Historiography

Upon reading the title my reader(s) entered one of two categories: either someone who knows what Historiography is or someone who is reading the entry. Since anyone reading obviously doesn't know what historiography is I'll explain. Historiography is the most boring topic on earth. I am not making that up. Historians, you know, the kind of people who get excited reading about the inner squabbling of Dutch merchant guilds in 17th century Amsterdam find historiography boring. Historiography is the study of the study of History. You heard that right, its the history of people writing history. In the Dr. Seuss book "Did I Ever Tell You How Lucky You Are." he tries to imagine the worst possible fates that could befall someone, Dr. Seuss accurately describes historiography in action in the part about the Bee Watch Watch Watcher Watcher. In fact, I am starting a rumor that the entire inspiration for that book was Dr. Seuss learning what historiography is. Pass it on, its highly possible.

Why then do historians write them? Why is a paper considered worthless garbage if it doesn't start with one? Because its important. Our perceptions change with time and it can be helpful to learn how people in the past thought about the past. One quick example before I get on to my topic, I remember when I was five my parents taking me to see the annual reenactment of the Battle of Lexington. Now we celebrate that battle as perhaps the most important event in our history. But the first commemoration on the anniversary wasn't until the 1820s. A politician running for office drug out the last surviving veterans to honor them for their deeds. One cynical observer at the time remarked that even if there were no survivors the candidate would have exhumed the bodies from the graveyard so he could publicly honor them.

I know macro-historiography sounds boring enough to kill but in the spirit of full disclosure I feel I need to go there. The how and why of writing history has shifted dramatically since the first historians invented the concept. There is such a thing as Academic History that we teach in our universities and that I was trained in. What I write on the blog is not academic history style and I admit that. For one, I write in narrative format as opposed to the more neutral academic tone. I don't usually get into the details of historical disputes (you should thank me because that's historiography.) Technically history is supposed to be an unbiased quest for historical truth but that's just not how it is. Actually I think the biggest kritik of academic style is that its pretentious in claiming to get to the actual truth when we openly admit that our writing will always be a bit biased. Since the mid-19th century History as a discipline has been trying to get itself classed as a social science and the fact that it by nature can't be observed dispassionately or lend itself to repeatable experiments using the scientific method are a few of the many reasons it isn't.

Livy was a very important Roman Historian who was a friend of Julius Caesar. He wrote Ab Urbe Condita, a 142 volume history of Rome that covered its first 745 years. The fact that his work was used heavily as a source by Edward Gibbon, one of the fathers of modern history, in his six volume The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire is even more impressive when you consider that out of 142 volumes only 35 survive intact. However, were Livy writing today he wouldn't be able to get his articles published by any self respecting academic journal. That's because Livy spells out at the very beginning that he is writing history in order to provide moral instruction to what he sees as a morally decaying Rome. He tells a lot of myths about the early days of Rome which he may or may not have made up. If you want to see what I am talking about check out my post on Jacques-Louis David, who painted lots of paintings to give moral lessons using stories from Livy.

That's pretty much what I do except I go one step further and try to relate it to today's politics. I use a conversational tone to reach laymen bored with other history writing so history is more accessible. Perhaps its best to describe what I do as more using History instead of writing History.

Jacques-Louis David

I am going to take a break from history and politics to focus on something uplifting. Jacques-Louis David (1748-1825) had an amazing life. He is probably the only person to thrive under the four distinct regimes France went through in a few years. He was popular before the Revolution, was highly prominent during the initial republic and terror. Not only does get to claim the title of being one of the few friends Robespierre didn't kill but probably the only surviving friend of his not to be executed with him. He was Napoleon's court painter and after the monarchy was restored he was offered a job working for the new King, which he turned down for ideological reasons, preferring self imposed exile.

Enough with the bio, now its time for the Art. I like David's works on stories from mythology. They each exists to teach a moral lesson and as time goes on his beliefs shift so does the overall messages of the paintings. First he extolls the male virtue of selfless service to the Patri or state.

The Oath of the Horatii:

As related in Livy's Ab Urbe Condita during the early days of Rome triplets fought another set of triplets from Alba Longa to decide the outcome of the war. Two of the brothers are killed but the last one wins the fight and saves Rome from enslavement.

The Death of Socrates:

As related in Plato's Apology Socrates accepts his death sentence and ignores pleas from friends to escape and willingly drinks poison thinking that death will be an adventure because he's never died before. This is after he insulted the jury repeatedly during the trial.

The Lictors bring to Brutus the Bodies of His Sons:

According to Livy, Brutus was instrumental in overthrowing the last King of Rome and establishing the Republic. When he finds out his own sons are in collusion with the former King to overthrow the Republic Brutus chooses loyalty to the state and has them executed.

All of these are about male virtue and the glorification thereof. Two of them come from Livy, who though a historian, saw history's usefulness as to provide moral instruction, namely absolute loyalty to the state above personal obligations. These paintings are misogynist in that the women are all crying in a dark corner, lacking virtue.

Helen and Paris:

From Greek myth David depicts Helen, the woman that caused the destruction of Troy. Paris is depicted as an innocent boy and David does a wonderful job of depicting Helen as way more of a prostitute than even completely nude women.

Post-Robespierre David spent some time in jail with only his wife to visit him. His love for his wife and her womanly virtue grew considerably and when he got out and started painting he reversed his message. Women's status as peacemakers curbing men's destructive tendencies, even at personal risk, is depicted.

The Sabine Women:

Back to Livy, in the early days of Rome their were lots of men of warrior age but almost no women. Seeing a solution they attacked the Sabine tribe and took their women. A year later the Sabine men came to get their women back. As the battle heated up the women ran into the middle to stop their kinsmen and former husbands from killing their new husbands.

Mars disarmed by Venus:

This is my favorite painting and no, it has nothing to do with the fact that everyone is naked. I really like the sharp and crisp colors. The subject is what is most beautiful about it. Mars, God of War is handing over his weapons because of the love of Veneus, Goddess of Love. He doesn't surrender completely and keeps his spear but gives up his warring days to "make love, not war." This expresses the hope that eventually love will conquer war with virtuous women leading the way.

Should I keep my day job or become an art critic?

The Oath

This ancient tale comes to us from mid-7th Century BC Rome. Rome was at war with her neighbor Alba Longa and eventually the outcome was agreed to be decided in the “old” way. The Horatii, a set of male triplets from Rome and the Curiatii, male triplets of the same age from Alba Longa, would duel while both Armies watched. Jacques David’s key masterpiece The Oath of the Horatii captures the Horatii as they leave their home and family for the battle.

As the 6 men fought in full view of their nations we can only imagine how every blow was watched by a thousand eyes, victory or enslavement hinging upon its landing. As all three Curiatii were wounded Romans cheered and the Alba Longans mourned but then one of the Horatii fell dead! Then another fell and the last of the Horatii fled across the field back to Roman lines with the Curiatii in hot pursuit. The Romans cried in horror at the cowardice of the last of the brothers as his light doomed them all. Looking over his shoulder the last Horatii suddenly wheeled around, for wounded the Curiatii pursued at different speeds. Now separated the Horatii was able to cut down all three Curiatii one at a time; Rome was victorious!

A victory parade made its way to the home of the Horatii with the bodies of the two fallen Horatii and the last at the front. Upon seeing one of her brothers alive the sister of the Horatii broke down in tears because it meant that her lover, one of the Curiatii, was dead. In a fit of rage her brother killed her for greaving more for the enemy dead than her own fallen brothers. Initally condemned to die, the City could not bring its self to execute its savior of the previous day.