IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ebg/heccah/0912.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Waterloo et les regard croisés de l'interprétation

Author

Listed:
  • Mongin, Philippe

Abstract

The interpretations of the Waterloo campaign are numerous, diverse and constantly reworked, so they are part of history no less than the event itself. This article briefly reviews them before considering more carefully two selected interpreters, i.e., Clausewitz and Stendhal. It likens the former to a rational choice theorist who makes a step away from intelligible narrative in the direction of modelling, and it represents the latter, who expresses himself through his character Fabrice, as a theoretically informed critique of the inert categories of the historical discourse. Despite their opposing trends towards unification and dissolution, both examples testify to general features, which the end of this essay tries to bring out, of the concepts of interpretation and plurality of interpretations.

Suggested Citation

  • Mongin, Philippe, 2009. "Waterloo et les regard croisés de l'interprétation," HEC Research Papers Series 912, HEC Paris.
    • Handle: RePEc:ebg:heccah:0912
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.hec.fr/var/fre/storage/original/application/938592612fea2cd1a45946347b4d73fc.PDF
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Waterloo; campaign of 1815; Napoleon; Clausewitz; Stendhal; The Charterhouse of Parma; interpretation; interpretative plurality; intelligible narrative; rational choice theories;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B49 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Other
    • C72 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Noncooperative Games
    • N43 - Economic History - - Government, War, Law, International Relations, and Regulation - - - Europe: Pre-1913

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ebg:heccah:0912. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Antoine Haldemann (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hecpafr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.