AN ANALYSIS OF LEOPOLD VON RANKE AND DEVELOPMENT OF MODERN HISTORIOGRAPHY Abuoma C Agajelu Nnamdi Azikiwe University, Awka Abstract The 19th century is being regarded as the golden age of facts. It’s also the century that gave birth to history as an academic field of study. These significant feats were made possible through the works of German historians, notably Leopold von Ranke. Ranke made popular some thesis and theories in history which helped shape it as an academic field of study. His achievements also carved out a respectable profession out of history. The aim of this paper is to discuss these methods and teachings of Ranke and how they transformed the study of modern history. The paper adopts the thematic historical method of research with effective use of secondary and tertiary source of data collection. Introduction Featuring in the study of history are a number of notable names which included Herodotus, Cicero, Thucydides, Leopold von Ranke, E.H. Carr, Arthur Marwick etc. while Herodotus is regarded as the father of history, Ranke is known today as the father of modern history. This is because of his invaluable contributions to the establishment of history as an academic field of study. Ranke’s contributions to history were basically influenced by the circumstances of his time. The French Revolution and the activities of Napoleon across Europe influenced the theoretical framework of Ranke’s works and thoughts. History started featuring in school curriculum first in Prussia and then it spread across Germany.1 The disciples of Ranke in Germany, who came from other European countries exported his ideas and the study of history in universities became a norm. The questions to be asked are: what is history? Who is Leopold von Ranke? What are his methods that so greatly influenced the study of history? Why was the study of history not so important before the 19th century? This paper will be divided into sections. The first section is the introduction, while the second section will attempt to define important concepts of the study. The third section will present a concise biography of Leopold von Ranke. The fourth section will examine his contributions towards the development of history as an academic field of study. Finally, the paper shall make inferences and draw conclusions from the evidences and interpretations presented. At this junction, it is pertinent to attempt a clarification or definition of the concept of history to know what it is all about. Conceptual Clarification A resounding question in the study of history is the question of the concept of history itself. The question is so important that it made the title of E.H. Carr’s published version of the Trevelyan Lectures at Cambridge. In his book, Carr defined history in terms of interpretation of selected facts of the past. He stated inter alia: History consists of a corpus of ascertained facts. The facts are available to the historian in documents, inscriptions and so on, like a fish on the fishmonger’s slab. The historian collects them, takes them home, and cooks and serves them in whatever style appeals to him.2 This paper shall treat E.H. Carr’s view on interpretation of facts later in the study. Thomas Hobbes wrote in 1651, “The register of knowledge of facts is called history.”3 Hobbes sentence can be broken down into revealing components. The “register” refers to the need of history to be recorded in some lasting medium (e.g. print, film, audio). The “knowledge of” phrase of Hobbes’ statement refers to the importance of us needing to know about something. If we don’t know about it, then it won’t get reported or recorded. The term “fact” is important in that we need truth, not suppositions. Hobbes definition is therefore a widely encompassing definition of history. Another informing definition of history is Arthur Marwick’s three-level definitions. First, he posits that history connotes “the entire human past as it actually happened.” Second, that history connotes man’s attempt to describe and interpret the past and third, that history is a systematic study of the past.4 Marwick’s definitions of history has the double-edged value of attempting a description of both history and historiography. History is defined in the Encyclopaedia Britannica Student and Home Edition, as the discipline that studies the chronological record of events (as affecting a nation or people), based on a critical examination of source materials and usually presenting an explanation of their causes.5 The authors of the prestigious Encyclopaedia explicitly pointed out the need to examine critically the sources through which historical account is given. It is in examining the sources and adopting it in interpretation that objectivity plays important role. The definition also hinted on the importance of causation in history. In his multi-dimensional work entitled Theory and History: An Interpretation of Social and Economic Evolution, Ludwig Von Mises gave a broad explanation of the meaning and nature of history. He stated thus: History deals with human action, that is, the actions performed by individuals and groups of individuals. It describes the conditions under which people lived and the way they reacted to these conditions. Its subject are human judgments of value and the ends men aimed at guided by these judgments, the means men resorted to in order to attain the ends sought, and the outcome of their actions.6 Ludwig centres his explanation of the nature of history on the activities of man in relation with his response to natural forces. These natural forces can come in form of life aspirations that most times moulds the activities of man. This general value of man