December 3, 2014
Robert GERWARTH and Guillaume PIKETTY
Master Histoire – 2014-2015
1ère année
Violence and War in the Modern Age: Approaches and Debates
This seminar intends to analyse the warrior phenomenon before it happens, when it takes
places, in the representations and then in the memories.
We will use the tools offered by history, and also by political science, philosophy,
anthropology, law and even social psychology, psychiatry and psychoanalysis.
Without forgetting the chronology, the specificities of the context and of the experiences, and
the tactical and strategic points of view, we will first focus on the individual situations.
Whilst the 19th and 20th centuries are the primary focus of the seminar, incursions in a wider
chronology will occur occasionally. We will work in a comparative perspective.
As often as possible, our work will rely on the usage, according to the disciplines, of
testimonies, souvenirs, private writings and novels, and also of pictures, movies and possibly
documentaries.
Each session will begin with two (if necessary three) presentations (10 to 15 minutes each)
about one of the “Essential Readings”, each presentation being followed by a debate. Then,
after a debate, one of the professors will propose a short “reprise” about the main themes of
the session.
Each student will be responsible for the following:
- Attendance and participation.
The latter entails reading the texts, at least the “essential” ones, before the
session.
- One presentation about an “Essential Reading”.
- A ten-pages final essay on a different topic than the presentation and to be
determined with the professors.
Session 1 (January 29) – The Age of Total War: The Two World Wars (RG)
This opening seminar will provide an introduction to the module. It will address various
practical issues concerning the course.
At the same time, this seminar will explore the European experience of ‘total war’ in the
twentieth century, and more specifically, the period of the two world wars.
We will discuss the concept of ‘total war’. This will be followed with a more detailed
consideration of ‘total war’ in the context of the two world wars.
Discussion Points
• What is total war?
• Is total war understood best as an ‘ideal type’?
• Is total war a uniquely twentieth century phenomenon?
• What is the relationship between total war and ‘modern war’?
2
• Was the First World War a total war?
• What was the role of ‘big ideas’ and ideology in the two world wars?
• How useful is the concept of a ‘European Civil War’ in discussing the years
1914-1945?
• Are discussions of the two world wars too Eurocentric?
Essential Reading
Roger Chickering ‘World War I and the theory of total war: reflections on the British and
German cases, 1914–15’ in Chickering and Förster (eds), Great War, Total War: Combat and
Mobilisation on the Western Front (Cambridge, 2000), pp 35–57.
Eric Hobsbawm, The Age of Extremes, 1914–1991 (London, 1994), pp 21–54 (chapter 1).
Further Reading
William Mulligan, ‘Total War: review article’, War in History, vol. 15, no. 2 (2008), pp 211–
221
Hew Strachan, ‘Essay and reflection: on total war and modern war’, International History
Review, vol. 22, no. 2 (Jun. 2000), pp 341–370
Roger Chickering and Stig Förster (eds), The Shadow of Total War: Europe, East Asia and
the United States, 1919–1939 (Cambridge, 2003), pp 1–23 (introduction)
Hew Strachan ‘Total war: the conduct of war, 1939–1945’ in Chickering, Förster and Greiner
eds), A World at Total War: Global Conflict and the Politics of Destruction, 1937– 1945
(Cambridge, 2005), pp.33–53
Session 2 (February 5) – Sociability among Combatants. Cohesion and Leadership. Is
War “Gendered”? (GP).
This seminar will explore the individual experience of war in the late nineteenth and twentieth
centuries.
We will study the ways and means to create efficient small units and to lead them on the
battlefield. We notably discuss the concept of “primary group”. From the home front to the
line, the place devoted to women will be specifically considered.
Discussion Points
• What does training men to kill mean?
• Is the idea of “primary group” relevant?
• What does being a leader imply?
• For what and for whom to die?
3
• Can women be soldiers?
Essential Reading
Joanna Bourke, An Intimate History of Killing. Face-to-Face Killing in Twentieth-Century
Warfare (London: Granta Books, 1999), chapter 3 “Training Men to Kill” pp.69-102.
