Proceedings
II International Congress "History under Debate"
14 - 18 july 1999

Between July 14^th-18^th  1999, the Second International Conference History under Debate was held under the sponsorship of the Xunta de Galicia, - the proceedings of which we have the honour of presenting now.

As it was said at the opening ceremony “this Second Conference consolidates History under Debate as a place where historians across the world meet, discuss, experiment and reach consensus”. That has been the case. The great echo is even more remarkable considering the fact that that this was an academic macro-conference which, albeit scheduled, had to be organised in only six months, mainly over the Internet, with the advantages and disadvantages this implies. The convocations could not be posted until a month before the conference and reached some countries after the conference took place. This circumstance acted as a kind of “natural selection” of the 150 lecturers and the 800 participants -from over 45 countries in all five continents who travelled to Santiago de Compostela. Many of  them were already part of the History under Debate and presented in Santiago topics on which they had been reflecting for some time.

We call it “natural selection” because the issues of historiographic methodology and theory of history we are interested in -to which this time we added professional concerns and immediate history- are the interest of a qualified minority of historians. A minority who has greatly increased over the last few years and who communicates over the Internet, which, like any other new technologies, is more rapidly and easily accepted by the younger generations. For that reason, we have decided, at least for the moment, to publish the proceedings on paper and not on the Internet. Looking ahead, we have likewise decided to reinforce the connection between historiographic debate and empirical research, between addressers and addressees of historiographic research. The future advancement of professional history demands an effort to maintain the connection between the different tempos, spaces and roles in the different communities of historians.

Our responsibility, as History under Debate, towards the historical discipline is, today, greater, if possible, than we when our project set out in 1993 because we are in the middle of a transition in historiographic paradigms, where the “old” and the ‘new’ are intertwined . A  paradigmatic change in progress which has resulted in the failure of some individual proposals and projects. This has led to a “positivist turn” in many colleagues who have taken refuge -let’s hope only temporary- in the old and simple certainties of nineteenth century historiography about the profession of historian, with the hope that we enter a new period of “normal science”.

History under Debate has not only weathered the storm of the “crisis” but has became an unavoidable point of reference, unique in its originality, to leave it behind. The reasons are manifold. Firstly, ours is a collective project. The endogenous and exogenous problems which have an influence on “the crisis of history” are such that cannot be solved individually. They require collective work and debate, where personal reflections are presented and open to the criticisms and the contributions of  the “others”. This demands a certain continuity and an homogenous orientation which the regulating instruments of the traditional academic and “guild-like” institutions cannot provide. This implies going beyond the borders the countries and of the field ; focusing our efforts on the construction of new and productive consensus and keeping in contact with most of our colleagues by offering them mechanisms of participation ( the international inquiry “The State of History,” is, in this sense, our most important project). We believe that our project, theoretical but mainly practical, in this time of historiographic and social individualism, in favour of the recovery of the “spirit of school”[1] paves the way for  historiographic intervention in the global world ahead.

The proceedings consist of 79 papers arranged in accordance with the Conference schedule[2] in three volumes: “Turn of the Century”, “New Paradigms” and “Problems in Historiography”. We also publish, distributed in all three volumes, the transcriptions[3] of the discussions which took place in the 19 round tables, where the turn-of-the-century concerns of historians from different backgrounds, nationalities and generations are more directly and spontaneously reflected than in the papers. They are, therefore, a snapshot of the historiographic, cultural and, in some cases, political moment. Once again, we have seen in the debates a clash between the different historiographies because they are daughters of their time and of the situation in their respective countries, which is not the same in the United States and China, Europe and Latin America. These historical and historiographic contradictions can only be expressed in a context of freedom, which we wish to transform, not without difficulties, into intellectual and human tolerance towards the colleague who holds a different opinion, be it historiographic or of any other nature.

Obviously enough, we cannot publish in book-format all the texts generated by the Second Conference (nor will it be possible in later editions given the dimension of the History under Debate Conferences). But in the Abstracts Book, distributed during the conference (and which is available in our website ) are the summaries of all the papers delivered in the thematic sections and the round tables. Over fifty papers, read or summarised by a reporter during the conference, many of them of equal quality to those presented here and which we hope can be published in the future. The selection criteria -apart from their quality- were their opportunity and their representativity, i.e., the adaptation of the papers to the epigraphs of the conference and the balance between the different historiographies and stances. The aim is that the academic reader may benefit from the most comprehensive and diverse view of world-wide reflection and historiographic debate at the threshold of the new century.

