Modern Historiography

by Michael Bentley

Modern Historiography is the essential introduction to the history of historical writing. It explains the broad philosophical background to the different historians and historical schools of the modern era, from James Boswell and Thomas Carlyle through to Lucien Febure and Eric Hobsbawm and Modern Historiography provides a clear and concise account of this modern period of historical writing.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Academic, Grad School

200 pages, Paperback

First published December 10, 1998

About the author

A specialist in British politics in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Michael John Bentley, FRHistS, is Emeritus Professor of Modern History at the University of St Andrews and is currently Senior Research Fellow in History at St Hugh's College, Oxford.

Reviews

[Kaitlyn · Rating 1 out of 5]

Read this for a Nature of History class. We were given two books to read throughout the semester-- we typically read a chapter or two from each book each book, and then have class discussion on them. The other book isn't anything great, but it's about a million times better than this one. I really dislike the book!! It's a historiography book-- should be a good thing for a history major-- but I can't stand Bentley's writing style. He's to the point-- way too to the point-- I have to spend more time looking up all the stupid little things he references than I do actually reading the book. He's so vague and just assumes everyone is as "intelligent" as him. He also loves including tons of phrases, sometimes even paragraphs, in either German or French and often won't provide any translation-- good thing all seniors in college taking this course just have hours upon hours of free time to look up all the crap in his book that he's too lazy to provide any useful info on... (in case anyone wasn't sure, that statement was drenched in sarcasm-- most of us don't even know what free time is!) And even the parts in English are super confusing-- he has a hoity-toity way of speaking and it all just goes over my head--soooo frustrating (and this is a common complaint from others in my class too--even my professor jokes about how much we all hate his book!)

Also, he loves throwing in little American insults-- I don't know why we're reading this in a class--in America-- when he loves insulting us. England created the stupid book, and I think England should keep it to themselves! (Not that I by any means have anything against England)

I really hate this book! I wanted to let out screams of excitement when I finally finished this book! Shame I was on the "quiet floor" of the library and could not!

[Tommy /|\ · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bentley offers a wide-ranging survey on historical writings. The focus is somewhat limited, in that he seemed to strictly focus on the English, French and German schools of historical writing. He did touch on the Italian and Russian schools to a somewhat slight degree. His frank opinion on the American school of historical writing is quite openly frank. Some reviewers here on GoodReads have mistaken this for a dim view of American writing, where it is actually a very open perspective about the differences between the older European schools and the far younger American school.

However. His writing is at a graduate level within academia, which makes the text not as accessible as it could be. Being that the intended audience is the graduate-level student, this would only seem logical. Casual readers will definitely be put off by the prose of the book. As a graduate-level student, I was put off by the mixing of languages throughout the book. Many of the passages are littered with French and German statements (including a few complete paragraphs) with little or no attempt made to provide any aspect of translation.

Overall, the book is a fair and open-ended assessment of the European and American schools of historical writing. There is no attempt to include Middle- or Far-Eastern writers into the book's premise, which I personally found a little disappointing. The book's overall premise is well-written, well-thought-out and (mostly) well presented.

[Sophia · Rating 3 out of 5]