Edward Shils and Morris Janowitz, “Cohesion and Disintegration in the Wehrmacht in World
War Two”, The Public Opinion Quarterly, Volume 12/2, summer 1948, pp.280-315.
Further Reading
Nicole A. Dombrowski, “Soldiers, Saints, or Sacrificial Lambs? Women’s Relationship to
Combat and the Fortification of the Home Front in the Twentieth Century” pp.2-37 in Nicole
A. Dombrowski (ed.), Women and War in the Twentieth Century. Enlisted With or Without
Consent (New York – London: Routledge, 2004).
Paul Fussell, The Boys’ Crusade. American G.I.s in Europe: Chaos and Fear in World War
Two (London: Phoenix, 2005), chapter “Replacements and Infantry Morale” pp.93-104.
Christian Ingrao, « Sociabilité et violence. Rituels de camaraderie dans les Einsatzgruppen »
pp.184-193 in Anne-Claude Ambroise-Rendu, Nicole Edelman et Fabrice d’Almeida (dir.),
Des gestes en histoire : formes et significations des gestualités médicale, guerrière et
politique, Paris, Seli Arslan, 2006.
Emmanuel Saint-Fuscien, À vos ordres ? La relation d’autorité dans l’armée française de la
Grande Guerre, Paris, Éditions de l’EHESS, 2011, chapitre 3 « L’exercice de l’autorité dans
une armée en guerre » pp.73-97.
Hew Strachan, “Training, Morale and Modern War”, Journal of Contemporary History, 2006,
volume 41/2, pp.221-227.
Martin Van Creveld, Men, Women and War. Do Women Belong to the Front Line? (London:
Cassel, 2001), chapter 15 “The Weakness of Women” pp.149-160.
Session 3 (February 12) – The Active Process of Killing. Suffering. Death (RG).
This session will focus on the experiences at the heart of war: the experiences of killing and
being killed. Reconstructing the ‘logic’ of killing under conditions of war will be part of our
discussions, as will be the sources used to reconstruct the experiences of bodily harm,
incarceration in POW camps or killing on the battlefield.
Discussion Points
• Why has the act of killing been ignored in the literature for so long?
• What are the sources with which we can write an “intimate history” of killing?
• Wounds and mutilations: treatment and care.
• What does dehumanizing the enemy mean?
4
•
Being a prisoner: a bodily experience?
Essential Reading
Joanna Bourke, An Intimate History of Killing: Face to Face Killing in Twentieth Century
Warfare (London, 1999), pp.xiii–xxiii (introduction)?.
Elaine Scarry, The Body in Pain. The Making and Unmaking of the World (New YorkOxford: Oxford University Press, 1985), “Introduction” pp.3-23.
Further Reading
Sylvie Caucanas, Rémy Cazals, Pascal Payen (dir.), Les prisonniers de guerre dans l’histoire.
Contacts entre peuples et cultures, Toulouse, Privat, 2003, notamment “Les causes de la forte
mortalité des prisonniers de guerre italiens en Allemagne et en Autriche au cours des deux
guerres mondiales” pp.125-135 et “Vivre au contact de l’ennemi : les prisonniers de guerre
français en Allemagne en 1914-1918” pp.197-210.
Drew Gilpin Faust, This Republic of Suffering. Death and the American Civil War (New
York: Vintage, 2008), chapter 1 “Dying” pp.3-31.
Paul Grauwin, J’étais médecin à Dien Bien Phu, Paris, France Empire, 2004, pp.96-105.
Jessie Glenn Gray, The Warriors. Reflexions on Men in Battle (New York: Harcourt, Brace,
1959. Reed., Lincoln and London, University of Nebraska Press, 1998), chapter 4 “The
Soldier’s Relations to Death” pp.97-129. Trad. fr. Au combat. Réflexions sur les hommes à la
guerre, Paris, Tallandier, 2012.
