ttingen, Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht, 2001). Analogous observations
may of course be made with respect to the nationaland regional levels.
10. For example, on distortionsabout the notion "Privatdozent"in the history of higher education
systems, see FrankSchultheiss, "Un inconscient universitairefait homme:le Privatdozent,"Actes de
la rechercheen sciences sociales 135 (2000), 58-62.
11. It should be pointed out that Marc Bloch, in his programmaticlecture at the Oslo Congress,
had alreadyunderscoredthe necessity of historicizingthe categoriesof analysis.The differencesarising in research on feudalism due to the use of the French term tenancier and the German term
Hiriger, in his view, offer the comparativistan enlightening area of study. Marc Bloch, "Pourune
histoire comparee des soci6t6s europ6ennes,"Revue de synthese historique 4 (1928), reprintedin
Marc Bloch, MWlangeshistoriques I (Paris: Editions de I'EHESS, 1963), 16-40, especially 38ff.

35
(4) This historicizationof the objects and problematicsmay give rise to conflicts between synchronic and diachronic logics. The comparative approach
assumes a synchronic cross-section or, at the very least, a pause in the flow of
time, even where comparativistsare also dealing with processes of transformation or comparisons over time. Even in these cases, they must fix the object,
freeze it in time, and thus in a sense suspendit. If the scholardelves too deeply
into the description of a chronological sequence of events leading to specific
changes, it will be difficult to justify why, in the comparative grid-whether
explicit or implicit-one element of the process is emphasized and anotherneglected. The result is a search for balance that in practiceturnsout to be tenuous
and unstable.
(5) An additionaldifficulty stems from the interactionamong the objects of
the comparison.When societies in contactwith one anotherare studied,it is often
noted that the objects and practicesare not only in a state of interrelationshipbut
also modify one anotherreciprocallyas a resultof theirrelationship.This is often
the case, for instance, in the human and social sciences where disciplines and
schools evolve throughmutualexchanges;in culturalactivities such as literature,
music, and the fine arts; and in practicalareas, such as advertising, marketing,
organizationalcultures, or even social policies. Comparativestudy of areas of
contactthatare transformedthroughtheirmutualinteractionsrequiresscholarsto
reorganizetheir conceptualframeworkand rethinktheir analyticaltools.'2
These five difficulties all relate to the problem of articulationbetween an
essentially synchronicanalyticallogic and historicallyconstitutedobjects.'3The
challenges they raise for the scholar requiregreaterconsiderationof the historical dimension of both the tools and objects of study.Transferstudies, specifically groundedin historicalprocesses, meet this requirement,but they nevertheless
pose additionalproblems.
III. TRANSFERSAND FRAMES OF REFERENCE
While the comparativemethod tends to focus on synchrony,inquiry into transfers is clearly situatedin a diachronicperspective.'4Whatevertemporalscale is
12. In his introductionto Ethnic Groups and Boundaries: The Social Organization of Culture
Difference (Bergen and Oslo: Universitetsforlaget,1969), 9-38, FredrikBarth had already underscored the necessity of taking into account the interactionat the bordersfrom which spreadthe distinctive traitsof the entities understudy-here "ethnicgroups."But while assigning to them a determinative role, Barth limits the transformationaleffects of interactionsto the processes of definition
and the characteristicsof the groups, without calling into question the cohesion of the group or the
dichotomizingfunction of the borders.Although Barthdefines ethnicity at the borders,he still conceives of it as structuredby the principles of sameness and difference.
13. Jean-Claude Passeron has addressed them as difficulties of the "sociological reasoning"
caught between the two extremes of experimentationand historicization.See Passeron, Le raisonnementsociologique, esp. 57-88.
14. For a presentationof the transferapproach,see Michel Espagneand Michael Wemer,"Laconstruction d'une r6f6rence culturelle allemande en France, genese et histoire," Annales ESC 42:4
(1987), 969-992. For additionalwork contributedthroughthe study of Germano-Britishtransfers,see
im 19.
AneignungundAbwehr. InterkulturellerTransferzwischen Deutschland und GrofJbritannien
Jahrhundert,ed. Rudolf Muhs, Johannes Paulmann,and Willibald Steinmetz (Bodenheim: Philo,
1998); for the relationshipsbetween America and Europe, see Transfertsculturels et metissages:

36
used, such an inquirypresupposesa process that unfolds over time. In analyzing

phenomenaof displacementand appropriation,it reconstituteschains of events.
Consequently,inquiryinto transfersis not based on an assumptionof static units
of analysis, but on the study of processes of transformation.As in the case of the
comparativemethod,the contributionsof this researchapproachare obvious and
the lines of inquiryopened up have proven fertile, not only at the level of transfers between nationaland regional cultures,but also in specific areas,such as the
relationshipsbetween disciplines, artistic practices, the history of writing, and
economic history.'5But althoughtransferstudies offer responses to questionsleft
unansweredby the comparativeapproach,they also create their own blind spots.
Four in particularstand out. For simplicity's sake, we will restrictourselves to
transfersbetween nationalunits, in the belief that the blind spots we identify are
structuralproblemsthat affect all areas of researchinto transfers.
(1) The first problemconcernsframes of reference.While focusing on transactions between two poles, a transferimplies a fixed frame of referenceincluding points of departureand arrival.Any descriptionand any analysis of transfers
presupposes a beginning and an end through which the process under study
becomes intelligible and interpretable.In the case of transnationalexchanges,
these points of departureand arrival are generally located within the national
societies and culturesthat are in contact.Consequently,the original situationand
the situationresultingfrom the transferare apprehendedthroughstable national
referencesthat are presumedknown: for example, "German"or "French"historiography;the particularpatternsof urbanizationof GreatBritainor Russia; and
the like.
(2) The fixed natureof the points of departureand arrivalis reflected in the
invariabilityof the categories of analysis. The categoriesused to analyze a transfer belong to the differing national perspectives. In other words, not only the
object of the transferbut the activities associated with it as well-translation, for
example-are apprehendedthroughconcepts elaboratedwithin national traditions. Even when measuring acculturationgaps and/or resistance to acculturation, these phenomenaare evaluatedin terms of static models. The significance
of a transferis determinedon the basis of categories whose historicityand lability must be set aside for the purposesof the investigation.
(3) More generally,both of the above-mentioneddifficultiesreveal a reflexivity deficit due to a lack of controlover importantself-referentialloops. Thus, if on
the level of relationshipsbetween nationalunits, the initial purposeof a transfer
Amdrique / Europe (XVIe-XXe siecles)/Cultural Transfer America and Europe: 500 Years of
Interculturation,ed. LaurierTurgeon, Denys Delage, and R6al Ouellet (Sainte-Foy: Les presses de
l'universit6Laval, 1996).
15. For these various examples, see in the order listed Jean-Yves Grenier and BernardLepetit,
"L'expdriencehistorique:A propos de C.-E. Labrousse,"Annales ESC 44:6 (1989), 1337-1360; "Le
paysage en Franceet en Allemagne autourde 1800,"ed. ElisabethDecultot and ChristianHelmreich,
Revue germanique internationale 7 (1997); the special section compiled by Fr6d6ricBarbier,"Le
commerce culturelentre les nations,"Revue de synthhse 1:2 (1988), as well as Helga Jeanblanc,Des
Allemands dans l'industrie et le commerce du livre a Paris (1811-1870) (Paris: CNRS-Editions),
1994; and Sidney WilfredMintz, Sweetnessand Power: ThePlace of Sugar in ModernHistory (New
York:Viking, 1985).