These three volumes, together with the six we published for the First Conference in 1993, have already become a good encyclopaedia of the evolution of the historiographic problems in the last and decisive decade of the twentieth century. Without intending to infringe on the reader’s individual right of assessment, we point out below some of the characteristics of the contributions to the Second Conference: the growing importance of historical and historiographic issues connected with globalisation[4], an interest renewed by the ethical commitment of historians to society; the evolution of the “linguistic turn” and the other post-modern issues -towards the vindication of narrativity and historical fiction; and the appearance of Latin American historiographies in the global debate.

We stated in 1996, in the introduction to the book on Latin American papers of the First Conference that “the old, mechanical relationship centre/ periphery no longer applies to account for the current situation of world historiography (…) that all national historiographies are, or may be, centre and periphery”[5]. And our objective was ‘using our own head’ and promoting Latin voices in the international historiographic scenario. In this sense, History under Debate is both a cause and an effect, as the Second Conference has demonstrated: Latin American contributions have been extremely relevant, notably as regards the society/ historian relationship.

The History under Debate proceedings have become, at least in Spain, the point of reference to assess whether the teaching projects of aspirants at tenures at different history departments were conversant with the latest developments. Six years later, these new proceedings will update the first ones. But we still expect more of them. We hope that they encourage the reader, both the teacher and  the researcher, to maintain an interest in methodology and historiography, an unavoidable foundation for good empirical research and a teaching of history which is closer to research at all levels, as it is posited in the papers under the rubric “What history are we going to teach in the twenty-first century?

This Second Conference means the consolidation of History under Debate. This implies a confirmation, at least as far as the part of Spanish historiography we represent, of something we already remarked in November 1995: “Our thesis is that Spanish historiography is-objectively- well posited to play a relevant role in the tradition/ innovation synthesis that is going to characterise the history of the twenty first century, thus taking on an international profile of its own”[6]. This international profile was linked to the generation renewal which has been mirrored in the younger age of the delegates at the Second Conference as compared to the First Conference, and which the Third Conference in 2004 will reflect even more clearly.

In some of the 30 reviews of the conference published or about to be published[7] in journals from a number of countries the issue of “stars” at academic conferences was raised, specifically as regards the Second Conference in comparison with the First Conference in 1993.  We are now witnessing a very special historiographic moment in which many of the most renowned and influential historians of the twentieth century -Annaliste, Marxist or Neo-Positivist- still alive are of a very advanced age, which limits their travelling and their participation in great debates, whereas the new figures are yet to be recognised, partly because it is not clear which paradigms should substitute those they represent. The transition stage historiography is living through has so far resulted in nothing but transitory leadership, a consequence of the repercussion of a book or the holding of an academic post. This situation will disappear once the national and international scenario is clarified and the ongoing change of paradigms comes to an end. Meanwhile, History under Debate has opted to promote a debate open to everyone who has something to say, regardless of age or academic distinction, in an attempt to encourage those consensus that make possible the search for the new without renouncing to the best of our historiographic traditions.

The preparation of the Second Conference History under Debate over the Internet, and, especially, the post-conference[8] are creating a new scenario for our current and future development as a world-wide network of historians, as a world forum of historiographic debate . Our Website (some 30.000 visits during the first year) and the discussion list via e-mail (where history is truly debated) made up by over 800 historians from all five continents are giving continuity, speed and sustainability to the relationship among colleagues from different countries and historical disciplines with shared concerns, many of whom have participated in conferences and other activities instigated by History under Debate over the last few years. This greatly facilitates the creation of new consensus, which is an exceptional foundation for the “new historiography”. The international community of History under Debate wishes to make an important contribution to the global historiography ahead. In the twenty first century the international community will have an influence, especially via the Internet, to a degree not known before, in the national historiographies by facilitating the contact between the individual historian and the world and creating new conditions for reflection and debates that transcend the old fields and the academic individualism.

In parallel with the conference in July 1999, we organised the First Virtual Conference History under Debate through a chat channel. We firmly believe that the Third International Conference History under Debate, which will take place in July 2004, will have a greater digital dimension. We are not sure to what extend because we also believe that the new IT society will not be the end of the book. As evidence of this belief, here you are, dear reader, these proceedings that will allow you to glimpse which path history will follow in the new century.

CARLOS BARROS