which determines his activities is what makes up history. Deductible from these definitions of history is the fact that history is a recorded past events of man. These records must not be in written documents. They can also be found in form of artifacts, oral traditions, oral evidences, ancient arts and inscriptions etc. Raw evidence without interpretations from the historian does not represent a complete history. As E.H Carr aptly puts it, “The belief in a hardcore of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy.” 7 This means that the historian has to summon the appropriate facts in order to achieve a reconstruction of the past events of man. Therefore, we can conclude that history is a systematic interpretation and reconstruction of the human past. The manner of the interpretation of the facts is where objectivity in history comes in. Leopold von Ranke’s teachings on objectivity is one the teachings that helped shape history as an academic field of study in the 19the century. A concise Biography of Leopold von Ranke and his Works The German historian Leopold von Ranke was born in Germany in 1795. His first major work, History of the Latin and Teutonic Nations 1494 – 1535, was published late in 1824. This was based on archival research, viewed by Ranke as the foundation of all historical works, and it established his reputation as an historian. The most influential part of the work was its appendix in which he assessed previous literature on the basis of the critical analysis of sources. For him, this was scholarly history. It was in the preface to his work that he stated his often quoted dictum, that he was writing ‘history as it had actually occurred’. Ranke was appointed Professor of History at the University of Berlin. In late 1827 he went abroad and remained away for over three years, researching in Vienna, Florence, Rome and Venice. He had several personal connections that he put to good use to secure access to previously closed archives. The following years were marked with publications mainly on the history of the Mediterranean countries and Germany. Particularly noteworthy are The Conspiracy Against Venice (1831), History of Popes (1839 – 47) and the History of Prussia (1847 – 48).8 The first generations of modern professional historians were a product of Ranke’s lectures, tutorials and training. These notable professional historians included King Maximilian II of Bavaria, Jakob Burckhardt, Georg Waitz etc. king Maximilian II actually established a Historical Commission within the Bavarian Academy of Science to which Ranke was appointed as chairman in 1858. During his later years Ranke wrote national histories for each of the major states of Europe, including his work entitled History of France, History of England and The German Powers and the Princes’ League. As Ranke’s reputation continued to grow, he was awarded many honours: he was granted entry to the hereditary nobility, adding ‘von’ to his surname in 1865 and he was made an honorary citizen of Berlin in 1885. Ranke’s university career ended in 1871 when he retired from his chair at Berlin. Nonetheless, by the time of his death in Berlin in 1886, he had completed nine volumes of his Universal History.9 Ranke and the Development of History as an Academic Field of Study The influence of Leopold von Ranke in the 19th century study of history is seen on the sudden interest of oversea scholars in Germany as a source of inspiration. He promoted the scientific study of history at an age when science promised so much for the betterment of humanity. During the period, earnest American students who hoped to elevate American intellectual life to European standards flocked to Germany so that they might come into contact with the most advanced learning. According to Edward Muir, “The German influence, in fact, decidedly altered American education from garten für kinder to post-graduate professional training”.10 For Americans interested in history there was only one goal – the Berlin seminar presided over by Ranke. There, Ranke and his students carefully poured over original sources from Europe’s past in the pursuit of documentary criticism. They avoided chronicles and contemporary histories, which were riddled with error and marred by bias, and concentrated on government charters and decrees, bureaucratic files, especially diplomatic dispatches and reports. With these documents, it was thought, historians could write true ‘scientific’ histories. The historical methods Ranke taught in his seminar offered an alternative to the ancient standard set by Thucydides. While Thucydides promoted a humanist view about the moral utility of history, Ranke debunked it. Ranke saw the role of history differently. To him such sentiments made history a branch of moral philosophy where rhetorical form and ethical maxims subordinated the pursuit of simple accuracy.11 His views regarding accuracy in history laid the foundation for the positivist theory of objectivity. The main thesis of the positivist theory is the attainment in history of a single point of view based on a set of presuppositions which all historians might be prepared to accept. Just as Ranke taught, the positivists believe that the objectivity attained in science is also attainable in history. They argue that given the use by historians of the method of investigation used by natural scientists, what the natural scientist has achieved in the study of nature could also be achieved in the study of society. The theory holds that science is the only valid knowledge and that facts are the only possible object of knowledge.12 In contributing to the popularity of the theory in modern history, Ranke said that