"...His piece on the American Revolution represents a new and growing interpretive school in American history, one which essentially critiques the past based upon the values of contemporary universities...." DK
This is a fair definition of Whig historicism. I have accused Professor Kaiser of Matthews' kind of interpretation on more than one occasion, and have acknowledged my lapses into it at times as well.
The only thing I would add is that this kind of history is hardly a new interpretive school in American history, although people like Matthews may represent an even more vigorous expression of long existing Whig historicism. Herbert Butterfield fought against it, and it seems to me that Bailyn and R R Palmer stood against it as well. But there are fairly few over here. Most are Whigs.
No comments:
Post a Comment