What do you think?
Rate this book
Hugh Trevor-Roper: The Biography
Hugh Trevor–Roper's life is a rich subject for a biography —with elements of Greek tragedy, comedy, and moments of high farce.
Clever, witty, and sophisticated, Trevor–Roper was the most brilliant historian of his generation. Until his downfall, he seemed to have everything: wealth and connections, a chair at Oxford, a beautiful country house, an aristocratic wife, and, eventually, a title of his own. Eloquent and versatile, fearless and formidable, he moved easily between Oxford and London, between the dreaming spires of scholarship and the jostling corridors of power. He developed a lucid prose style which he used to deadly effect. He was notorious for his acerbic attacks on other historians, but ultimately tainted his own reputation with a catastrophic error when he authenticated the forged "Hitler Diaries." Adam Sisman sheds new light on this fascinating and dramatic episode, but also shows that there was much more to Hugh Trevor–Roper's career than the fiasco of the Hitler Diaries hoax that became his epitaph. From wartime code–breaking to grilling Nazis while the trail was still fresh in 1945 (and finding Hitler's will buried inside a bottle), to his wide–ranging interests, his snobbery and his malice, his formidable post–war feuds, and his secret and passionate affair with an older, married woman.
A study in both success and failure, Adam Sisman's biography is a revealing and personal story of a remarkable life.
Clever, witty, and sophisticated, Trevor–Roper was the most brilliant historian of his generation. Until his downfall, he seemed to have everything: wealth and connections, a chair at Oxford, a beautiful country house, an aristocratic wife, and, eventually, a title of his own. Eloquent and versatile, fearless and formidable, he moved easily between Oxford and London, between the dreaming spires of scholarship and the jostling corridors of power. He developed a lucid prose style which he used to deadly effect. He was notorious for his acerbic attacks on other historians, but ultimately tainted his own reputation with a catastrophic error when he authenticated the forged "Hitler Diaries." Adam Sisman sheds new light on this fascinating and dramatic episode, but also shows that there was much more to Hugh Trevor–Roper's career than the fiasco of the Hitler Diaries hoax that became his epitaph. From wartime code–breaking to grilling Nazis while the trail was still fresh in 1945 (and finding Hitler's will buried inside a bottle), to his wide–ranging interests, his snobbery and his malice, his formidable post–war feuds, and his secret and passionate affair with an older, married woman.
A study in both success and failure, Adam Sisman's biography is a revealing and personal story of a remarkable life.
624 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2010
About the author
Adam Sisman
18 books59 followersAdam Sisman is the author of various biographies, all well received by critics.
His first book, published in 1994, was a life of Trevor-Roper's colleague and rival, A.J.P. Taylor. In 2006, Sisman published a much-admired study of the friendship between Wordsworth and Coleridge. He has won the National Book Critics Circle Award for Biography/Autobiography
His first book, published in 1994, was a life of Trevor-Roper's colleague and rival, A.J.P. Taylor. In 2006, Sisman published a much-admired study of the friendship between Wordsworth and Coleridge. He has won the National Book Critics Circle Award for Biography/Autobiography
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
April 19, 2025
As a biography this is excellent. As an examination of the man and his flaws it is, not bad, but not great. Trevor-Roper died in 2003 and this biography was published in 2010 but it is hard to find any reason why anyone under the age for 50 would, outside of an interest in specific controversies HT-R was involved in, would read this biography. Historians, and their histories date very rapidly (Edward Gibbon is the exception to, not the proof of this) and this holds as true for HT-R as it does for the contemporaries he disagreed with such as Alan Bullock and A.J.P. Taylor or earlier ones like Lewis Namier and Arnold Toynbee. What is surprising about HT-R was that although HT-R area of specialty was the English Civil War and the 17th century he was, amongst other things, for many years, the 'go-to' historian for opinions on the history of Nazi Germany by newspapers, TV and radio programme makers and others. Of course this had to do with his authorship of 'The Last Days of Hitler' which in turn was the result of his work for British Intelligence (I am sorry but being Irish I can't help finding those to words an oxymoron and very funny).