Catherine Merridale, Ivan’s War: Inside the Red Army, 1939-45 (2006), chapter 6 (A Land
Laid Waste), 187-225.
James J. Weingartner, “Trophies of War. U.S. Troops and the Mutilation of the Japanese War
Dead, 1941-1945”, Pacific Historical Review, Feb. 1992, Volume 61, Number 1, pp.53-67.
Session 4 (February 19) – Men and Women in Resistance. Memories (GP).
This session will be specifically devoted to the fighting the resistance, both interior and
external. We will consider the reasons for choosing to fight on the national soil of to go
abroad in order to fight back. We will study the specificities of the clandestine world
(sociability, leadership, danger and death, etc.). We will address the issues raised by the
memories of the resistance.
Discussion Points
• Why committing oneself in the resistance?
• Ways and means of a clandestine war.
• Sociability and hierarchy in the resistance.
5
• Can women be resistance fighters?
• What does death mean for the resistance fighters?
• What are the specificities of a war of partisans?
• Why choosing combatant exile, and what for
Essential Reading
Claire Andrieu, « Les résistantes, perspectives de recherche » p.69-96 in Antoine Prost (dir.),
La Résistance, une histoire sociale, Paris, Éditions de l’Atelier, 1997.
Laurent Douzou, « La démocratie sans le vote. La question de la décision dans la
Résistance », Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales n°140, décembre 2001, pp.57-67.
Further Reading
Harry Roderick Kedward, « La Résistance, l'histoire et l'anthropologie : quelques domaines
de la théorie », p.109-118 in Jean-Marie Guillon, Pierre Laborie (dir.), Mémoire et histoire :
la Résistance, Toulouse, Privat, 1995.
Pierre Laborie, « Qu’est-ce que la Résistance ? », p.29-38 in François Marcot (dir.),
Dictionnaire historique de la Résistance. Résistance intérieure et France libre, Paris, Robert
Laffont, 2006.
Peter Lieb, “Repercussions of Eastern Front Experiences on Anti-Partisan Warfare in France
1943–1944”, Journal of Strategic Studies vol. 31, issue 5, pp. 797-823.
Mark Mazower, Hitler's Empire. How the Nazis Ruled Europe (New York: The Penguin
Press, 2008), chapter 15 “Opposition” pp.471-521.
Paula Schwartz, “The Politics of Food and Gender in Occupied Paris” in Modern and
Contemporary France, 1999, 7 (1), pp.35-45.
Session 5 (March 5) – Violence and Decolonisation: The British Experience (RG).
This seminar focuses on the violence that accompanied European decolonisation after the
Second World War. It will begin with a general discussion of violence as a feature of the
decolonisation process. This will be followed with a more detailed discussion of the British
experience of colonial counter-insurgency in this period and the ways in which it compared to
that of other European powers such as France and the Netherlands.
Discussion Points
• In what ways were European powers ‘exporters of violence’ in the decades
following the Second World War?
• How effective were European counter-insurgency campaigns in the colonial world
after 1945?
6
• How peaceful was the British experience of decolonization?
• What forms of coercion did the British employ during colonial disturbances?
• How consistent were British methods of counterinsurgency with humanitarian
principles?
• Were British methods any less violent than those of other colonial powers?
• How might we account for the differing levels of violence employed by Britain
against various colonial insurgencies in this period?
Essential Reading
David French, The British way in Counter-Insurgency, 1945–1967 (Oxford, 2011), pp
105–138 (chapter 4)
David Killingray and David M. Anderson, ‘An orderly retreat? Policing the end of empire’ in
Anderson and Killingray (eds), Policing and Decolonisation (Manchester, 1992), pp 1-22
Further Reading
Martin Shipway, Decolonization and its Impact: a Comparative Approach to the End of
Colonial Empires (London, 2007), pp 140–173 (chapter 6)
Martin Thomas, Bob Moore and L. J. Butler, Crises of Empire: Decolonization and Europe's
Imperial Nation States, 1918-1975, pp 318–345 (chapter 13)
David Anderson, Histories of the Hanged: Britain’s Dirty War in Kenya and the End of
Empire (London, 2005), pp 289–328 (chapter 7)
Alistair Horne, A Savage War of Peace: Algeria, 1954–1962 (London, 1987), pp 183–208
(chapter 9), 349–373 (chapter 17)
7
Session 6 (March 12) – War and the Environment (GP).