37
study was to show that borderswere more permeablein order to underminethe

mythof the homogeneityof nationalunits,the resultis thatthe categoriesof analysis reintroduce,througha sort of boomerangeffect, the national referencesthat
were to be put in question.The study of exchanges does lead to a richerapproach
of the cultureof reception:it underlinesforeign contributionsand helps to historicize the concept of nationalculture.But the representationitself of this cultureis
not really called into question.Thus, ratherthansofteningthe nationalgrounding
of historiographiesand humanand social-science disciplines, researchinto transfers paradoxicallyoften leads to strengtheningit. More generally,to the extentthat
the referencepoints of the analysisare not questionedas such, transferstudiesrun
the risk inherentin any approachthatoverlooks its self-referentialdimension:they
only reinforcethe prejudicesthatthey seek to undermine.
(4) Last is the issue of reciprocityand reversibility.While the projectrelating
to transfersdid not lay down a rule on this point right from the start,empirical
surveys have generallyinvolved simple linear processes, from one cultureor one
discipline to another,following a logic of introduction,transmission,and reception. Even in those relatively rarecases of triangularconfigurations,the object is
limited to successive transfers.16Quite often, however, a situationis more complex than this, bringing into play movements between various points in at least
two and sometimes several directions.Such activities may follow each other in a
temporalsequence-in some cases, this is referredto as "re-transfer"17-butmay
also overlapone another,partiallyor wholly. They may also crisscrossand engender a numberof specific dynamicsthroughvariouskinds of interrelationships.All
of these cases are resistantto any analysis that merely establishes a relationship
between a point of departureand a point of arrival.The study of these different
configurations requires devising theoretical frameworks and methodological
tools thatmake it possible to examine phenomenaof interactioninvolving a variety of directionsand multipleeffects. To our mind, histoire croisee with its crossing figure provides a guide to thinkingabout such configurations.
IV. AN INQUIRYINTO INTERCROSSINGS
In the literal sense, to cross means "to place or fold crosswise one over the
other."'8This creates a point of intersection where events may occur that are
capable of affecting to various degrees the elements present dependingon their
resistance,permeabilityor malleability,and on their environment.The notion of
intersectionis basic to the very principle of histoire croisee that we intend to
elaboratehere. This centralityof intersectionsimplies four consequencesthat we
wish to highlight.
16. See Philologiques IV Transfertsculturels triangulaires France - Allemagne - Russie, ed.
KatiaDimitrievaand Michel Espagne (Paris:Editions de la Maison des sciences de l'homme, 1996).
17. Cases of this type form partof the original researchagenda on transfers,but they have rarely
been followed up by empirical studies.
18. It is only by extension that the termtakes on the meaning"to meet in passing, esp. from opposite directions." Webster'sNinth New Collegiate Dictionary (Springfield MA: Merriam-Webster,
1983), p. 309.

38
First, the notion of intersectionprecludes reasoning in terms of individual

entities, consideredexclusively in themselves, with no external reference point.
Histoire croisee breaks with a one-dimensionalperspective that simplifies and
homogenizes, in favor of a multidimensionalapproachthat acknowledgesplurality and the complex configurationsthat result from it. Accordingly,entities and
objects of researchare not merely considered in relation to one anotherbut also
throughone another,in terms of relationships,interactions,and circulation.The
active and dynamicprincipleof the intersectionis fundamentalin contrastto the
static frameworkof a comparativeapproachthat tends to immobilize objects.
Second, referringhistoire croisee to relationalconfigurationsand active principles also requirespaying particularattentionto the consequencesof intercrossing. The view that something occurs within the crossing process is a basic
assumptionof histoire croisie, which deals with the crossings as well as with
their effects and repercussions.The approachdoes not limit itself to an analysis
of the point of intersectionor a moment of contact, it takes into account more
broadly the processes that may result therefrom,as suggested moreover by the
term "history"in the designationhistoire croisde.
Third,to cross is also to crisscross, to interweave,that is, to cross over several times at a tempo that may be staggered.This process-orienteddimension is a
fundamentalaspect of inquiryinto any intercrossings.It points towardan analysis of resistances,inertias,modifications-in trajectory,form, and content-and
new combinations that can both result from and develop themselves in the
process of crossing. Such transformationsare moreover not necessarily limited
to elements in contact: they may also affect their local or remote environment
and manifestthemselves at a deferredmoment.
This brings us to the fourth point: the entities, persons, practices, or objects
that are intertwinedwith, or affected by, the crossing process, do not necessarily
remain intact and identicalin form.19Their transformationsare tied to the active
as well as the interactivenatureof their coming into contact. Such transformations are usually based on reciprocity(both elements are affected by their coming into contact), but may also derive from asymmetry (the elements are not
affected in the same manner).In this respect, intercrossingcan be distinguished
from intermixing. The latter emphasizes the specificity of the product of
hybridization(the interbreeded)and brings us beyond the originalelements, the
previously identified constitutive entities of the convergence.20In contrast, histoire croisle is concernedas much with the novel and originalelements produced
by the intercrossingas with the way in which it affects each of the "intercrossed"
parties,which are assumedto remainidentifiable,even if in alteredform. This is
anotherhallmarkof histoire croise'e.
To investigate relational configurationsthat are active and asymmetrical,as
well as the labile and evolving natureof things and situations, to scrutinize not
only novelty but also change, is one of the aims of histoire croisde.Insteadof an
19. On the philosophicalfoundationsof a discussion on transformationsbroughtaboutby coming
into contact with the Other, see in particularMichael Theunissen, The Other: Studies in the Social
Ontologyof Husserl, Heidegger, Sartre,and Buber [1965] (Cambridge,MA: MIT Press, 1984).
20. On intermixing,see Serge Gruzinski,La pensdemdtisse(Paris:Fayard,1999), especially 33-57.