Today his role as 'expert' on the Nazis and WWII is just inexplicable and when you look back at the acres of polemic he indulged in via reviews and articles, all beautifully written, you can't help feeling that it was a lot of effort to hide the fact that he had failed to produce 'the big book' that would justify his place in history as a historian. He lived a long and fruitful life and became a member of the 'establishment', was honoured with a life-peerage the mastership of a Cambridge college the 'Regis' professorship of Modern History ('modern' history at Oxford means everything post the fall of the Roman empire) and via his marriage a did a huge amount of hobnobbing with minor royals and weekending at some of the best stately homes.
But looking back it all seems so pointless, glittery, shiny baubles but nothing solid and real. Nowadays his contributions to the debate on everything from Protestantism versus Catholicism as an engine for economic development; debunking the (the Scottish) Gaelic language, pontificating on the causes of WWII and the nature of Hitler as a thinker/strategist are not only seen as wrong, but ridiculously wrong and most current historians of those subjects would ask not only why was he asked to comment on things he was no expert on, but why he wasted his time with them? Of course his original area of expertise, 17th century English history, doesn't attract requests for polemical, and highly paid, reviews in the Sunday papers.
Most people will remember HT-R for his endorsement of the fraudulent Hitler Diaries, which he retracted, but what is amazing is that HT-R also managed to give support and kind words to other fraudsters. As Lady Bracknell said about loosing parents 'loosing one may be regarded as a misfortune; but two looks like carelessness' in HT-R case he endorsed, by my count, three if not four (the fourth on my list is David Irving whose deceptions/evasions/lies and distortions as a historian would not be reveled until 1993 long after HT-R had retired from academia and although Irving fooled HT-R he also fooled a great many other historians as well) but the other three, David Roberts, Felix Kersten and Konrad Kujau, the Hitler Diaries forger, do lead one to question why he was so susceptible to endorsing deception (see my footnote *1 below). This apparent willingness to be deceived contrasts with his po-faced denunciation of Edmund Backhouse in the 'The Hermit of Peking'. For me this willingness to see right were there is nothing but wrong appears to be a potential insight into HT-R and maybe he why he was a failure.
An excellent biography of one of the 'great and the good' of mid-twentieth century UK culture who deserves a better, more penetrating analysis then this book provides - such a book might say much about not only HT-R but the vacuity and failure of so much of the UK's intellectual life in this period.
*1 HT-R's involvement with David Robert's is detailed in full in Adam Sisman's book 'The Professor and the Defrocking' and about more recent UK frauds by David Roberts you should check on Google. Felix Kersten, Himmler's masseur, made claims to have saved the entire Dutch population from deportation and many Jewish lives due to his ability to 'heal' Himmler's stress. The fraudulent nature of his claims is amply demonstrated in Ian Buruma's 'The Collaborators: Three Stories of Deception and Survival in WWII'.
Today his role as 'expert' on the Nazis and WWII is just inexplicable and when you look back at the acres of polemic he indulged in via reviews and articles, all beautifully written, you can't help feeling that it was a lot of effort to hide the fact that he had failed to produce 'the big book' that would justify his place in history as a historian. He lived a long and fruitful life and became a member of the 'establishment', was honoured with a life-peerage the mastership of a Cambridge college the 'Regis' professorship of Modern History ('modern' history at Oxford means everything post the fall of the Roman empire) and via his marriage a did a huge amount of hobnobbing with minor royals and weekending at some of the best stately homes.
But looking back it all seems so pointless, glittery, shiny baubles but nothing solid and real. Nowadays his contributions to the debate on everything from Protestantism versus Catholicism as an engine for economic development; debunking the (the Scottish) Gaelic language, pontificating on the causes of WWII and the nature of Hitler as a thinker/strategist are not only seen as wrong, but ridiculously wrong and most current historians of those subjects would ask not only why was he asked to comment on things he was no expert on, but why he wasted his time with them? Of course his original area of expertise, 17th century English history, doesn't attract requests for polemical, and highly paid, reviews in the Sunday papers.