This session intends to apply to the warrior phenomenon some of the issues raised by the
history of environment. We will try to (re)consider war from an environmental point of view.
We will analyse the consequences of the environment on the ways and the means to wage
war, and on the fighters both during the fighting and after.
Discussion Points
• Theatres of operations and evolution of the combat methods.
• Is it possible to master the environment in order to wage war?
• Logistics issues.
• Is nature the main enemy of the warriors?
• The environment: the first victim of the war?
Essential Reading
Omer Bartov, Hitler’s Army: Soldiers, Nazis, and War in the Third Reich (New York: Oxford
University Press, 1991), pp.3-58. Trad. fr. L’armée d’Hitler. La Wehrmacht, les nazis, la
guerre, Paris, Hachette, 1990.
Peter Schrijvers, The GI War Against Japan. American Soldier in Asia and the Pacific During
World War II (New York: New York University Press, 2002), chapter 5 “Nature” pp.101-134.
Further Reading
Paul Fussell, The Boys’ Crusade. American G.I.s in Europe: Chaos and Fear in World War
Two (London: Phoenix, 2005), chapter “The Haunted Wood: Hürtgen Forest” pp.81-91.
J.B. Neilands, Gordon H. Orians, E.W. Pfeiffer et al., Harvest of Death: Chemical Warfare in
Vietnam and Cambodia (New York: The Free Press, 1972), “The Ecological Effects of the
Military Uses of Herbicides in Vietnam” pp.150-175.
Roy Scranton, “Walls and Shadows: The Occupation of Baghdad”, City, December 2007,
Vol. 11, No. 3, pp.277-292.
Martin Van Creveld, Supplying War. Logistics From Wallenstein to Patton (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 2004), chapter 6 “Sirte to Alamein” pp.181-201.
Session 7 (March 19) – Genocide. From Africa to Auschwitz to Cambodia to
Rwanda (RG).
This seminar examines the colonial origins of extreme violence in Europe. It will focus on the
historical debate concerning the extent to which imperial Germany’s violence against native
peoples in South-West Africa acted as a direct influence on the genocidal policies of the Nazi
regime. We will also discuss why genocides continued to occur in the world after the horrors
of Auschwitz.
8
Discussion Points
• In what ways can colonial experiences be seen to have influenced the extreme
violence of twentieth century Europe?
• Can the colonial violence of European powers be considered as acts of
genocide?
• In what ways is Germany’s colonial past claimed to have influenced the
genocidal policies of the Nazis?
• Can fascism be considered as a form of colonialism?
• Why did the defeat of Nazi Germany not end the history of genocide?
Essential Reading
Robert Gerwarth and Stephen Malinowski, ‘Hannah Arendt’s Ghosts: reflections on the
disputable path from Windhoek to Auschwitz’ in Central European History, 42, pp 279–300
Jürgen Zimmerer, ‘Annihilation in Africa: the ‘race war’ in German South West Africa
(1904–1908) and its significance for a global history of genocide’ in German Historical
Institute Bulletin, no. 37 (Fall 2005), pp 51–57
Dirk Moses and Donald Bloxham, “Genocide”, in Gerwarth / Bloxham (eds.) Political
Violence in Twentieth-Century Europe.