39
analyticalmodel-which would result in a static view of things-our aim is on

the contraryto articulatevariousdimensions and place them into movement;this
requiresa toolbox that, while integratingthe well-tested methodological contributions of the comparativeapproachand transferstudies, makes it possible to
apprehendin a more satisfactoryway the complexity of a composite and plural
world in motion, and therebythe fundamentalquestion of change. The failureto
achieve this is a weak if not blind spot within comparative,and to some extent
transfer,approaches.21
The relational,interactive,and process-orienteddimensionsof histoire croiste
lead to a multiplicity of possible intercrossings.We shall not seek here to enumerate all of them or to propose a typology. We shall restrictourselves to identifying four broad families based on the object and its operator.The intercrossing thatwithout doubt most immediatelycomes to mind is that which is intrinsically related to the object of research (1). But intercrossingmay also occur in
viewpoints or ways of looking at the object (2). It may likewise be envisaged in
terms of the relationshipbetween the observerand the object, thereby implicating issues of reflexivity (3). If we identify these empirical and reflexive dimensions for heuristicpurposes, the various types of intersectionsthat result nevertheless interweave with one another. Intercrossingnever presents itself as an
"alreadygiven" that need only be observed and recorded. It requires an active
observer to constructit and only in a to-and-fromovement between researcher
and object do the empirical and reflexive dimensions of histoire croise'ejointly
take shape. Intercrossingthus appears as a structuringcognitive activity that,
through various acts of framing, shapes a space of understanding.By such
means, a cognitive process articulatingobject, observer,and environmentis carried out. The intercrossingof spatial and temporal scales, which can be both
inherentin the object as well as the result of a theoretical and methodological
choice, is a particularlyrevealing example of this interweavingof the empirical
and reflexive dimensions (4).
(1) Intercrossingsintrinsic to the object. Intercrossingsin this case have an
empiricalgroundingand constitutethe object of research.A particularcrossing,
togetherwith the analysis of its componentelements and the mannerin which it
operates,as well as its resultsand consequences,standsin the centerof the study.
In practice,it is often extremelydifficultto dissociatethese variousaspects andto
isolate them accuratelybecausecrossings and intercrossingscan never be reduced
to linearschemasor simple causalities.Dependingon the circumstances,one or the
otherof these aspectsis placedat the centerof the analysisdependingon the entry
point selected in the process.The emphasiscan be placed on the historicaldimension constitutingthe intersectingelements and the history of the intercrossing
21. To the extent thatthey are concernedwith transformations,transferstudiesdo in fact deal with
certain aspects of change, but limitationto transfersalone does not make it possible to account for
radicalchange where new things, categories, practices,or institutionsarise for the first time. In other
words, in many cases transferstake partin the change, but understandingof the latteris not generally exhaustedby the former.The same applies to connected history, which certainly takes into considerationcertainaspects of change, but hardly makes possible analysis of change as such.

40
itself.22The inquirythus focuses on momentsand phenomenaprecedingthe intercrossing as well as on its modalities.But it is also possible to concentrateon what
happens afterwards,on the results and processes more or less directly brought
about by the intercrossing.23Regardlessof the point of departurechosen, intercrossing functionsas the basic matrixfor constructionof the object that, depending on the circumstances,will be more or less closely connectedto analysesof the
momentsprecedingor subsequentto the points of intersectionproperlyspeaking.
In this respect,we are dealing with novel objects of researchthat the methodologies of comparativeand transferstudiesgenerallyhave difficultygrasping.
(2) The intercrossingofpoints of view. Here we are dealing in the areaof intersecting fields, objects, and scales, that is, the area of things that the researcher
crosses, whereas the previous intersectionsoccur without his or her direct intervention (even if the mere fact of identifyingan object as coming within the scope
of histoire croisee is itself a significant act of interventionon the part of the
researcher).In contrastto the precedingtype of intersectionthat the scholarmay
try to describe or to understand,while not necessarily being familiar with all of
the details, some of which will always remainbeyond his or her control, this second type of intercrossing implies a structuring,voluntary intellectual action,
throughwhich are defined the contoursnot only of the object of study but of the
line of inquiryas well. This raises the question of the constructionof the object
both from an empiricalas well as from an epistemological standpoint.Thus, for
example, a study of the reception of Tacitus's Germaniain Europebetween the
fifteenth and the twentiethcenturies can reveal instances of historical intersections-the circulationof argumentsand theirreinterpretation
accordingto national contexts-but it may also place emphasison the necessity of crossing different
nationalreceptionsto create a researchtopic of a Europe-widedimension.
Basically, the construction of the object, which may be envisaged in a
Weberianperspectiveas the adoptionof one or more particularpoints of view on
the object,24is alreadythe result of various acts of crossing. To the extent that it
may evolve in the course of the inquiry,the chosen vantage point implies new
intersections.Scholars are in fact led to account for the way in which their own
choices do or do not integrate other perspectives, to cross different potential
points of view, and if necessary to engage in a process of translationor balanc22. See, for instance,the researchby SebastianConradon the makingof Japanesehistorythrough
the confluence between local tradition and importation of European national historiography.
SebastianConrad,"Laconstitutionde l'histoirejaponaise:Histoire comparee,transferts,interactions
transnationales,"in Wernerand Zimmermann,ed., De la comparaison a l'histoire crois6e, 53-72.
"National"historiographiesgeneratedduringthe period of colonialism may likewise be analyzed in
terms of intercrossing.See, for example, Romila Thapar,"La quete d'une traditionhistorique:l'Inde
ancienne,"Annales HSS 53:2 (1998), 347-359.
23. This is true of the study carriedout by Kapil Raj on the effects of the intercrossingbetween
Indianand English methodsin the birthof Britishcartographyat the beginningof the nineteenthcentury,which thus no longer appearsas an authentically"English"creation,but as the result of an interaction between two distinct traditionsthat mutuallynourishedone another.Kapil Raj, "Connexions,
croisements, circulations:Le detour de la cartographiebritanniquepar l'Inde, xvIIIe-xlxe siecles,"
in Wernerand Zimmermann,ed., De la comparaisona l'histoire croisde, 73-98.
24. The expression "pointof view" is used here not in a subjective sense, but in the literal meaning of point of observationthat determinesan angle of view. Max Weber,On the Methodologyof the
Social Sciences, (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1949), 81ff.

