Abstract
Durkheim constituted his sociology in a tense relation with existing social sciences. With respect to history, for example, he had a critical opinion.
Durkheim's view of history is based on the dichotomy between événement and institution. This dichotomy derives from his philosophical position which regards the existence of law a determinant factor of the scientific thought. According to his ideas, événement doesn't seem to occur from any law, and the domain of événement is refractory to science.
On the basis of this dichotomy, he criticized the traditional history which gave événement an excessive importance. This traditional view of history was typically expressed by Charles Seignobos. Against Seignobos, Durkheim insisted as follows : one cannot understand événement, if one doesn't recognize institution which is the structure of society. This idea is concretely expressed in his analysis of the World War I upon which has not been set due value. In my opinion, this analysis is one about the relation between mentalité (that is institution grasped in terms of collective psychology) and événement.
He defines sociology as the science of institution. And, his criticism of the traditional history exists at bottom when he regards the sociological explanation as the establishment of causal relations. In these senses, the place of the traditional history in Durkheim's sociology is important even if it is negative. In addition, his criticism of the traditional history coincides with the recent tendency in historical studies. This shows the historical significance of Durkheim.