Further Reading
Hannah Arendt, The Origins of Totalitarianism (London, 1958), pp 222–267 (chapter 8)
Isabel Hull, ‘The military campaign in German Southwest Africa, 1904–1907’ in German
Historical Institute Bulletin, no. 37 (Fall 2005), pp 39–44
Raymond Evans, ‘“Crime without a name”: colonialism and the case for “Indigenocide”’ in
Moses (ed), Empire, Colony, Genocide: Conquest, Occupation and Subaltern Resistance in
World History (Oxford, 2008), pp 133–148
Session 8 (March 26) – Extreme Violence and Ethnic Cleansing. From Armenia to
WWII to Former Yugoslavia (GP)
This session examines extreme violence throughout the twentieth century. It will study the
reasons why the “laws of war” were deliberately ignored, notably (but not only) concerning
the civilians. It will try to analyse the processes that lead to extreme violence and the ways
through which individuals can become perpetrators. It will consider the consequences of such
a violence both on the victims and on the perpetrators.
Discussion Points
• Why did twentieth century warfare deliberately target civilians?
• What constitutes a “war crime”?
9
• What does a rape mean?
• What are the consequences of torture?
• “Ordinary men” committing extraordinary crimes?
• What questions does extreme violence ask to historians and to scientists?
Essential Reading
Joanna Bourke, An Intimate History of Killing (London: Granta Books, 1999), chapter 6 “War
crimes” pp.159-202.
Ruth Seifert, “The Second Front. The Logic of Sexual Violence in Wars”, Women’s Studies
International Forum, Volume 19, Nos 1/2, 1996, pp.35-43.
Further Reading
Anonymous, A Woman in Berlin (London: Virago, 2011). Trad. fr. Une femme à Berlin.
Journal, 20 avril-22 juin 1945, Paris, Gallimard, 2006, pp.15-71.
Stéphane Audoin-Rouzeau, « Violences extrêmes de combat et refus de voir » pp.543-549 in
Jacques Sémelin (dir.), « Violences extrêmes », Revue internationale des sciences sociales
n°174, décembre 2002.
Earl R. Beck, Under the Bombs. The German Home Front, 1942-1945 (Lexington: The
University Press of Kentucky, 1986), pp.83-197.
Raphaëlle Branche et Françoise Sironi, « La torture aux frontières de l’humain » p.591-600 in
Jacques Sémelin (dir.), « Violences extrêmes », Revue internationale des sciences sociales
n°174, décembre 2002.
Raphaëlle Branche, Isabelle Delpla, John Horne, Pieter Lagrou, Daniel Palmieri, Fabrice
Virgili, “Introduction : écrire l’histoire des viols en temps de guerre » pp.7-24 in Raphaëlle
Branche et Fabrice Virgili (dir.), Viols en temps de guerre, Paris, Payot, 2011.
Ruth Harris, “The Child of the Barbarian”, Past and Present, number 141, pp.170-206.
Alan Kramer, ‘Combatants and non-combatants: atrocities, massacres, and war crimes’ in
John Horne (ed.), A Companion to World War I (Oxford, 2010), pp.188–201
Regina Mühlhäuser, « La violence sexuelle des soldats allemands pendant la guerre
d’anéantissement en Union soviétique (1941-1945) pp.43-54 in Raphaëlle Branche et Fabrice
Virgili (dir.), Viols en temps de guerre, Paris, Payot, 2011.
Véronique Nahoum Grappe, « Anthropologie de la violence extrême : le crime de
profanation » p.601-609 in Revue internationale de sciences sociales, décembre 2002.
Session 9 (April 2) – Terrorism (RG).
This seminar explores terrorism in twentieth century Europe. It will begin with a general
discussion about the definitions of terrorism, and the evolution of terrorist violence in Europe
during the long twentieth century. This will be followed by a consideration of the Irish
10
Republican Army in Northern Ireland and the Red Army Faction in Germany as examples of
‘Pseudo-colonial’ and ‘New Left’ terrorism in the 1970s.
Discussion Points
• How can ‘terrorism’ best be defined?
• Is ‘terrorism’ a useful term for historians?
• What types of political entities use ‘terrorist’ methods?
• What does a historical analysis of ‘terrorism’ in twentieth century Europe tell us
about the phenomenon more generally?
• How does the violence of the IRA relate to our understanding of ‘terrorism’?