41
ing of the approachesresulting from the specific vantage points. These various
points of view are also socially structured,reflectingparticularpositions in competition or power struggles.25Consequently,variationamong them also means,
in empiricalterms, the scholar's taking into accountdiffering social viewpoints:
of the governorsand the governed,workersand employers,and so on. Whatmatters here is less the reflexive element inherentin any work involving intellectual positioningthanthe technical processes of intercrossingas a whole thatinform
it. By this is meant,for example, the ways of managingthe articulationbetween
several possible vantage points as well as the numerous links between these
viewpoints to the extent that they are acknowledgedto be historically constituted. In this respect,the framingof the object and the positioning of the researcher
in which objects and points of view are creatinvolve a "doublehermeneutic,"26
ed throughintercrossinginteractions.
(3) The relations between observer and object. Once one begins to reason in
terms of a cognitive approach, the question of the relationship between the
researcherand the object necessarily arises and in a sense becomes inherentto
the two precedingtypes of intercrossing.The question concerns, first and foremost, the way in which the preliminarystages of the inquiryshape the object and
conversely the way in which the characteristicsof the object influence the parameters of the inquiry. The question of the intercrossing relations between the
observerand the object is especially pertinentwhere the researcheris requiredto
work with a language, concepts, and categories that are not part of his or her
sphere of socialization.27In the case of comparisons and transferstudies, this
gives rise to an asymmetryin the relationshipsbetween researchersand theirvarious field areas or sources. It would seem evident that a researchertrained in
France28involved in a Franco-Germanicresearch project could not deal with
both sides in a symmetricalmanner,if only by reason of the impact of the mastery of the subtleties of language and of categories entailed, and more broadly
because of his or her own placement within French society. It would be both
futile and naive to try to free oneself once and for all from this problemarising
in any scientific inquiry.29One may nevertheless attemptto limit its effects by
25. PierreBourdieuplaced great emphasis on this point in his work as a whole. See in particular
Choses dites (Paris:Editions de Minuit, 1987), 155ff.
26. In the sense used by Anthony Giddens, in New Rules of Sociological Method (London:
Hutchinson, 1974).
27. This question has been treatedin particularby Jocelyne Dakhlia, "'La culture n6buleuse'ou
l'Islam 'al'6preuve de la comparaison,"Annales HSS 56 :6 (2001), 1177-1199, here 1186ff.
28. We know well the complexity of this type of designation,especially to the extent that courses
of studyare increasinglyinterconnectedandprovide forms of integrationthatblurthe variousassignments to categories of membership.
29. This problemis particularlyacute in the social sciences whereinquiriesare subjectto an ongoing tension between proceduresdesigned to be objective and descriptive,on the one hand,and a normative and prescriptivedimension, on the other,resulting from the fact that the researcheris also a
social being. However, many studies have shown that this problemalso exists in the hard sciences.
See, in particular,Bruno Latour and Steve Woolgar, LaboratoryLife: The Social Constructionof
Scientific Facts (London: Sage, 1979); Barry Barnes, David Bloor, and John Henry, Scientific
Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1996); Dominique
Pestre, "Pourune histoire sociale et culturelledes sciences: Nouvelles d6finitions, nouveaux objets,
nouvelles pratiques,"Annales HSS 3 (1995), 487-522, with a descriptionof the state of researchand
numerousbibliographicalreferences.

42
trying to objectify the multivariousrelationshipsto the object-keeping in mind

that such objectificationwill always remain incomplete-in orderbetterto control the biases that might be introducedinto the results of the inquiry.The way
the researchertakes hold of the object, the object's resistance, the presuppositions implied by the researcher'schoices, or even the way in which the relationship between researcherand object may change in the course of the inquiry-for
example, througha redefinitionof the inquiry or a readjustmentof its methodology and analytical categories-these are all aspects of a reflexive process in
which the position of the researcherand the definition of the object are susceptible to evolving in which the respective shifts in each are a productof specific
interactions.The space of understandingopened up by the inquirydoes not exist
a priori,but is createdin the dynamic intercrossingrelationshipsbetween both.
Thus, the empiricaland reflexive dimensions are simultaneouslyconfigured.
(4) The crossing of scales. The questionof scale offers an opportunityto illustrate the way in which the empirical and reflexivity can be articulatedwithin a
perspective of histoire croisde. Such an approachraises the problem of spatial
and temporalunits of analysis, and of choosing themdependingon the object and
the adoptedpoint of view. To approachthe question of scale both as a dimension
intrinsicto the object and as a cognitive and methodologicaloption chosen by the
researcherimplies a break with a logic of pre-existingscales to be used "off the
shelf," as is often the case for national studies or for the major dates in the
chronology of politics that are relied on as naturalframeworks of analysis,
defined independentlyof the object.
The problemof scale has alreadybeen the subject of much discussion. It has
been raised in particularin terms of the relationship between the micro and
macro levels and explored for instance in Italianmicrostoria,the Frenchmultiscopique approach,as well as the GermanAlltagsgeschichte. Despite their particularities,30all threeapproacheshave in common the idea that the level of scale
is primarilya matterof the researcher'schoice of level of analysis. Thus, microstoria adopts the micro level to show how it can enrich and advance the categories traditionallyused in macro analysis.31 Its most radical followers go so far
as to bring all phenomena down to a micro scale by means of an underlying
assumptionaccordingto which the micro level engendersthe macro.32The proposal for multiscopiqueapproachesdeveloped in Francefor its partaims to avoid
such a dichotomous perspective, by conceiving of the variation of scales (jeu
d'dchelles) as a change of focus to vary points of view on the past. By means of
this principle,the local comes to be a "particularmodulation"of the global and,
at the same time, a "different"version of macro-social realities.33Finally,
30. For the positioningof the multiscopiqueapproachin relationto microstoria, see, in particular,
Paul-Andr6Rosental, "Construirele macro par le micro: FredrikBarth et la microstoria,"in Jeux
d'echelles: La micro-analyse a l'experience, dir. Jacques Revel (Paris, Editions de I'EHESS/
Gallimard/Seuil,1996), 141-159.
31. See, in particular,Carlo Ginzburg and Carlo Poni, "La micro-histoire,"Le debat, no. 17
(1989), 133-136; Giovanni Levi, Le pouvoir au village: La carrikred'un exorciste dans le Piemont
du XVIIesiecle [1985] (Paris:Gallimard, 1989).
32. MaurizioGribaudi,"Echelle, pertinence,configuration,"in Jeux d'echelles, 113-139.
33. Jacques Revel, "Micro-analyseet constructiondu social," in Jeux d'echelles, 15-36, here 26.