Most people will remember HT-R for his endorsement of the fraudulent Hitler Diaries, which he retracted, but what is amazing is that HT-R also managed to give support and kind words to other fraudsters. As Lady Bracknell said about loosing parents 'loosing one may be regarded as a misfortune; but two looks like carelessness' in HT-R case he endorsed, by my count, three if not four (the fourth on my list is David Irving whose deceptions/evasions/lies and distortions as a historian would not be reveled until 1993 long after HT-R had retired from academia and although Irving fooled HT-R he also fooled a great many other historians as well) but the other three, David Roberts, Felix Kersten and Konrad Kujau, the Hitler Diaries forger, do lead one to question why he was so susceptible to endorsing deception (see my footnote *1 below). This apparent willingness to be deceived contrasts with his po-faced denunciation of Edmund Backhouse in the 'The Hermit of Peking'. For me this willingness to see right were there is nothing but wrong appears to be a potential insight into HT-R and maybe he why he was a failure.
An excellent biography of one of the 'great and the good' of mid-twentieth century UK culture who deserves a better, more penetrating analysis then this book provides - such a book might say much about not only HT-R but the vacuity and failure of so much of the UK's intellectual life in this period.
*1 HT-R's involvement with David Robert's is detailed in full in Adam Sisman's book 'The Professor and the Defrocking' and about more recent UK frauds by David Roberts you should check on Google. Felix Kersten, Himmler's masseur, made claims to have saved the entire Dutch population from deportation and many Jewish lives due to his ability to 'heal' Himmler's stress. The fraudulent nature of his claims is amply demonstrated in Ian Buruma's 'The Collaborators: Three Stories of Deception and Survival in WWII'.
April 10, 2012
Adam Sisman’s biography of English historian Hugh Trevor-Roper harkens us back to a time when the writing and teaching of history mattered. From the 1930s through the 1980s the world was highly ideological, and the interpretation of even the distant past was hotly contested as being intimately relevant to contemporary events surrounding the rise of first fascism and then communism. As the gladiators in this particular coliseum, certain historians became celebrities in a manner not seen before or, certainly, since then. Appearing on television and the radio, and writing in newspapers and journals both academic and popular, they were much in demand to provide perspective on events such as trials of Nazi war criminals, the JFK assassination and the Warren Commission.
Country homes, fancy cars, and exotic foreign travels play as large a role as journal articles, conferences and books. The reader is invited into the arcane world of Oxbridge and the vicious politics that consumed its scholars. Flamboyant, brilliant, garrulous and out spoken, Trevor-Roper is a particularly engaging protagonist. One author likened him to a “pop star” in terms of his standing with the public. Although his academic work focused mostly on the 16th and 17th centuries, Trevor-Roper’s framework for understanding “his” period was in competition with those offered by Marxist historians such as Christopher Hill and Eric Hobsbawm. Which interpretation prevailed was not seen as irrelevant at a time when a Marxist superpower was claiming that “the West” was irrevocably doomed because of natural historical forces.
Sisman does a particularly fine job covering the historical issues about which Trevor-Roper and his colleagues discussed and debated, sometimes in vituperative terms. At the same time, he avoids turning the book into historiography. The reader will understand just enough about the historical controversies to understand Trevor-Roper, and the controversies in which he engaged with relish, without getting too bogged down.
Sisman’s generally sympathetic portrayal does not lead him astray when recognizing his subject’s shortcomings. For example, his summation of Trevor-Roper’s involvement in the controversy surrounding the Warren Commission’s report is particularly harsh (“rashness,” “poor judgment,” “obstinancy,” “arrogance”). Trevor-Roper could separate the personal from the professional in manner many others could not, and he was frequently caught off guard at how personally colleagues took what he intended to be purely professional criticisms. Sisman’s reliance on Trevor-Roper’s voluminous correspondence reminds us of the daunting challenge that will be met by anyone attempting to chronicle the life of the historians of today.
