Historians have bemoaned the existence of a gap separating historical study and public interest in the topic of the ‘bystanders'. Moralistic tendencies and emotional excess have been pointed to as part of the explanation of the problem. This article turns the critical perspective back upon the historians and argues that there is more to morality and emotion than is often acknowledged by historians. If this was recognised, the article suggests, it could contribute to a lessening of the tensions sometimes arising when historians meet their public. The article also considers the concept of the ‘bystander' and the relationship between the disciplines of history and philosophy in relation to the study of the Holocaust.