43
Alltagsgeschichtebases its choice of the micro and criticism of the macro on an

anthropologyof social relationships.34However,by treatingthe question of scale
as exclusively a matterof theoreticaland methodologicalchoice, microstoria,the
multiscopiqueapproach,and Alltagsgeschichtedo not really deal with the problem of the empirical articulationand matchingof different scales to the level of
the object itself. Scale, however, is as much a matter of the concrete situations
particularto the objects studied as it is of intellectualchoice.
As a general rule, empirical objects relate to several scales at the same time
and are not amenableto a single focal length. This is the case, for example, of
the make-up of the category of the unemployed in Germanybetween 1890 and
1927.35Constructorsof this category act, simultaneouslyor successively, on different levels: municipal,national,even international,in such a mannerthat these
varying scales are in partconstitutedthroughone another.These scales could not
be reducedto an externalexplicatory factor but ratherare an integralpart of the
analysis. Thus, from a spatialpoint of view, the scales referback to the multiple
settings, logics, and interactionsto which the objects of analysis relate.36Froma
temporalperspective,they raise the question of the time frames of both observer and object and of their interferencesat the confluence between the empirical
and methodology.The focus broughtto bear on their couplings and articulations
makes it possible to account for interactionsthat are part of complex phenomena that cannot be reducedto linear models.
The transnationalscale provides a good illustration of this double aspect.
Within a histoire croisee perspective, the transnationalcannot simply be considered as a supplementarylevel of analysis to be added to the local, regional, and
national levels according to a logic of a change in focus. On the contrary,it is
apprehendedas a level that exists in interactionwith the others, producing its
own logics with feedback effects upon other space-structuringlogics. Far from
being limited to a macroscopic reduction, the study of the transnationallevel
reveals a network of dynamic interrelations whose components are in part
defined throughthe links they maintainamong themselves and the articulations
structuringtheir positions.37Viewed from this perspective, histoire croisee can
open up promising lines of inquiry for the writing of a history of Europe that is
not reduced to the sum of the histories of member states or their political relations, but takes into accountthe diversity of transactions,negotiations,and reinterpretationsplayed out in differentsettingsarounda greatvarietyof objects that,
combined, contributeto shaping a Europeanhistory "aigeomitrie variable."
34. Histoire du quotidien, ed. Alf Ltitdke [1989] (Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de
l'homme, 1994); Sozialgeschichte, Alltagsgeschichte, Mikro-Historie, ed. Winfried Schulze
(G6ttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1994); MikrogeschichteMakrogeschichte: komplementdir
oder inkommensurabel?,ed. JtirgenSchlumbohm(Gdttingen:Wallstein, 1999).
35. B6n6dicteZimmermann,La constitutiondu chomage en Allemagne: Entreprofessions et territoires (Paris:Editions de la Maison des sciences de l'homme, 2001).
36. MartinaL6w underlines in her sociology of space this relational and labile dimension of
spaces composed of objects and individuals that move beyond the systems of geographical,institutional, political, economic and social coordinatesthat aim to stabilize spaces by establishingboundaries. MartinaLbw, Raumsoziologie(Frankfurtam Main, SuhrkampVerlag,2001).
37. For additionaldevelopments on the relationshipsbetween histoire croisee and the transnational dimension, see Wernerand Zimmermann,"Vergleich,Transfer,Verflechtung,"628ff.

44
An approachbased on intercrossingsargues in favor of going beyond reasoning in termsof micro versus macro,emphasizinginstead their inextricableinterconnections. The notion of scale does not refer to the micro or the macro level,
but ratherto the various spaces within which are rooted the interactionsmaking
up the process analyzed. In other words, the relevant scales are those that are
constructedor broughtinto play in the very situationsunder study.They are spatial as well as temporal, and their variations are not solely dependent on the
researcher,but also result from the protagonistsin the situations under study.
Intercrossingis thus obviously an aspect of both the realm of the object of study
and the realm of the proceduresof researchrelatedto the researcher'schoices. In
its most demanding version, histoire croisle aims to establish connections
between both of these realms.
V. HISTORICIZINGCATEGORIES
Connectingthe empiricalobject to the researchprocedureopens the centralquestion of categories and categorization.Given the pitfalls of asymmetriccomparisons-postulating a similarity between categories on the basis of a simple
semantic equivalent, without questioning the often divergent practices encompassed by them--or negative comparisons-evaluating a society based on the
absence of a category chosen because of its relevance to the initial environment
of the researcher-great care is called for in assessing the analytical impact of
the categories used. Such care can be exercised throughsystematic attentionto
the categories in use, in the dual sense of categoriesof action and of analysis.38
While any form of reasoningproceeds by categorization,such categorization
often remains implicit, even if any comparativeresearch should theoretically
explicate the categories referredto. To know whereof and whence one is speaking: this twofold issue is centralto histoire croise'e.Since categories are both the
productof an intellectualconstructionand the basis for action, they unavoidably
pose the question of the relationshipbetween knowledge and action, both in the
situationsstudied and in terms of the protocols of inquiry.The focus upon them
clears a potentialpath to bring togetherthe empiricaland reflexivity.
This focus on categories is not so much aimed at categories in themselves as
at their various constitutive elements and how they fit together.These elements
are subjectto variationsand fluctuationsover time and space. To get beyond the
essentialismof categoriesimplies reasoningin termsof situatedprocesses of categorization-with the process referringback to the temporaland spatialinteractions that make up the category.Categories such as "landscape,"for examplethe same could be shown for "unemployment,""culture,""old age," "sickness,"
"workers,""white collar managers,"and so on-are historically dated and partially structuredby the hypotheses that helped to form them. With respect to
"landscape"and its equivalents-always rough approximationsin other languages and cultures-such formationhas been progressive and has broughtinto
38. For an example of such work on categories, see, in particular,L'enquete sur les categories:
De Durkheima' Sacks, ed. BernardFradin,Louis Qu6r6, and Jean Widmer (Raisons pratiques,5)
(Paris: Editions de I'EHESS, 1994); see also the special section "Hommage a Bernard Lepetit:
L'usage des cat6gories,"Annales 52:5 (1997), 963-1038.

45
play, within each national entity, a multiplicity of categorial schemes particular

