Abstract
The experience of historians as autobiographers has led them to reconsider the nature of historical knowledge and the function of the historian as an intermediary between the past and present. In the new theoretical context of the social sciences and historiography, we can take this proposal further and consider autobiography as a valid form of history-or, at least, as,unconventional history', understood as negotiations with history that transcend or subvert traditional chronological monographs, posit the 'subjective' as a useful form of knowledge, and engage the constructed nature of the text. Taking this hypothesis as a starting point, this article reads historians' autobiographical texts to explore if we can/should continue to defend the classic distinction between subject and object, historian scientist and historian author. In this article I compare the work of several historian autobiographers that permit us to identify different methodologies in approaching the story of the self that also reflects different theoretical conceptions of history. I argue that historians that may be considered 'constructionist" such as Fernand Braudel, Annie Kriegel, George Duby, and Eric Hobsbawm, design their autobiographies in the same way they articulate their historical texts: by foregrounding objectivity and establishing critical distance between the subject-the historian who narrates the story-and the object-one's own life. Unconventional or experimental approaches, such as those espoused by Robert Rosenstone, Dominick LaCapra, or Clifford Geertz, result in more self-conscious autobiographies, which are, paradoxically, often more realistic and more revealing of the epistemological nature of life writing.