the task of the historian was “simply to show how it was.”13 Due to his emphasis on that which is seen, the Encyclopaedia Britannica Student and Home Edition, described Ranke as an anti-analyst and a visual historiographer.14 Despite being described by many scholars of 20th century, such as Mommsen and Vierhaus, as a historian only dealing with political history and the history of great powers, Ranke actually dealt with cultural history as well. In many of his works cultural history may be only mentioned briefly, but in some cases Ranke dedicated a full chapter to the history of literature. For example, in his History of England, one can find a full chapter on literature during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. it nearly covers 20pages. In an eighty-five page article from 1835 Ranke dealt only with the history of Italian literature.15 Although he made a huge impact on the 19th and 20th century’s historiography and many of his books became and remained standard works, Ranke’s methods and theories have proved to be controversial. A number of historical scholars challenged his view on historical objectivity. One of the most vocal and influential among them was E.H. Carr. In his book entitled, What is History? Carr stated that “the belief in a hardcore of historical facts existing objectively and independent of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy…”16 Debunking the hope that absolute or scientific objectivity will one day be possible in history, Sir George Clark commented: Historians of a later generation do not look forward to any such prospect. They expect their work to be superseded again and again. They consider that knowledge of the past has come down through one or more human minds, has been ‘processed’ by them, and therefore cannot consist of elemental and impersonal atoms which nothing can alter…17 Though absolute objectivity in history is no longer so popular, the issue – raised by Ranke – has enriched the study of history with informative theories and concepts. Ranke’s popular aphorisms helped stimulate the interest of scholars in history and saved it from disappearing into oblivion. Conclusion Leopold von Ranke amassed a followership of historians across the world that almost fanatically followed his concepts. Unfortunately, many simply continued, canonized and debased his concepts, retaining all of their limitations without the universality of view that gave them meaning. This made some 20th century historians to regard them as too lazy to think for themselves. Nevertheless, these 19th century scholars matched on armed with Ranke’s concepts and succeeded in establishing history as a discipline worthy of scientific methods. Furthermore, even though Ranke’s view in history seems too uptight and conservative, he introduced important insights and methodology which today enriches history as an academic field of study. His view on primary sources helped to reduce too much emphasis and dependence on secondary sources of data collection and broaden the historian’s choice of source of evidence. He also emphasized the need for citation of the source of evidence by the historian which contributes to shape the methodology used today in historical research. It will, therefore only be appropriate if we conclude this paper with one of his most popular and influential aphorisms in the study of history. The aphorism stated thus: I see the time coming when we will base modern history no longer on secondhand reports, or even on contemporary historians, save where they had direct knowledge, and still less on works yet more distant from the period: but rather on eyewitness accounts and on the most genuine, most immediate sources.”18 Today many professional historians encourage emphasis on primary source of data collection to encourage originality in historiography. End notes Edmund B. Fryde, “Historiography in the 19th and 20th Centuries,” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Student and Home Edition (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010). E.H. Carr, What is History (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1961), 3. Robert C. William, The Historian’s Toolbox: A Student’s Guide to the Theory and Craft of History (New York: M.E. Sharpe, 2010), 11. James Ngozi Obiegbu, “Historiography and the Training of Historians,” in Issues in Historiography, ed., O.O. Olubomehin (Ibadan: College Press, 2001), 1. “History,” Encyclopaedia Britannica, Encyclopaedia Britannica Student and Home Edition, (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010). Ludwig Von Mises, Theory and History: an Interpretation of Social and Economic Evolution (Yale: Yale University Press, 1957), 159. Carr, History…, 4 – 5. G.G. Iggers and J.M. Powell, Leopold von Ranke and the Shaping of Historical Discipline (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1990), 18. Andreas Boldt, “Perception, Depiction and Description of European History: Leopold von Ranke and his Development and Understanding of Modern Historical Writing,” Historical Perspectives Vol.5 No.3 (2003), 2 Edward Muir, “Leopold von Ranke, his Library, and the Shaping of Historical Evidence,” The Courier, Vol.22, No.1 (1987), 1. Muir, “Leopold von Ranke…,” 3. O.O. Olubomehin, “The Issue of Objectivity in History,” in Issues in Historiography, ed., O.O Olubomehin (Ibadan: College Press, 2001), 43. Carr, History, 8. Rudolf Vierhaus, “Ranke, Leopold von,” Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Student and Home Edition (Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, 2010). Boldt, “Perception…,” 5 – 6. Carr, History…, 4 – 5. Carr, History…, 2. Iggers and Powell, Leopold von Ranke…, 48. 12