to the various groups, places, and individuals involved in the process: artists,
botanical associations, local beautificationleagues and societies, neighborhood
associations, and so on. Only a situatedapproachenables elucidationof the specific issues of categorization,which, while no longer perceptible,still contribute
to shaping culturalheritage practices that are currentlyprevalentin France and
Germany,for instance.39A process-orientedapproachthus makes it possible to
graspmore fully the implicationsof categorialdelineations,in particularthrough
examination of their various more or less stabilized components. Reference to
categorizationthereforeinvolves reasoning not in an abstractand general fashion, but in association with the study of the interpretiveschemes andgeneralization proceduresthat lead to the institutionof a generic category.40Such a categorial approach makes it possible, thanks to the introductionof a diachronic
dimension, to avoid the influence of implicit and reductiveculturalmodels.
It raisesthe issue of historicizationandthe way in which histoirecroisee relates
to the field of history.Initiatedat the beginning of the nineteenthcentury,reinforced by the successive crises of differentcurrentsof positivism, and accelerated by the calling into question of scientific objectivism,41historicizationtoday is
an inescapabledimensionof the productionof knowledge abouthumansocieties.
It concernsall of the social sciences, even those, like economics, thattendto view
themselves above all as sciences of the present.Consideredfrom the perspective
taken here, historicizationmeans articulatingthe essential aspect of reflexivity
and the multiple time frames that enter into the constructionof an object to the
extent that it is envisaged as a productionsituated in time and space. Histoire
croisdeplays a role in this undertakingby opening up lines of inquirythatencourage a rethinking,in historical time, of the relationshipsamong observation,the
object of study,and the analyticalinstrumentsused. Further,the referenceto history is justified by the attentiongiven to the process of constituting both the
objects and the categories of analysis. Here too, it is not so much the temporal
dimension in itself as the incidence of a pluralityof temporalitiesinvolved in the
identificationand constructionof the objects that is in question. This reliance on
history thus encompasses a substratumcommon to those disciplines that, in one
respector another,are confrontedwith the historicityof their materialsand tools.
Finally,the term"history"also refersto the narrativecomponentof any empirical
39. See Danny Trom, "La productionpolitique du paysage:Eliments pour une interpretationdes
pratiquesordinairesde patrimonialisationde la natureen Allemagne et en France"(Doctoralthesis,
Institutd'dtudespolitiques, Paris, 1996).
40. Alain Desrosibresaccounts for these generalizationproceduresin the case of statisticcategorization.Alain Desrosieres,La politique des grands nombres:Histoire de la raison statistique(Paris:
La Ddcouverte, 1993). For a case study, see also Danny Trom and BdnddicteZimmermann,"Cadres
et institutiondes problkmespublics: les cas du chomage et du paysage," in Lesformes de l'action
collective: Mobilisationdans des arknespubliques, ed. Daniel Cefai and Danny Trom(Raisons pratiques, 12) (Paris:Editions de I'EHESS, 2001), 281-315.
41. See Ian Hacking, Representingand Intervening: IntroductoryTopics in the Philosophy of
Natural Sciences (Cambridge,MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 1983); Lorraine Daston and Peter
Galison, "The Image of Objectivity,"Representations40 (1992), 81-128; for the culturalsciences,
see Michael Lacknerand Michael Werner,Der Cultural Turn in den Humanwissenschaften:Area
Studies im Auf- oderAbwind des Kulturalismus?(Bad Homburg,WernerReimers Stiftung, 1999).

46
social science. Such narrationcan be carriedout in the present,to describe a situation, or be appliedto the past, to make intelligiblecertainessential aspects of the
object of study.42
Being process-oriented,histoire croisee is an open approachthat takes into
account,from an internalpoint of view, variationsin its componentsand, froman
externalpoint of view, its specificity with respect to other possible forms of history. It can be likened to a history of problems and queries (histoireprobleme)
that attemptsto avoid the dual essentialism of an objectivationthrough factsregardedas directly accessible to the observer-and a reificationof structuresthatby tautologicalreasoningpredeterminesthe results of the inquiry.In opposition to an essentialistperspective,the idea of intercrossingidentifiesfirst an interaction that-and this is one of its decisive characteristics-modifies the elements
that are interacting.In this sense, it points towardsa "second-degree"history.
VI. PRAGMATICINDUCTION
But how does one study or objectify various forms of intercrossing,situated in

time and space? The example of scales has providedan opportunityto formulate
a few suggestions, which should now be developed in further detail.
Emphasizingthe need to startwith the object of researchand its concrete situation leads to an inductive and pragmatic approach. From an epistemological
standpoint,any productionof sociohistorical knowledge does indeed combine
inductive and deductive procedures,but in varying proportions.43In the case of
the comparativemethod, where the deductive aspect is often significant, national issues, pre-existingand crystallizedin a language and in specific categories of
analysis, pose a risk of partly prefiguring the results. Histoire croisde cannot
escape the weight of such pre-establishednational formatting,but its inductive
orientationaims to limit these effects through an investigative mechanism in
which the objects, categories, and analytical schemes are adjustedin the course
of research.This is illustratedby a study carriedout by Nicolas Mariot and Jay
Rowell on visits of sovereigns in France and Germany on the eve of the First
WorldWar,a study that aims to test the transpositionof a researchtheme andan
inquiryprotocol from one countryto another.44By illustratingan asymmetryin
the situations, pointing out significant differences in the various ways of conceiving and categorizing public action or the relations between center and
periphery,the test led them to revise the initial hypothesis and to reformulatethe
categories structuringit. The principleof inductioninvoked here thus refers to a
process of productionof knowledge in which the various elements are defined
42. See Alban Bensa, "De la micro-histoirevers une anthropologiecritique,"in Revel, ed., Jeux
d'&chelles, 37-70; Kultur,soziale Praxis, Text:Die Krise der ethnographischenRepriisentation,ed.
EberhardBerg and MartinFuchs (Frankfurt:SuhrkampVerlag, 1993); Danny Trom,"Situationnisme
m6thodologiqueet histoire: une approche par induction triangulaire,"in Laborierand Trom, ed.,
L'historicitede 1'actionpublique.
43. For a recentdiscussion of the question, see HilaryPutnam,RenewingPhilosophy(Cambridge,
MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 1992), passim.
44. Nicolas Mariot and Jay Rowell, "Une comparaisonasym6trique:Visites de souverainet6et
constructionnationale en France et en Allemagne B la veille de la PremibreGuerremondiale,"in
Wernerand Zimmermann,ed., De la comparaisona l'histoire croisle, 181-211.

47
and, if necessary, repositioned in relation to one another.Its pragmaticnature

