Extract
[...] Her work primarily focuses on the links between history and anthropology and on the history of gender. She has notably been interested in building a historical memory of women, by publishing a history of women between 1400 and 1820. She demonstrates that women have long been considered unfit to be historians of their own actions and that their ability to do so has been limited for a long time.9. She then returns to an anthropological study of their ways of life, demonstrating that they had little access to places of knowledge production, places of conservation, and that most of them were confined to the domestic status. [...]
[...] In other words, this consists of producing scientific historical knowledge about the past of women, accompanied by the production of a memorial narrative that has two goals: identity for women but also political to highlight the way in which unequal social structures have evolved over time Conclusion In short, historical anthropology was born from the interest of historians in the methods and approaches of ethnology and anthropology and the recognition of the place given to the major divisions of social matter such as gender. Indeed, to respond to the invisibility of women within historical science, historians needed to use methods from anthropology and ethnology. These methods then allowed them to explore their experience within past societies. [...]
[...] In this article, she argues that the woman of Ischomaque should benefit from better visibility. She does not have a name. She analyzes that this brings her a status of inferiority7. However, these new approaches are not without raising questions among historians and anthropologists. We can cite the case of anthropologist Clémence Royer, who was also a feminist, who wanted to submit at the end of her studies, a thesis titled 'the animal of creation that man knows the least'. It was a provocative title speaking of women. [...]
[...] This involved, in particular, highlighting their role during important historical events, studying their socialities through social history over time and micro-history, which allowed for a renewed reading of society in light of the construction of social structures and rethinking the place of women within societies. Nathalie Zemon Davis was a precursor in the way of envisioning a refounding of women's memory through an anthropological exploration of their pasts over time; showing that memory has an identity and political dimension contributing to their visibility. Bibliography Charpenel, M. (2018). The stakes of memory among women historians, 1970-2001. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, N° 223(3), 12-25. https://doi.org/10.3917/arss.223.0012. Dauphin, C., Farge, A., & Fraisse, G. (1986). Culture and power of women: essay of historiography. [...]
[...] Also, through the awareness of a masculinization of history, the constraints of memory are renewed. The famous historian Pierre Nora, for example, has evolved his work published in 1984, which is called Lieux de mémoire in which he is interested in the place and symbolic function of institutions while focusing on the sociology of their members without highlighting the exclusively masculine character of these institutions years later, Pierre Nora reflected on the place of women at the university and recalled that no woman was elected to the Collège de France before 1973" 4. [...]
