The Role of History

  • J. H. Plumb


The great Christian past, with its nineteenth-century variations — for they were no more than variations — on that old majestic theme of man’s fall and salvation, has collapsed. Rubble, broken arches, monuments crumbling to dust, roofs open to the sky litter this world of thought and loom forebodingly against the horizon. A strange collection of men walk amidst the debris, some full of lamentation, calling for urgent repairs, for an immediate restoration of the old house of the intellect; others climb on to a prominent broken pillar and in self-confident voices explain it all away; others are blind and stumble over the ruins not knowing what has happened. From none of this does humanity derive much comfort. Can this litter of a dead past be cleared away? Can its subtle distortions, or its complex interrelations with all we think and feel, be eliminated from our intellectual heritage. Is to do so desirable, even if possible? And if possible, can man face the future with hope and with resolution without a sense of the past? And if not, can a new past, truer than the old, be manu-factured to give him a like confidence? These problems, I venture to suggest, lie at the very heart of our society.


Moral Judgment Historical Study Fifteenth Century Fourth Century Historical Material 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    The literature on the nature, let alone the philosophy, of history is vast, and growing. For a quick glance at some of the more notable pronouncements over the last hundred years, see The Varieties of History ed. Fritz Stern (New York, 1956)Google Scholar
  2. 1.
    and Hans Meyerhoff, The Philosophy of History in our Time (New York, 1959).Google Scholar
  3. 1.
    There is a common fallacy amongst historians that the pursuit of objectivity must end in negation, e.g. Professor Robert Lynd: ‘History, thus voyaging forth with no pole star except the objective recovery of the past, becomes a vast, wandering enterprise’. Quoted by Howard Zinn, ‘History as Private Enterprise’, in The Critical Spirit: Essays in Honor of Herbert Marcuse (Boston, 1967 ), ed. Kurt H. Wolff and Barrington Moore, Jr, 174.Google Scholar
  4. 1.
    Marc Bloch, The Historian’s Craft trans. Peter Putnam (Manchester, 1954), 13.Google Scholar
  5. 1.
    See the most important and suggestive article by Arthur F. Wright, ‘On the Uses of Generalization in the Study of Chinese History’, in Generalization in the Writing of History (Chicago, 1963), ed. Louis Gottschalk, 36–58;Google Scholar
  6. 1.
    also J. Gray, ‘Historical Writing in Twentieth Century China: Notes on its Background and Development’, in Historical Writing on the Peoples of Asia: Historians of China and Japan ed. W G. Beasley and E. G. Pulleyblank (Oxford, 1961), 186–212. This volume also contains a fascinating essay (pp. 135–66), ‘Chinese Historical Criticism: Liu Chih-chi and Ssu-ma Kuang’, by E. G. Pulleyblank, which demonstrates the great sophistication of Chinese historiography within its own rigid framework of generalization. Of course, the generalization was no more and no less rigid than that of the Christian West, and the arrangement of sources and the detail contained in them was infinitely greater. But I would maintain that the Chinese were concerned solely with creating an educative past - subtle, complex, highly detailed, accurate in commission, but not history.Google Scholar
  7. 2.
    See two brilliant books by Edward H. Schafer, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand (University of California Press, 1963), and The Vermilion Bird: A Study of T’ang Images of the South (University of California Press, 1967), which discuss the interest of the Chinese of the Tang dynasty in Central Asia and the tropical South and the exotics which they produced.Google Scholar
  8. 1.
    ‘Perhaps we have all underestimated the impact of ecclesiastical history on the development of historical method. A new chapter of historiography begins with Eusebius, not only because he invented ecclesiastical history, but because he wrote it with a documentation which is utterly different from that of the pagan historians’: A. Momigliano, ‘Pagan and Christian Historiography in the Fourth Century A.D.’, in The Conflict between Paganism and Christianity in the Fourth Century, ed. A. Momigliano (Oxford, 1963), 92. The whole essay is profoundly important and I am deeply indebted to it. Professor Momigliano stresses the rejection by Christian historians of the pagan past. He points out that the Christians of the fourth century made no serious attempt to provide a Christian version of Livy or Thucydides. ‘A reinterpretation of ordinary, military, political or diplomatic history in Christian terms was neither achieved nor even attempted’: ibid. 88. And, of course, the whole Pantheon of pagan heroes was rejected. Biography ceased and was replaced by hagiography. No such total rejection of a sophisticated ideology of the past is comparable to this until modern times. The Islamic revolution in Arabia certainly had a profound influence on the Arabs’ view of their past, but there was far more continuity.Google Scholar
  9. 1.
    See Julian Obermann, ‘Early Islam’, in Robert C. Dentan, The Idea of History in the Ancient Near East (New Haven, 1955 );Google Scholar
  10. 1.
    also Franz Rosenthal, ‘The Influence of the Biblical Tradition on Muslim Historiography’, in Bernard Lewis and P. M. Holt, Historians of the Middle East ( Oxford, 1962 ). And, in any case, the pre-Muslim past of the Arabs was very unsophisticated. Elaborate and coherent pasts which become the prerogative of a band of trained professional scholars can only be found in complex and highly sophisticated societies.Google Scholar
  11. 1.