• How important is sectarianism in understanding IRA violence?
• How does the violence of the RAF relate to our understanding of ‘terrorism’?
• How important is the trauma of Germany’s Nazi past in explaining the
violence of the RAF?
Essential Reading
Heinz-Gerhard Haupt and Klaus Weinhauer, ‘Terrorism and the state’ in Bloxham &
Gerwarth (eds), Political Violence in Twentieth Century Europe (Cambridge, 2011), pp.176–
210
Charles Townshend, Terrorism: a Very Short Introduction (Oxford, 2011), pp 1–21
(chapter 1)
Jeremy Varon, Bringing the War Home: the Weather Underground, the Red Army Faction
and Revolutionary Violence in the Sixties and Seventies (Berkeley, 2004), pp 196–254
(chapter 5)
Further Reading
Stefan Aust, The Baader-Meinhof Complex (London, 2008), relevant chapters from Part II
Richard English, Armed Struggle: the History of the IRA (London, 2003), pp 148–187
(chapter 4)
Session 10 (April 9) – Coming out of war (I). Cultural Demobilization. Emotions,
Possibly Extreme. Psychiatric Traumas (GP).
This seminar is devoted to the rather complicated process of coming out of war. It will
consider the different issues at stake when an individual tries to resume a “normal” life after
having endured war, as a fighter (wearing a uniform or not), as a non-combatant, as a victim,
etc. It will analyse the long-term consequences of the emotions provoked by war.
Discussion Points
11
• What does returning to his or her intimate life mean for a veteran?
• What is a “moral economy of gratitude”?
• Ways and mean of mourning.
• Is a complete cultural demobilization possible?
• Is a psychiatric trauma “for real”? If so, how and by whom can it be detected and
then treated?
Essential Reading
John Horne, « Introduction » pp.45-53 in John Horne (dir.), « Démobilisations culturelles
après la Grande Guerre », dossier in 14-18. Aujourd’hui. Today. Heute n°5, mai 2002.
Jonathan Shay, Achilles in Vietnam. Combat Trauma and the Undoing of Character (New
York: Scribner, 1994), pp.169-181.
Further Reading
Louis Althusser, L’avenir dure longtemps, Paris, Stock, 1992, p.29-34 et p.48.
Richard Bessel and Dirk Schumann, « Introduction » pp.1-13 in Richard Bessel and Dirk
Schumann (eds.), Life after Death. Approaches to a Cultural and Social History of Europe
During the 1940s and 1950s (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003).
Bruno Cabanes et Guillaume Piketty, « Introduction » pp.11-34 in Bruno Cabanes et
Guillaume Piketty (dir.), Retour à l’intime au sortir de la guerre, Paris, Tallandier, 2009.
Dossier « Choc traumatique et histoire culturelle » in 14-18. Aujourd’hui. Today. Heute n°3,
Noesis, 2000.
Pieter Lagrou, « Overview » pp.3-10 and Barbara Hately-Broad, « Coping in Britain and
France: A Comparison of Family Issues affecting the Homecoming of Prisoners of War
following World War II » pp.141-150 in Bob Moore and Barbara Hately-Broad, Prisoners of
War, Prisoners of Peace (Oxford – New York: Berg, 2005).
Special Issue on « Shell Shock », Journal of Contemporary History, volume 35, number 1,
2000 (articles by Joanna Bourke, Paul Lerner, George Mosse and Jay Winter).
Ben Shephard, A Long Way home. The Aftermath of the Second World War (London: Vintage,
2011), « Introduction » pp.1-10.
Session 11 (April 16) – Coming out of War (II). Brutalization and Paramilitarism (RG).
This seminar will focus on the aftermath of the First World War. Students will be introduced
to the concept of ‘brutalization’, and will debate its relative importance in explaining the
continuation of violence after 1918 against factors such as counter-revolution, imperial
collapse, and the mobilising power of ‘cultures of defeat’.
12
Discussion Points
• In what ways did the First World War brutalize European society?