One final note: the American title of the book is a curiosity (it was not used in England where readers would recognize Trevor-Roper’s name more readily). Trevor-Roper was not particularly honorable (except that he was incapable of keeping his honest opinions to himself, a sort of academic integrity perhaps) and he might wince at being identified as being more “English” than any other historian of the period, as he was very critical of those who failed to look beyond England’s borders when chronicling events. Still anyone looking for a biography of Trevor-Roper in particular or for exposure to the world of Oxford dons and historians during their golden age will enjoy Sisman’s book tremendously.
Country homes, fancy cars, and exotic foreign travels play as large a role as journal articles, conferences and books. The reader is invited into the arcane world of Oxbridge and the vicious politics that consumed its scholars. Flamboyant, brilliant, garrulous and out spoken, Trevor-Roper is a particularly engaging protagonist. One author likened him to a “pop star” in terms of his standing with the public. Although his academic work focused mostly on the 16th and 17th centuries, Trevor-Roper’s framework for understanding “his” period was in competition with those offered by Marxist historians such as Christopher Hill and Eric Hobsbawm. Which interpretation prevailed was not seen as irrelevant at a time when a Marxist superpower was claiming that “the West” was irrevocably doomed because of natural historical forces.
Sisman does a particularly fine job covering the historical issues about which Trevor-Roper and his colleagues discussed and debated, sometimes in vituperative terms. At the same time, he avoids turning the book into historiography. The reader will understand just enough about the historical controversies to understand Trevor-Roper, and the controversies in which he engaged with relish, without getting too bogged down.
Sisman’s generally sympathetic portrayal does not lead him astray when recognizing his subject’s shortcomings. For example, his summation of Trevor-Roper’s involvement in the controversy surrounding the Warren Commission’s report is particularly harsh (“rashness,” “poor judgment,” “obstinancy,” “arrogance”). Trevor-Roper could separate the personal from the professional in manner many others could not, and he was frequently caught off guard at how personally colleagues took what he intended to be purely professional criticisms. Sisman’s reliance on Trevor-Roper’s voluminous correspondence reminds us of the daunting challenge that will be met by anyone attempting to chronicle the life of the historians of today.
One final note: the American title of the book is a curiosity (it was not used in England where readers would recognize Trevor-Roper’s name more readily). Trevor-Roper was not particularly honorable (except that he was incapable of keeping his honest opinions to himself, a sort of academic integrity perhaps) and he might wince at being identified as being more “English” than any other historian of the period, as he was very critical of those who failed to look beyond England’s borders when chronicling events. Still anyone looking for a biography of Trevor-Roper in particular or for exposure to the world of Oxford dons and historians during their golden age will enjoy Sisman’s book tremendously.
November 24, 2021
Adam Sisman has written "An Honourable Englishman: The Life of Hugh Trevor-Roper". It's not a short book and it's definitely written for the reader who has an inordinate interest in both history and History Lecturers. In other words, a history-jock, like me.
Hugh Trevor-Roper was the writer of both popular history and more academic history. By "popular" history, I mean work that is aimed at the interested amateur history readers out there. His second book - and one that brought him the most fame, was "The Last Days of Hitler", which we wrote in 1946. He was given access to Hitler's bunker in Berlin, and was allowed to interview those people who had served Hitler in his last few months. The book - which is still in print - gave a detailed view of Hitler's end, and was a best seller world-wide.
Hugh Trevor-Roger was born the middle child of three to a doctor and his wife in Northumberland, England, in 1914. Distantly related to members of the British upper-class, Hugh was sent off to a school when he was about 8 years old, leaving a rather love-less house and family behind. He was an immediate academic star throughout his schooling, which ended at Christ Church in Oxford. During the war he worked for the Secret Intelligence Service (the precursor to MI6) on the breaking of German codes, particularly those of the Abwehr. After the war, he remained in the Army and did "odd jobs" for military intelligence, like interviewing Nazis. He returned to Oxford and was a lecturer/tutor in the History department.
