La prima conferenza annuale del National Council on Public History (NCPH) alla quale ho partecipato fu nel 2010 a Portland, nell’Oregon. Avevo scoperto nella lista di discussioni di H-Net, H-Public, la call per una tavola rotonda organizzata da Anna Adamek […]
As we know, the social role of historians as experts and potential influencer of contemporary debates because of their knowledge of the past and their critical skills applied to original sources, is challenged today. This is what denounced in 2015 Jo Guldi and David Armitage in a Manifesto that has been widely commented worldwide and translated into Italian.
This interview was organized asynchronously by Thomas Cauvin, (Colorado State University) at the end of July 2017 and after the first AIPH national conference and 4th IFPH international conference which took place in Ravenna (5-9 June 2017) […]
La Public History: innovazioni metodologiche e prospettive divulgative nella scienza storica. Una discussione nella rivista “Storia e Futuro”
SeF: Cominciamo da una semplice questione di definizione e di metodo: come definirebbe la Public History, tanto in positivo quanto in negativo? Cosa è, ma anche cosa “non è”, la Public History? […].
This post is written in Italian and served as an introduction to the Memoria e Ricerca 2017 issue on History Museums and Public History. The papers we present were selected from panel presentations delivered during the International Federation for Public History (IFPH) 2ndinternational conference in Jinan, China in August 2015, which was part of the 22nd Conference of the International Committee for the Historical Sciences (ICHS).
Historiography on fascism has sometimes sparked lively discussions in the, often sleepy, Italian academic historians community. However, narrating the history of fascism outside of academic books and engaging publically–and as historians–with opposing memories has still to be accomplished in a country still fearing its own past.