In this short volume Bentley attempts something that already deserves respect for its attempt: a concise history of historiography leading up to the "Modern Age" to give an overview of diverse and divergent conceptions of how to study the past. In recognition of this ambitious task I give him credit for an eloquent and informative publication. In regards to his use of language it remains to be said, that indeed his eloquence could be understood as academic jargon, which makes his text hard to approach and at times hard to focus on. Nonetheless, once adjusted to his writing style, I found his use of metaphor and the weaving in of personal anecdotes to be rather refreshing and entertaining.
I had difficulties with understanding the structure of the chapters/elements as I was missing a proper introduction to his line of reasoning/narrating. In the beginning he is following a chronological sequence in the history of historiography, but somewhere around the late 19th century this gets slightly confusing and seems to drift first into chapters of national content (German School, France, British, US) and later (in the last 2-3 chapters specifically) rather thematic cohesion.
This change in narration I do not see as a problem per se, rather the lack of guidance provided by the author to guide the reader is what I would criticize here. As a reader I understand that with the change in the dynamic of history as a discipline different foci arise and thus necessitate a different form of recollection, yet would I have liked Bentley to help me understand this with his words, rather than his implicit placement of information.
What is more, Bentley at times gets lost in details about specific historians, rather than giving an idea of the atmosphere or common ground that connects these. Whilst helpful in its precision and in paying tribute to all the great historians of the past, this may seem overly convoluted for an introductory volume and make the read sometimes a dry battling with facts rather than informative overview of fluid currents of historical thought.
Lastly, the ambition to combine French, German, British and American perspectives on the study of the past and its different forms of attempting it from my perspective seems too arbitrary in structure. Whilst, as anteriorly noted, the first chapters progress in a more chronological sequence, Bentley seems to often start with the German or French school and then later add comments about the British and/or American equivalent of that time, this concept seems to break approximately midway through his book. From then onwards the reader is left with a surprise about her whereabouts in each new chapter. Generally the focus on especially the German scholars is noticeable. This is often contrasted with the French. This contrast is well elaborated on and it becomes clear where the difference and overlaps lie. I understand this focus to be chosen not due to personal interest of the author, but rather in following the general trends in the study of history, as these seem to have been given more focus in these two nation-state societies.
All in all, and despite my rather negatively sounding remarks, I think this is a good introduction to "modern historiography" in that it manages to be concise and informative. I would recommend this book rather for graduate level or readers who have prior engagement with historiographic texts. Bentley's use of language brought great joy to me at times and his impressive talent to join the most important people, streams of thought with the political/economical situation of each of the 4 countries in focus on just 160 pages is striking. I would have personally liked him to rather add 40 more pages and allow for more guidance through his thinking process or rather the structure he decided to use. I recognize the great difficulty of the task he attempts in this book and would like him to do the same as to invite the reader to work herself through it together with him.

[Aisha Manus · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book is so dry I need some damn Visine for my eyes! I wanted to like it because unlike other Historiography books, Bentley digs a bit deeper into women historians, such as the often neglected Mary Beard, but I just couldn't. This book is SO academic you spend so much time deciphering what is being written that you can easily miss the point. And holy crap he writes the longest sentences known to man, that his paragraphs are longer than a page. GIVE MY BRAIN A BREAK! So I would not recommend this book unless someone was seriously studying the topic of Historiography, and not just as a required course for their general history major. 2.5 Stars.

[Graham · Rating 2 out of 5]

As with other reviewers, I found this one quite dry and it took me a long time to plod through. The subject matter is a complex one and the author's dense exploration makes for a difficult read. It starts off well but after the first couple of chapters I found it more like a list of prominent figures and some occasional pithy analysis rather than a deep overview of the topic. Long untranslated quotations from prominent historians don't help much either. It's certainly not all bad, and I found the closing section on postmodernism particularly useful, but there are better books on the subject out there.

[Anson Cassel Mills · Rating 2 out of 5]

The major problem with Modern Historiography: An Introduction is that it’s not an introduction. Presumably profs—who can learn from this brief book themselves—may be tempted to adopt it (rather than, say, Breisach) because it is short. That would be a mistake. Any student, undergraduate or graduate, who truly understands what Bentley’s about should not be taking an introductory course in historiography.

[Sabine · Rating 2 out of 5]

Had to read this for my Nature of History class. Author was very full of himself and pretty anti-American. While there was some good information, most of it was hard to muddle through because of the authors holier than thou attitude.

[LauriAnn · Rating 2 out of 5]

This was pretty esoteric with occasional moments of clarity. Mostly it felt like name dropping and a forum for those who can read large block quotes of French and German.

[Christopher Dixon · Rating 2 out of 5]

Ehh.....

[Renay · Rating 3 out of 5]

A thoughtful analysis. Not light reading.

[Dez · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you want to read a book that name drops every other word ...this is your book.