Highly skilled at playing the academic political games needed to succeed in the high-pressure world of Oxford, he rose in stature, both within the academic community and the wider world of British government affairs. He wrote other books, traveled the world giving academic lectures, and was often the "go-to" source on questions of history. He was consulted by Rupert Murdoch when the German magazine, Stern, claimed they had found/been given the "Hitler Diaries" and wanted to sell it to the Times. After taking a cursory look at the "diaries", he first declared them the real thing, but then back-pedaled upon closer examination. His reputation took a blow when he first legitimatised them and then backed off. But he took full responsibility for his initial error. He engaged in several spats with other historians along the way.
Trevor-Roper married when he was in his early 40's to a divorced mother of three who was seven years older than him. Alexandra Haig was the daughter of WWI Field Marshall Douglas Haig. "Xandra" was a rather emotional, needy woman, possibly not the right match for Trevor-Roper who was emotionally distant, but their marriage was a fairly happy one. "Opposites attract" at work here, I suppose. Trevor-Roper was given a "life peerage" as Lord Dacre of Glanton and ended his career at Peterhouse at Cambridge. He was not well-liked by a small portion of the administration he referred to as the "mafia", he left after serving a difficult seven year tenure. He died in 2003.
Adam Susman's book is a lively, readable biography. It'll keep your interest and leave you wanting to learn more about Hugh Trevor-Roper and his times.
Hugh Trevor-Roper was the writer of both popular history and more academic history. By "popular" history, I mean work that is aimed at the interested amateur history readers out there. His second book - and one that brought him the most fame, was "The Last Days of Hitler", which we wrote in 1946. He was given access to Hitler's bunker in Berlin, and was allowed to interview those people who had served Hitler in his last few months. The book - which is still in print - gave a detailed view of Hitler's end, and was a best seller world-wide.
Hugh Trevor-Roger was born the middle child of three to a doctor and his wife in Northumberland, England, in 1914. Distantly related to members of the British upper-class, Hugh was sent off to a school when he was about 8 years old, leaving a rather love-less house and family behind. He was an immediate academic star throughout his schooling, which ended at Christ Church in Oxford. During the war he worked for the Secret Intelligence Service (the precursor to MI6) on the breaking of German codes, particularly those of the Abwehr. After the war, he remained in the Army and did "odd jobs" for military intelligence, like interviewing Nazis. He returned to Oxford and was a lecturer/tutor in the History department.
Highly skilled at playing the academic political games needed to succeed in the high-pressure world of Oxford, he rose in stature, both within the academic community and the wider world of British government affairs. He wrote other books, traveled the world giving academic lectures, and was often the "go-to" source on questions of history. He was consulted by Rupert Murdoch when the German magazine, Stern, claimed they had found/been given the "Hitler Diaries" and wanted to sell it to the Times. After taking a cursory look at the "diaries", he first declared them the real thing, but then back-pedaled upon closer examination. His reputation took a blow when he first legitimatised them and then backed off. But he took full responsibility for his initial error. He engaged in several spats with other historians along the way.
Trevor-Roper married when he was in his early 40's to a divorced mother of three who was seven years older than him. Alexandra Haig was the daughter of WWI Field Marshall Douglas Haig. "Xandra" was a rather emotional, needy woman, possibly not the right match for Trevor-Roper who was emotionally distant, but their marriage was a fairly happy one. "Opposites attract" at work here, I suppose. Trevor-Roper was given a "life peerage" as Lord Dacre of Glanton and ended his career at Peterhouse at Cambridge. He was not well-liked by a small portion of the administration he referred to as the "mafia", he left after serving a difficult seven year tenure. He died in 2003.
Adam Susman's book is a lively, readable biography. It'll keep your interest and leave you wanting to learn more about Hugh Trevor-Roper and his times.
July 24, 2015
A solid academic effort, well researched and in the most, Sisman is adept at explaining historiographical theory and academic debate.
