The relations between the judge and the historian and the differences between these two figures, in cases where an historian collaborates openly with a judge as an expert consultant. What happens when an investigative office asks an historian to reconstruct an event which is subject to a judicial procedure? Or, in another possible scenario, what happens when a community asks an historian to pronounce on what happened in the past, in order to ascertain which, between two contesting memories of the representation of an event, is the one which corresponds to what ‘really happened’? In these cases historians are sought out to establish the truth – their professional skills as ‘truth experts’ are called upon. The author reflects on these issues, using as a starting point his own personal experiences as a consultant in some recent Italian war-crimes trials.
Lo storico come consulente
PEZZINO, PAOLO
2012-01-01
Abstract
The relations between the judge and the historian and the differences between these two figures, in cases where an historian collaborates openly with a judge as an expert consultant. What happens when an investigative office asks an historian to reconstruct an event which is subject to a judicial procedure? Or, in another possible scenario, what happens when a community asks an historian to pronounce on what happened in the past, in order to ascertain which, between two contesting memories of the representation of an event, is the one which corresponds to what ‘really happened’? In these cases historians are sought out to establish the truth – their professional skills as ‘truth experts’ are called upon. The author reflects on these issues, using as a starting point his own personal experiences as a consultant in some recent Italian war-crimes trials.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
