Other Sellers on Amazon
In Defence of History Paperback – February 1, 2018
Enhance your purchase
Books with Buzz
Discover the latest buzz-worthy books, from mysteries and romance to humor and nonfiction. Explore more
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Frequently bought together
About the Author
- Publisher : Granta Books (February 1, 2018)
- Language : English
- ISBN-10 : 1783784598
- ISBN-13 : 978-1783784592
- Item Weight : 9.2 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.1 x 0.9 x 7.8 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,476,046 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- Customer Reviews:
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Predictably, Evans stirred a riot among the academic community, and his book was excoriated by hard-core objectivists and fluffy postmodernists alike. But while the book has strengths and weaknesses, they are probably not what the author thinks they are. In Defence of History is good at summarising historiographical trends, from Von Ranke's revolution to today. As such, it will be useful to history students, who take exams on this. It is also hugely entertaining in its examples, its discussion of individual historians' works. Evans pulls absolutely no punches, and his historiographical erudition is monumental (he is a Cambridge professor, by the way). Indeed, his own defence in the face of his book's critics, provided in the Afterword, is probably the book's most readable part.
But I found In Defence of History less good at theory. Evans's conclusion, called Objectivity and its limits, is somewhat muddled and boils down to the idea that as long as the historian is scrupulous in his method all will be fine. Then Evans criticises Carr's opinion that facts are created in the act of being picked up by historians. Evans claims that facts pre-exist history-writing, and that subjectivity intervenes only in the interpretative phase. But this skirts Carr's argument that there is an infinite number of potential facts, and that the historian's selection of what is relevant is subjective. Facts differ from one writer to the other: the medievalist monastic chronicler may concentrate on what happened to his abbey, the historian on the social or political trends his chronicle unwittingly betrays. This is just one point, but generally Evans draws insufficient difference between the notionally possible and the practical, as a result spilling much ink on arguments which brevity might have made stronger.
Perhaps three stars is a little grudging as an evaluation. Evans's merit is to have put the postmodernists in front of their own 'internal contradictions'. If all historical narratives are equally valid, for example, this gives equal claims to authority to such nasties as Holocaust deniers, a point which the high-minded post-modern advocates seem to have missed (you'd be surprised). And if the postmodernists deny the existence of such a thing as the truth, claiming all texts are unstable and lacking in a definitive meaning, they must deny the truth of their own theories, or don't they? Nevertheless, the reality is that history as discipline is thriving, and that no one, or very few, have taken to heart postmodernism's call to abolish it, least of all the numerous cultural historians who took from it the tools of textual deconstruction and carried on merrily writing their books. Evans does say that. Still, In Defence of History might have been more effective with 100 less pages and half the venom.
Top reviews from other countries
The afterword, in which Evans defends himself from attacks on the first edition of his work, of widely varying degrees of articulacy and sanity, from both the conservative right and the swivel-eyed post-modernist left, is a master-class in how to deflate an opponent. It makes cage fighting look like a girly slap punching contest. You can almost hear the bones crack as Evans lands a good hard kick in the ribs. Ouch!
The detail is meticulous and the content incapsulating, really a great read for anyone studying history, and essential for historiography. The epilogue detailing the response to the book also serves as an interesting and unique ending to In Defence of History.
My only minor criticism is Prof Evans gets a bit muddled with the scientific method, relegates astronomy to an 'observational science', which is so obviously wrong.
He also confuses scientific predictions with predicting the future, and this confusion allows him to tie himself in unncessary knots.
Scientific theories require predictions - which is why paleobiology is a proper science - but not necessarily about the future. It makes predictions about what to expect from the fossil record, and - lo and behold - years later someone finds the predicted fossil. Early astronomers predicted where 'new' planets were, and so they were. And so on...
These trivial criticisms aside, this is essential and pleasurable reading for any history student.
11/10 (from a retired biologist, now full time history MA student)