The length of the book, about 620 pages, however, is monstrous and completely out of proportion to the subject, who was, after all, a not-very-well-known academic historian. When I attended a book launch at Christ Church, I pointed out to Mr Sisman that his biography was far longer than anything Trevor-Roper had managed to publish in his lifetime. This did not go down well. Nor did my attempt to salvage the conversation by pointing out that this was merely a reflection on a rich life of historical inquiry across different periods. This is a book for historians with a lot of time and confined interests rather than the general public.
The other serious flaw of the book is Sisman's clunky prose which suffers irremediably when put alongside that of Trevor Roper, a great stylist. Hence, the most enjoyable sections of the book are the long quotations from T-R's personal letters or publications.
The length of the book, about 620 pages, however, is monstrous and completely out of proportion to the subject, who was, after all, a not-very-well-known academic historian. When I attended a book launch at Christ Church, I pointed out to Mr Sisman that his biography was far longer than anything Trevor-Roper had managed to publish in his lifetime. This did not go down well. Nor did my attempt to salvage the conversation by pointing out that this was merely a reflection on a rich life of historical inquiry across different periods. This is a book for historians with a lot of time and confined interests rather than the general public.
The other serious flaw of the book is Sisman's clunky prose which suffers irremediably when put alongside that of Trevor Roper, a great stylist. Hence, the most enjoyable sections of the book are the long quotations from T-R's personal letters or publications.
July 31, 2018
Absorbing story of a writer who never quite wrote the great work expected of him; a historian whose reputation was broken by the Hitler Diary hoax; a brilliant mind that could rarely settle.
Read
January 31, 2012Absorbing life of great British historian. Sisman claims to have been a friend of T-R but he's fair in doling out blame and credit in what was the life of a public intellectual. T-R's interests and talents, not to mention a pen frequently dipped in acid, led him into many scrapes. It also meant that for much of his career he was unable to finish any book he started to write. Sisman probably goes overboard covering in detail the many university post elections T-R was involved in- it's always a surprise to me though how Oxbridge grads retain a tie with their school to the ends of their lives. The Hitler diary hoax is handled well and while T-R erred it's clear as much blame should be pinned on Rupert Murdoch and Stern magazine.
June 5, 2012
I have to say I sympathize with Trevor-Roper's inability to finish a major project. While I don't have nearly his breadth of learning, I do have his breadth of interests and it can be fatal to large projects. I had to laugh reading his early history--my early fantasy of academic life personified in reading and study with little teaching! Alas, such lives are few today....
A fascinating look at a complex man who inspired both anger and admiration--and sometimes in the same people. It says something that those who liked him least still often had positive things to say about his historical work.
A fascinating look at a complex man who inspired both anger and admiration--and sometimes in the same people. It says something that those who liked him least still often had positive things to say about his historical work.
June 17, 2019
Rarely have I read such an enjoyable biography about a personality that I’ve found so distasteful. Sisman not only possesses considerable literary gifts, he knew Trevor-Roper personally, gained exclusive access to a treasure trove of primary sources, and was both willing and able to delineate his subject’s strengths and weaknesses.
Trevor-Roper was a fine historian whose instincts were usually more correct than politically correct. He could be generous with his better students, and to a certain extent he mellowed with age. As Sisman emphasizes, Trevor-Roper was often bold, determined, and independently minded. Yet he also displayed “rashness, poor judgment, obstinacy, and, perhaps arrogance.” (382) A colleague, Maurice Bowra, wrote in a private letter that Trevor-Roper was “a very clever man, a good writer, on the right side on all academic matters, and a sturdy fighter. On the other hand he is quite inhuman. He does not like anyone or wish to be liked; what he wants is to impress and be admired.” (307)
At the end of his book, Sisman suggests that future generations will regard Trevor-Roper’s involvement with the Hitler diaries fiasco a “mere footnote” to his respected historical career. (578) I have my doubts: hubris and nemesis have had a long run in Western Civilization, and the example of a respected historian falling prey to presumption is not a lesson that should be (nor probably will be) lost.