• How prevalent was paramilitary violence in Europe after the First World
War?
• How can we explain this emergence of paramilitary violence in Europe and
its uneven distribution?
• In what ways was the First World War claimed to have ‘brutalized’ British
society?
• How did these fears of ‘brutalization’ affect British political culture?
• In what ways was German politics and society brutalized by the war?
• In what ways did the experience of defeat shape counter-revolutionary movements
in Germany?
• How can we account for the differing experiences of Britain and Germany?
Essential Reading
Robert Gerwarth and John Horne, ‘Vectors of violence: paramilitarism in Europe after the
Great War’ in Journal of Modern History, vol. 83, no. 3 (Sep. 2011) pp.489–512
George L. Mosse, Fallen Soldiers: Reshaping the Memory of the World Wars (Oxford, 1991),
pp.159–182 (chapter 8)
Further Reading
Robert Gerwarth, ‘The central European counter-revolution: paramilitary violence in
Germany, Austria and Hungary after the Great War’ in Past and Present, no. 200, pp.175–
209
Jon Lawrence, ‘Forging a peaceable kingdom: war, violence, and fear of brutalization in postFirst World War Britain’ in Journal of Modern History, vol. 75, no. 3 (Sep. 2003) pp.557–589
Peter Gatrell, ‘War after the War: Conflicts, 1919–1923’ in Horne (ed) A Companion to
World War I (Oxford, 2010), pp 558–576
Session 12 (April 23) – Telling about War (GP).
This seminar considers the various ways to tell what fighting in a war is, and what it means. It
will focus on the individuals who try to describe the warrior phenomenon. It will consider
some of the specific characters evoked in such descriptions. Last but not least, it will study
the long-term consequences of these tellings and of the memories of the war.
Discussion Points
• Journalism and journalists in / at war?
• Is it possible to tell what war really is?
13
• What is a hero?
• Myths, representations and stereotypes.
• Memories of the war and policies of memory.
• Resistance: a story impossible to tell – and untold?
Essential Reading
Omer Bartov « De la guerre-éclair à la guerre totale : image et historiographie » pp.213-244
in Bruno Cabanes et Edouard Husson (dir.), Les sociétés en guerre, Paris, Armand Colin,
2003.
Olivier Dumoulin « Des morts pour vivre » pp.437-444 in Olivier Dumoulin et Françoise
Thélamon (dir.), Autour des morts. Mémoire et identité, Rouen, Publications de l’Université
de Rouen, 2001.
Further Reading
Pierre Brossolette « Hommage aux morts de la France combattante » pp.213-216 in Pierre
Brossolette, Résistance (1927-1943). Textes rassemblés et présentés par Guillaume Piketty,
Paris, Odile Jacob, 1998.
Laetitia Bucaille « Introduction : récits de l’après-conflit et recompositions identitaires, excombattants, héros et exilés » in Revue internationale de sciences sociales, automne 2007.
Pierre Laborie, Les Français des années troubles, Paris, Desclée de Brouwer, 2001, chapitre
« Silences de la mémoire, mémoires du silence » pp.53-71.
Pierre Laborie, Le chagrin et le venin. La France sous l’Occupation, mémoire et idées reçues,
Paris Bayard, 2011, chapitre I « Prisons et miracle de la mémoire » pp.17-49.
Mary Louise Roberts, « Photographier les G.I. : érotisme et photojournalisme en France
pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale » pp.259-277 in Bruno Cabanes et Guillaume Piketty
(dir.), Retour à l’intime au sortir de la guerre, Paris, Tallandier, 2009.
Laurence van Ypersele (dir.), Questions d’histoire contemporaine. Conflits, mémoires,
identités, Paris, PUF, 2006, chapitre VIII « Héros et héroïsation » pp.149-167.
Jean-Pierre Vernant, « La mort héroïque chez les Grecs » pp.69-86 in Jean-Pierre Vernant, La
Traversée des frontières, Paris, Seuil, 2004.