should furthermoremake it possible to restrictthe temptationof a priori constructionsand get aroundthe trapof essentialism and its overly static categories.
Pragmaticinductionthus implies startingfrom the object of study and the situations in which it is embedded,accordingto one or more points of view-previously defined, it is true, but subjectto continualreadjustmentsin the course of
empirical investigation. Reliance on specific situations makes it possible to
escape the "convenientand lazy usage of context"45by rejectingits generic and
pre-establishednatureand integratinga reflectionon the principlesgoverning its
definition. Such a lazy usage is replaced by an analysis of the mannerin which
individualsactuallyconnect themselves to the world, the specific constructionof
the world and the elements of context producedby this activity in each particular case, and finally the uses arisingfrom such construction.By focusing on specific situations,it is thus possible to get away from the external,often artificial,
natureof the context in orderto make it an integralpart of the analysis. Just as
in the case of scales, the definition of the context is not the prerogativeof the
researcher.It also involves reference points that are specific to the objects and
activities understudy.Thus, histoire croisee integratesinto the operationof contextualization carried out by the researcher the referential dimension of the
objects and practicesanalyzed,taking into account both the variety of situations
in which the relationshipsto the context are structuredand the effect that the
study of such situationsexerts on the analyticalprocedures.46Pragmaticinduction does not therebyimply confining the analysis to a micro level or limiting it
to a juxtapositionof situations,to the detrimentof any form of generalization.
But generalizationin such cases is carried out through a combinationof these
various situations.47The emergence, for example, of common forms of concert
organizationin nineteenth-centuryEurope can thus be studied from highly varied local constellationsand throughthe concretepracticesof the relevantactors.
Institutions,such as concert societies, or generic figures, such as the impresario
or the concert agent, arise in a multiplicity of configurationsaccordingto logics
that cannot be reduced to a process of linear evolution, which some would like
to subsumeinto a progressivecommercializationor a generalizeddifferentiation
of functionsrelatedto the organizationof concerts.Their main featuresare much
more defined through the interactionof the expectations and strategies, some-
45. Respondingto criticismmade by Jacques Revel, "Micro-analyseet constructiondu social," in

Revel, ed., Jeux d'echelles, 15-36, here 25.
46. Passeron (Le raisonnementsociologique, esp. 85-88 and 368-370) has gone furthestin the
analysis of the challenge posed by the constructionof the context, in particularwith respect to the
comparative method, without, however, advancing concrete methodological proposals. Histoire
croisee, for its part,proposes to link two levels of constructionof context, thatof the analyticaloperations carriedout by the researcherand that of the situationsof action analyzed.
47. Undera procedureclosed to the combinativeethnographyfounded by Isabelle Baszangerand
Nicolas Dodier on the establishmentof an "ethnographicjurisprudence."Isabelle Baszanger and
Nicolas Dodier, "Totalisationet alterit6dans l'enquite ethnographique,"Revuefrangaise de sociologie 38 (1997), 37-66. For an attemptat a transpositioninto history,see Zimmermann,La constitution
du chomage. On the relation between case study and generalization,see Penser par cas, ed. JeanClaude Passeronand JacquesRevel (Paris:EHESS, 2005)

48
times contradictory,of actorsto which they respondwhile at the same time structuringthem.48
Similarly, pragmatic induction does not imply restricting oneself to shortaction time-frames without regardfor the long term. On the contrary,the long
term of the structuresis combined with the shortjuncturesof action, in an analysis of social activity based on the study of the dynamic relationshipsbetween
action and structure.From this perspective,the activity of individualsappearsas
in a relationshipof reciprocalrelationsbetween
both structuredand structuring,49
structuresand action. However, such structuringis not so much determinedby
the necessity of an irreversibleprocess as by the intercrossingin the course of
action of constraintsand resourcesthat are in part structurallygiven and in part
tied to the contingency of the situations.50Thus, for example, most of our institutions stem from a dual grounding,both within a structurallylong history that
affects their logic and functioning, and in singularcontexts of action that played
a decisive role in bringingthem aboutand transformingthem.51The perspective
of a social pragmaticsmakes it possible to think in termsof the interdependence
of these two dimensions throughthe identificationof the slides and lags occurring in the course of the action that enable moments of institutionalinnovation.
Mindful of both short-termcontexts of action and the long-term structuralconditions that make it possible, such an approachopens up new perspectives for
analyzingchange and stability at the same time.
VII. REFLEXIVITY
As illustratedby the example of scales, such pragmaticinduction is also reflexive. This is one of the points that distinguishes histoire croisde from both comparativism-which, ideally, postulatesthe existence of an externalpoint of view
making it possible both to constructcomparableobjects and to apply to them
common analyticalquestionnaires-and transferstudies-which, in most cases,
do not questiontheirimplicit framesof reference.Nevertheless we will not delve
into the reflexivity issue debated for more than a centurynow in the social sciences.52By way of example, we shall limit ourselves to pointing out a few
instancesin which histoire croisedecan contributeto meeting the challenge posed
by reflexivity. Both pragmaticinduction and the proceduresfor historicization
48. See Concerts et publics: Mutations de la vie musicale 1789-1914: France, Allemagne,
Grande-Bretagne,ed. Hans-ErichBideker, PatriceVeit, and Michael Werner(Paris:Editions de la
Maison des sciences de l'homme, 2002).
49. See, in particular,on this point, AnthonyGiddens, The Constitutionof Society: Outlineof the
Theoryof Structuration(Cambridge,Eng: Polity Press, 1984).
50. For a reinterpretationof the notion of structurein terms of schemas and resources, and
thoughtson its integrationinto a theoryof actionand a problematicof change, see WilliamH. Sewell,
"A Theory of Structure:Duality,Agency and Transformation,"
AmericanJournal of Sociology 98:1
(1992), 1-29.
51. For an illustration of this dual grounding, see Paul-Andre Rosental, L'intelligence dimographique:Sciences et politiques des populationsen France (1930-1960) (Paris,Odile Jacob,2003).
52. For the nineteenthcentury,the main referenceremainsDroysen's Historik,as well as Dilthey's
projectfor a critiqueof historicalreason. For morerecentdebates on reflexivity in the social sciences
and its relationshipto theories of modernity,see, in particular,Anthony Giddens, Consequencesof
Modernity(Oxford: Polity Press, 1990); Ulrich Beck, Anthony Giddens, and Scott Lash, Reflexive
Modernization(Oxford, Polity Press, 1994).

49
inherent within histoire croisee generate forms of reflexivity. Tied to logics of

