Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. (Reviews).

Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence. By Peter Burke (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2001. 224pp. $35.00).

Peter Burke has mobilized his decades of work in social and cultural history in order to write this exhortative book exploring the value of images for historical writing. Stressing the use of "traces" rather than "sources" to understand the past, Burke argues that visual documents provide invaluable evidence that both bolsters and supplements other forms of information available to historians. In particular, Burke argues, "images can bear witness to what is not put into words." Yet Burke has observed a continuing reluctance to use them by most historians, particularly beyond a mere illustration of arguments made on the basis of written data. With notable exceptions, Burke claims, only in the 1980s did what William Mitchell calls a "pictorial turn" take place. The evolving history of mentalities and material culture encouraged such a "turn," and the series "Picturing History" in which Eyewitnessing appears was launched in 1995 to promote this development. With the emergence of the "generation ... exposed to co mputers, as well as television, [that] has always lived in a world saturated with images" Burke implies the potential for the "new trend" to find a good head of steam. Yet, Burke is surprisingly cautious about writing a manual that could be used to train graduate students. He did not want to write a "how-to-do-it" book, given the "often ambiguous or polysemic" subjectmatter, and the suggestive rather than systematic organization of his book makes it more helpful for the working historian than a novice (9-15, 31, 185).

In a series of chapters Burke interweaves a wide and sometimes confusing variety of issues raised by the challenge of turning images into "admissable evidence." He introduces at different points both the kinds of visual evidence available to historians and the range of information that a close reading can extract from them. Periodically, he also strays into questions about the reception of images and their use by patrons or consumers, including "the role of image as agent". Burke also keeps returning to the central issue of contextualization as he provides cautionary tales and examples. Reference to theoretical perspectives appears as needed to explore the meaning of works under consideration. Yet while substantial evaluation of the iconological approach makes up Chapter Two, it is only as a curious sort of postscript that Burke presents a variety of recent theoretical avenues available to historians (14, 145).

Burke has gathered together in Eyewitnessing a plethora of intriguing visual documents that illustrate his analysis, moving beyond Western cultures to give his book a global range. He begins with portraits and photographs, and later includes religious imagery, "images in politics," material remnants of "the everyday culture of ordinary people," representations of the "other", pictorial historical recreations, and film. From the ways in which "images propagate values" to information about the "social use of objects," from the mentality of ordinary people to the "forms of social behavior," from the unexamined prejudices shaping images of women or colonial subjects to the deliberate presentation of rulers, visual documents reveal useful information for historical analysis (60, 78, 81, 100-103).

How to unlock the secrets hidden in these documents engages Burke throughout the book. Methods include using a series of comparable images to uncover continuities and changes over time. Paying attention to "small details" leads to fascinating revelations about the social mores or mentality of past cultures. But deceptions await the incautious historian, so Burke begins with the portraits and photographs that illustrate well the seductive sense of "reliability" that seemingly "unfiltered" images can provide. The message even in these cases depends on the cultural traditions from which the image's creator draws and which interpreters must painstakingly recreate, the point Burke repeatedly illustrates (21-33).

Theory can also help historians to interpret and decode visual documents. Burke relies heavily on Erwin Panofsky's approach to unlocking the surface and underlying meanings of images, despite his caution about the approach's limits. He later applies the "concept of the 'gaze,' ... the western gaze, for example, the scientific gaze, the colonial gaze, the tourist gaze, and the male gaze." Other references to helpful theoretical perspectives appear at times, yet Burke delays until the final two chapters presenting the usefulness of Psychoanalysis, Structuralism and Post-structuralism, and the "Social Histories of Art," including a brief mention of the "feminist approach" and some discussion of reception theory. Ultimately, Burke endorses "a synthesis between elements of the iconographical approach and elements of the alternatives to it." This pragmatic "third way" allows historians to make truly discriminating judgments about the visual evidence (41-42, 125, 169-184).

Although Burke's publications include a classic history of popular culture, he provides less coverage of the images produced on the local level than I expected. Much elite art appears in his chapters as well as images aimed at ordinary people. He does include briefly such locally generated evidence as the votive images that express "the hopes and fears of ordinary people and testify to the close relationship between donor and saint." Moreover, the one illustration of votive art in the book demonstrates the ability to "study continuity and change in the clothes of different social groups" that such paintings permit. But it lacks the features provided in more complex votive imagery, including complementary textual and pictorial details, that make these documents so rich a source for understanding the popular mentality (50, 81).

The reader of Eyewitnessing will learn much about the ways in which historians need to read visual texts with the help of many other informational sources. Quite rightly, Burke reiterates the message that context is the key to assessing a visual document's evidentiary contribution. Images, he illustrates well, frequently take research into realms where the written word cannot or does not go. But he could have done more to explore the ways in which his visual "traces" add to existing knowledge rather than reiterate information available from written sources. This said, Burke has written an engaging and important book that should persuade his readers to take historical images very seriously as decipherable and therefore credible providers of evidence. Following his lead historians in a wide variety of subfields can find imaginative ways of including visual documents in their research agendas.