Related to the issues of the autnnom> of Intellectual history anii the wa)

developments outside historical scholarship have led hi\torlans to w-examine the

foundations of their Jizcipline. is the question kvhich recurs throughout the book.

‘what is a teut’l’ As Hayden \\‘hite succinctly puts it in his \emiolopical analysis of

Henry Adams‘s autobiography. ‘the test-contc\t relationhhip. once an unexamined

presupposition of historical investigation. ha> become a problem’ (p. 31). LaCapru

offers the most penetrating analvsis of the nature of tests in his prwoking essay.

Tests. he argues. operate on t\vo ievels. There exists the documentary aspect of ;I text

(the factual or literal plane involving reference to empirical reality) and the text‘s

wx~rk-like facet (that u hich inwkes a creative response in the reader not reducible to

the documentary). The distinction between documentary and work-Luke allo~vs

LaCapra to call for ;I return to the readinp and interpretin, (1 of the prcat. complex tests

of the Western tradition tvhich contain ;I large element of the work-like. What is

refreshins about LaCapra’s position is his unabashed claim that complex. Lvork-like

texts engage the historian in ;I dialogue. a11 ‘attempt to think further what is at issue in

a text or ;I past -‘reaiitv”. and in the process the questioner is himself questioned by the

“other”’ (p. 54). Great texts can he reco~nised by their ability to transform the reader

and to be true to his sources the intellectual historian must develop an interpretation

of these tests ivhich ‘reactivates the prows5 of inquiry. opening up new avenues of

investigation, criticism. and self-reflection’ (p. 60).

This collection of essays offers no easy rt’solutlon to the identity crisis of intellectual

history by advocating the rstablishment of a IX\\. unified school of historical thought

based on a consensus on the content of an updated philosophy of the history of ideas.

Rather, the significance of the volume lies in its contention that intellectual historians

should become more receptive to theory and that by doing so they will enrich their

analysis of the texts they desire to understand. To be sure the studies of a variety of

subjects in this book are permeated by a sensitivity to theory and this lends them a

wonderful complexitv which could onlv be hinted at in the confines of a review. This

very complexity, the use of strange Jargon drawn from other disciplines. and the

introduction of novel ideas and approaches. may at first make us feel a trltk insecure

and inadequate. But ultimately this book eshilarates and challenges the reader bq

broadenin_e our perspectives and raising some old questions in a new light.

Leon Blum, Jean Lacouture, trans. George Holoch (New York and London: Holmes

s( hteirr, 1952). xii + 571 pp.

This massive biographical study of Leon Blum (1573-1950) deserves to be read b)

all those who are interested in modern European history. If it is given the attention it

merits. the result will likely be a renewed Interest in Blum and the ordeal of French

socialism during the first half of the t\ventirth century. Lacouture skillfully a-eaves the

varied sources at his disposal into an escitin, ~7 and dramatic storv. Beginning with

Blum‘s Jewish middle-class origins. his success as literary critic: lawyer and civil

Book Rer,iews 191

servant in the Conseil d’Etat. then moving on to the parltamentary career begun in

1919. his subsequent rise to the leadership of the French socialist party. and his

formation of two governments as premier (first for a year in June 1936. and second for

less than a month in IYX). Lacouture displays the delicate touch of a master

biographer. Lacouture is particularly effective when he describes Blum’s anguish while

imprisoned by the Vichv regime. his spirited defence of his contributions to the Third

Republic while on trial.in 19-13. his deportation to Buchenwaid in lY-I3 at the age of

seventy. his nearly miraculous survival and release in 19J5. and his triumphant return

to France where he helped to rrorganise the socialist party and spent four weeks in

power in 1946.

One of the reasons for Lacouture’s success as a biographer is his obvious sympathy

for his subject. Blum is portrayed as a passionate seeker of social justice. galvanised

into action by the Dreyfus affair and inspired throughout his life by Jean Jauris. the

French socialist leader assassinated in IYLJ. Blum once confessed to his friend Andre

Gide ‘for that man [Jaures] I have been a faithful dog’ (p. 57). Blum was true to his

master in his vision of socialism as ‘at once a culture, a morality. and an art. the art of

harmonizing. rationalizing society’ (p. 55). Although he admitted the importance of

economic factors in an analysis of the unjust capitalist society, he never subscribed to

full-blooded materialism. Blum always gave priority to the humanistic element in

Marxism. Social and political revolution was not an end in itself unless accompanied

by moral and intellectual regeneration. Blum’s feelings on the essential ethical nature

of socialism were reinforced by his experience with Lenin’s ruthlessness and the

narrow-mindedness of French communists. who saw Blum’s combination of Xlarxian

historical materialism and Jauresian idealism as a regrettable deviance from the

fundamental tenets of socialist doctrine. But Blum saw the entirety of Mars’s vvork as

a living body of thought open to criticism.