action, pragmaticinductionleads to a readjustmentof the principlesand the logic
of the inquirywhile it is being conducted.As for historicization,it elucidatesthe
relationshipbetween various spatio-temporalscales and differentregimes of historicity and positions of observationthat are themselves historically situated.
A histoire croisee of disciplines helps to illustratecertainaspects of the reflexivity issue. Depending on whether one treats the interpenetrationsbetween
German and American historiographiesafter 1945 from a "German,""American," or "French"point of view, one obtains perspectives, and thus interpretations, that are quite different.The emigrationand exile of Germanhistoriansto
the United States, the re-importationinto Germany after 1950 of originally
"German"theorieshaving been in the meantimeacclimatedand "Americanized"
(this was the case with broadaspectsof Weberiansociology), coupled with reception theories such as at the Chicago School, caused considerable interweaving
that requiresre-evaluationof the viewpoints from which the various interpretations have been developed. Commonlyused terms, such as "Germansociology,"
became fluid, difficult to use without caution, not to mention complex notions
such as Historismus and its translationsas historicism, historicisme, istorismo,
and so on, each of which relates to differentperceptions,traditions,and methodologies.53Consequently,the scholar today is likely to look upon his or her own
concepts and analyticalinstrumentsas the result of a complex process of intercrossing in which nationaland disciplinarytraditionshave been amalgamatedin
varying configurations,and to reintroducethe correspondingviewpoints into the
inquiry.The aim of histoire croisee is to shed light on this thick fabric of interweavings. In so doing, it does not withdrawinto a space of relativistindecisiveness or infinite speculative relationships.54On the contrary,it aims to utilize the
intercrossingof perspectivesand shifts in points of view in orderto study specific knowledge effects. Starting from the divergences among various possible
viewpoints, by bringingout their differences and the way in which, historically,
they emerge, often in an interdependentmanner,histoire croisle makes it possible to recompose these elements.55The reflexivity to which it leads is not empty
formalism,but is rathera relationalfield that generatesmeaning.
53. On the epistemologicalimplicationsof this question, see AlexandreEscudier,"Episthmologies
croishes? L'impossible lecture des thhoriciensallemandsde l'histoire en France autourde 1900," in
Wernerand Zimmermann,De la comparaisona l'histoire croisde, ed.,139-177. For a presentationof
the problemin the context of a Germandiscussion, see Otto GerhardOexle, Geschichtswissenschaft
im Zeichen des Historismus(G6ttingen:Vandenhoeck& Ruprecht,1996).
54. On the problem of historical relativism, see Hilary Putnam, Reason, Truth,and History
(Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press, 1982); Alasdair MacIntyre, Whose Justice? Which
Rationality?(Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press,1988), 349ff. Finally, on the history
of the idea of historical relativity, see Reinhart Koselleck, "Geschichte," in Geschichtliche
Grundbegriffe,ed. Otto Brunner,Werner Conze, and Reinhart Koselleck (Stuttgart:Klett-Cotta,
1972-1997), vol. 2 (1979), 647-717, here 695-701 and Koselleck, L'experiencede l'histoire (Paris:
Gallimard/Seuil,1997), 75-81.
55. The groundingin the dynamic of social activities makes it possible to place histoire croisde
within the debateover constructionism.On the one hand,all of the objects of histoire croisee, as well
as the categories capable of describing them and the problematicsto which they relate, are assumed
to be socially constructed.But, on the otherhand, this does not mean that they are all placed on the
same level and that their respective positions are irrelevant.Quite to the contrary,we advance the

50
Neither does histoire croisde result in a logic of infinite historicalregression.

Historicizationshouldnot be confusedwith a contextualizationthatrequiresdelving furtherandfurtherinto historicalinvestigation,so as to arriveat a moredetailed
representationof the past and its relationshipto the present.On the contrary,it is
constructedand circumscribedin relationto an object and a problematic,making
possible the identificationof the relevanttemporalitiesand thus a delimitationof
the process of historicization.Once this has been made clear, it becomes possible
to examine anew the relationshipsbetween diachrony and synchrony, which
remaindifficult to coordinate,with respect both to comparisonand transferstudies. One of the contributionsof histoirecroisdeis thatit makes possible the articulationof both of these dimensions,whereascomparisonfavors the implementation
of a synchronicreasoning,andtransferstudiestendtowardan analysisof diachronic processes. Crossed history,in contrast,enables the synchronicand diachronic
registersto be constantlyrearrangedin relationto each other.
Intercrossing,as has been shown, affects both the researchobject and research
procedures. It functions as an active principle in which the dynamics of the
inquiry unfold in accordancewith a logic of interactionswhere the various elements are constitutedin relationto or throughone another.Considerationof this
aspect of active inclusion and both its constitutiveand transformationaleffects is
at the heartof histoire croisde. It involves mobile groundingprocesses that link
not only the observerto the object but also objects among themselves. The elements of the space of understandingthus configured-in which the observer is
personally engaged-are not fixed, but are instead defined on the basis of their
dynamic interrelationships.The result is a process of permanentadjustmentthat
simultaneously concerns the respective positions of the elements and the
processes of their coming into being.
Over and beyond these distinctive traits that stem from the concept of intercrossing, histoire croisefealso resultsin the rethinkingof the fundamentaltension
between the logical operations involved in producing knowledge and the historicity of both the object and the approachproduced by such knowledge. As
noted earlier,with respect to questions such as the choice of scales, construction
of context, and processes of categorization,histoire croisle engages in a to-andfro movementbetween the two poles of the inquiryand the object. By systematically questioningthe relationshipsbetween these two poles, it seeks-in choosing its fields-to respond to the question of the historical groundingof knowledge producedby the social sciences. The epistemological challenge of course
remains, and shall continue to remain. But the implementationof the research
agenda of histoire croiseleas outlined in this article leads to the opening of new
lines of inquiry capable of changing the conditions under which intellectual
experience is carriedout.
Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales, Paris
hypothesis that the configuration of the intercrossingand the intellectual operationcorresponding
theretolead to a logic that produces meaningon the basis of semantic interactionsbetween situated
positions. Viewed from this perspective,intercrossingappearsas a social constructionthat produces
specific forms of knowledge. See Ian Hacking, The Social Constructionof What?(Cambridge,MA:
HarvardUniversity Press, 1999), especially 36-59.


Werner Zimmermann Entangled History PDF

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Werner Zimmermann Entangled History PDF

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Wesleyan University

Beyond Comparison: Histoire Croise and the Challenge of Reflexivity

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

History and Theory45 (February2006), 30-50

? Wesleyan University 2006 ISSN: 0018-2656

BEYOND COMPARISON: HISTOIRE CROISEE

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

light.2The questions resultingfrom the collapse of colonialism have, moreover,

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

engaged in the field of observation.They are involved in the object, if only by

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

used, such an inquirypresupposesa process that unfolds over time. In analyzing

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

study was to show that borderswere more permeablein order to underminethe

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

First, the notion of intersectionprecludes reasoning in terms of individual

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

analyticalmodel-which would result in a static view of things-our aim is on

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

trying to objectify the multivariousrelationshipsto the object-keeping in mind

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

Alltagsgeschichtebases its choice of the micro and criticism of the macro on an

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

play, within each national entity, a multiplicity of categorial schemes particular

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

But how does one study or objectify various forms of intercrossing,situated in

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

and, if necessary, repositioned in relation to one another.Its pragmaticnature

45. Respondingto criticismmade by Jacques Revel, "Micro-analyseet constructiondu social," in

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

HISTOIRECROISEEAND THE CHALLENGEOF REFLEXIVITY

inherent within histoire croisee generate forms of reflexivity. Tied to logics of

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

Neither does histoire croisde result in a logic of infinite historicalregression.

This content downloaded from 141.35.40.166 on Thu, 23 Oct 2014 12:24:48 PM

Anda mungkin juga menyukai