    For the philosophical naïveté of the historian of medieval India, see P. Hardy, Historians of Medieval India (1960), 18–19, 125–31. The same is true of Indonesian history, which is largely a complex of myths in which some historical facts are buried. This was quite adequate for the primitive and courtly societies of Indonesia until the present time when the need for a unifying, socially usable past became keenly felt.Google Scholar
  12. 1.
    See C. C. Berg, ‘The Javanese Picture of the Past’, in An Introduction to Indonesian Historiography ed. Soedjatmoko, Mohammad Ali, G. J. Resink and G. McT Kahin (Ithaca, 1965), 87–117. Soedjatmoko’s essay on ‘The Indonesian Historian and his Time’ is a fascinating discussion of the problems facing a Western-trained historian confronted by a society with a very primitive sense of the past. However, no society, primitive or advanced, has suffered such ideological fractures as Europe.Google Scholar
  13. 1.
    See R. R. Bolgar, The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries (Cambridge, 1954), for a brilliant discussion of what the Middle Ages made of their classical inheritance.Google Scholar
  14. 1.
    Joseph Anthony Mazzeo, Renaissance and Revolution: The Remaking of European Thought (New York, 1965), 61: ‘Petrarch and his humanist successors… were, in fact, able to view the classical past in an historical perspective, as something distant, yet accessible, different, yet intelligible and eminently usable. As the natural landscape that the -Renaissance artist painted existed in a mathematically intelligible space, so the ancient world existed for the humanists in a well-defined structured historical space.’Google Scholar
  15. 2.
    Herbert Butterfield, The Statecraft of Machiavelli (1955);Google Scholar
  16. 2.
    also R. Ridolfi, The Life of Francesco Guicciardini (1967), 259: In the Storia d’Italia Guicciardini used documents with a method more rigorous than any had done before him and few did after.’Google Scholar
  17. 1.
    On the other hand there is a deliberate Gothicism in Uccello’s work. For this see Erwin Panofsky, Renaissance and Renascences in Western Art (Stockholm, 1960) and Studies in the History of Iconography: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance (New York, 1939). Of course, there were bound to be many anachronistic features of religious art, when ignorance of the actual world of the ancients was so widespread. What is interesting is that the attempt was made, which implies the consciousness of a different past. See also J. H. Plumb, The Renaissance (1961), 95–96.Google Scholar
  18. 1.
    See Myron P. Gilmore, Humanists and Jurists: Six Studies in the Renaissance ( Cambridge, Mass., 1963 ), 31–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 1.
    J. B. Bury, The Idea of Progress (Dover ed., 1955 ), 39–41.Google Scholar
  20. 1.
    Also Geoffroy Atkinson, Les Nouveaux Horizons de la Renaissance Française (Paris, 1935), for the effect of geographical knowledge.Google Scholar
  21. 1.
    N. Egerton, ‘The Longevity of the Patriarchs’, Journal of the History ofIdeas (1966), xxvii 575–84.Google Scholar
  22. 1.
    A. Momigliano, ‘Ancient History and the Antiquarian’, in Studies in Historiography (1966), 1–39, for a brilliant summary of the growth of antiquarianism after the Renaissance and its effect on the development of the techniques of historical scholarship.Google Scholar
  23. 1.
    For the Maurists and Bollandists, see M. D. Knowles, Trans. Royal Hist. Soc., 5th ser., viii (1958), 147–66, and ibid. ix (1959), 169–92.Google Scholar
  24. 2.
    David C. Douglas, English Scholars (1939); English Historical Scholarship in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, ed. Levi Fox (Oxford, 1956 );Google Scholar
  25. 2.
    T. D. Kendrick, British Antiquity (1950)Google Scholar
  26. 2.
    and F. Smith Fussner, The Historical Revolution (1962);Google Scholar
  27. 2.
    J. G. A. Pocock’s fundamentally important The Ancient Constitution and the Feudal Law (Cambridge, 1957 ).Google Scholar
  28. 1.
    See P. Gay’s most illuminating work, The Enlightenment: The Rise of Modern Paganism (New York, 1966 ).Google Scholar
  29. 2.
    Edward Gibbon, Autobiography (Oxford, 1907), 169.Google Scholar
  30. 1.
    Per Fuglum, Edmund Gibbon: His View of Life and Conception of History (Oslo, 1953), 41.Google Scholar
  31. 1.
    See David Knowles, Great Historical Enterprises (1963), 65–134;Google Scholar
  32. 1.
    also Herbert Butterfield, Man on His Past (Cambridge, 1955), particularly P. 75–85.Google Scholar
  33. 1.
    Richard Pares, The Historian’s Business and Other Essays (Oxford, 1961), to: ‘The sense [of the past] that historians make is an increasingly complicated sense. It may perhaps be suggested that professional classes always create complications in order to make themselves indispensable. But I think that such an explanation would do the professional historians less than justice. It is a matter of scientific conscience. The historical process is very complicated: it has its laws and its uniformities, but it can only be explained in terms of itself.’Google Scholar
  34. 1.
    Apart from the excellent and stimulating world history of William H. McNeil, The Rise of the West (Chicago, 1963), the most successful attempts have been made by archaeologists — Carleton S. Coon and Gordon Chide.Google Scholar
  35. 1.
    On the argument for classical studies as a training for the intellect, see M. I. Finley, ‘Crisis in the Classics’, in Crisis in the Humanities, ed. J. H. Plumb (1964), 18–19.Google Scholar
  36. 1.
    Its true value is educational. It can educate the minds of men by causing them to reflect on the past’: G. M. Trevelyan, Clio: A Muse and other Essays (new impr. 1949 ), 147.Google Scholar
  37. 1.
    See also G. R. Elton, The Practice of History (Sydney, 1967), 48–50. Gay, The Enlightenment: The Rise of Modern Paganism 46–47Google Scholar

Copyright information

© J. H. Plumb 1969

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. H. Plumb
    • 1
  1. 1.Christ’s CollegeCambridgeUK

Personalised recommendations