Yet Blum’s emphasis on socialism as a great force for harmony led him to play the role of unifier. Despite his antipathy in 1920 towards those socialists who wished to

join the Third International and submit to Lenin’s rule. Blum vainly worked to preserve the unity of French socialism. Fifteen years later Blum’s willingness to act as a conciliator led him to seek a coalition between communists, radicals and his socialist party ultimately resulting in the formation of the Popular Front. Lacouture depicts Blum as a man who courageously strove for peace with his enemies although he recognised that his role as unifier left him vulnerable to attack and open to misrepresentation. Caught in the middle between communists to the left of him and bourgeois liberals to the right, not to mention the neo-fascists and conservatives who abhorred him, Blum was a popular target for anti-Semitic slurs and vicious personal slander. Blum had to endure worse than mere verbal or written abuse in 1936 u-hen he was physically assaulted by a crowd of L’Action franqaise supporters.

Lacouture is also concerned in his book to deal with the theme of the intellectual in politics, and it is here that he offers his strongest criticism of Blum’s career. Blum. like Lamartine before him, began as an intellectual (in this case a theatre and literary critic), went into politics later in life at the age of forty-seven, and rose to a position of power where he had the opportunity of putting his theories into practice. But as Max

Weber observed in his ‘Politics as a Vocation’ in 1918, a year before Blum first served as a parliamentary deputy, ‘he who lets himself in for politics, that is for power and force as means. contracts with diabolical powers’. Could Blum the intellectual remain clean while engaging in the dirty game of politics? Furthermore. could Blum keep his socialist party pure from the contamination of the bourgeois political system in which it operated? Up until 1931 Blum and his socialists maintained a policy of

non-participation in non-socialist governments - that is, they refused to accept any cabinet positions even though the size of their parliamentary contingent might merit

192 Book Rri,ierc,r

the tnclusion of some soctalist element. Blum wanted to ensure That the party would be

ready for the larger task of exercrsing power when the proper :tme came rather than

lose rts purity in opportunist temptations and short-term misston> or risking

compromise, distortion or divisenrss bv parttctpatron tn the irorkings of managine a

bourgeois state. However, the rise of the fascist threat lead him to revise hrs posit&.

for he real&d that an untainted socialist party would be of no use if it lvrre caught in

the trap of a colcp ~l’t;r~r and dictatorship, like the German Social DrmocrJts (p. 206).

tVhen in the 1936 election the socialist partv emerged as the strongest :r~up within the

Popular Front. and the Popufar Front was the largest section vvtthin parliament. BIum

decided that now was the time for sociahsts to find out if they would bvork from vvithin

the system.

Lncouture goes into great detail on Blum‘s first government. in particular the

decision. vvhich Blum referred to as ‘my torture’. not to aid Republican Spain against

France‘s insurrection due to tremendous pressure from both Great Britain and the

radicals within his Popular Front cabinet (p. 323). After admitting the compromises

which Slum made when he ended his policy of non-participation. Lacouture

concluded that despite some important accomplishments the socialis? party %IS

doomed to failure in its exercise of political power. Lacouture asserts that Blum was

bound by the contradictions in which French social democracy exhausts itself. ‘How

can one preserve the integrity of the republican state while calling into question the

economic system at its foundation, or destroy a system of production relations while

nlaintaining the public order which conditions that system. or defend a panoply of

freedoms that also serve as an alibi for the perpetuation of injustice?’ (p. 539).

Lacouturr, then, interprets Blum as one who fought the good fight and lived the

good life, but whose noble intentions were stymied by the paradox of trying to achieve

a socialist end through bourgeois means.

Bernard Lightman

Muslims, Christians and Jews in the Crusader Kingdom of \.alencia; Societies in Symbiosis, Robert I. Burns, S.J. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1951),

xx + 363 pp., f?T.t)().

Professor Robert Burns’s new collection of essays on thirteenth-century post-

rsconquest Valencia does what the best scholarly hooks always do: it destroys old and

damaging myths, offers challenging new interpretations and ultimately changes the

way in which we must view our own world. In the process, Burns brings to life a

complex and vital civilisation in transition which is often misunderstood, often

ignored, by students of the Middle Ages. This is, of course, a book of special interest

for students of Spain, as these essays and the accompanying documents present a rare

nuts-and-bolts view of the day-to-day workings of what was to become one of the most

powerful state-buildin g myths in European history: the ‘Reconquista‘.

The essays collected here focus on the Mediterranean kingdom of Valsncia in the

years 124545. that is, during the period of Crusade and transition from >luslim to

Chrtstian rule under Jaume I el Conqueridor and his son Pere el Gran. To derive full

benefit from this book. it wouid be helpful to have read Burns’s broad survey of

.Lfudejar life in Vaiencia fslant rtnder tkr Crumkrs: Cdnrziai Sun.ir,ai in rk T~2irfeenih-Cfrrtur!:~ ~~~z~~~~~r of Vdencin (Princeton: Princeton University Press,

1973). This earlier book introduces many of the important concepts and characters

referred to constantly, and often obliquely. in Mwlirm. Chrisriarls md Jrws. Isium also tleshes out historical and geographical background givsen only cursor! treatment

in this new collection of essays. With this background knowledge. .\l~~linrs. Chrisrinnr