As for the biography itself, Sisman has done a remarkable job. American political scientist Wallace Stanley Sayre once wrote that academic politics were so bitter because the stakes were so low. Even so, Sisman makes interesting most of the Oxbridge variety. I would have trimmed some of the intramural feuds (which, to an American, occasionally border on the unintelligible) as well as Trevor-Roper’s clandestine courtship, which renders both parties to adultery more petty, boring, and ill tempered than perhaps they really were. Regardless, this biography is exceptional, the best I’ve ever read of a historian.
Trevor-Roper was a fine historian whose instincts were usually more correct than politically correct. He could be generous with his better students, and to a certain extent he mellowed with age. As Sisman emphasizes, Trevor-Roper was often bold, determined, and independently minded. Yet he also displayed “rashness, poor judgment, obstinacy, and, perhaps arrogance.” (382) A colleague, Maurice Bowra, wrote in a private letter that Trevor-Roper was “a very clever man, a good writer, on the right side on all academic matters, and a sturdy fighter. On the other hand he is quite inhuman. He does not like anyone or wish to be liked; what he wants is to impress and be admired.” (307)
At the end of his book, Sisman suggests that future generations will regard Trevor-Roper’s involvement with the Hitler diaries fiasco a “mere footnote” to his respected historical career. (578) I have my doubts: hubris and nemesis have had a long run in Western Civilization, and the example of a respected historian falling prey to presumption is not a lesson that should be (nor probably will be) lost.
As for the biography itself, Sisman has done a remarkable job. American political scientist Wallace Stanley Sayre once wrote that academic politics were so bitter because the stakes were so low. Even so, Sisman makes interesting most of the Oxbridge variety. I would have trimmed some of the intramural feuds (which, to an American, occasionally border on the unintelligible) as well as Trevor-Roper’s clandestine courtship, which renders both parties to adultery more petty, boring, and ill tempered than perhaps they really were. Regardless, this biography is exceptional, the best I’ve ever read of a historian.
June 22, 2023
This was a delightful read about a scholar/essayist/historian whose particular fields of interest were 16th and 17th Century England and Nazi Germany. Now while these two topics appear disconnected, they stem from Trevor-Roper's educational background in the first instance and his work as an intelligence officer in the secret service during World War II in the second. In fact, the book he is most remembered for is "The Last Days of Hitler" where he solves the mystery of what actually happened to Hitler in September 1945 as Berlin was besieged.
The biography is complete, from Trevor-Roper's birth in 1914 to his death in 2003. We get to see the subject's ascent from his middle-class upbringing into academic circles few achieve. I was not sure I was going to like this tome when I was gifted a copy, but I gave it the old college try and it was well worth the effort. It is well-written, absorbing, and the author has a nice style of writing to bring you along on the journey. Recommended.
The biography is complete, from Trevor-Roper's birth in 1914 to his death in 2003. We get to see the subject's ascent from his middle-class upbringing into academic circles few achieve. I was not sure I was going to like this tome when I was gifted a copy, but I gave it the old college try and it was well worth the effort. It is well-written, absorbing, and the author has a nice style of writing to bring you along on the journey. Recommended.
October 17, 2017
A thorough and well-written accounting of the life of erudite Hugh Trevor-Roper. An Oxford trained historian, he produced very few books of importance in his lifetime--his book on the last days of Hitler being the best sold and most known. I've ordered some of his other work to study, and I'll be re-reading the Hitler since it's been a while since I first read it. His marriage is a great puzzle. In the end, I never realized what compelled him to marry his chosen, given the age disparity (she was older) or social disparity (she came from a higher background.) Many say it was this marriage that held him back from writing the great works of which he was capable. When you have a wife given to couture Jacques Fath dresses and glamorous dwellings, it's easier to succumb to television appearances and book reviews.
May 16, 2023
Well written biography of one of the 20th centuries most famous English Historians. Sisman seems to like HTR much more than I did.
Unlike AJP Taylor, Trevor Roper was NOT a rebel or non-conformist. Frankly, he often comes off as an establishment toady, with conventional political and historical views. Anti-Catholic. He worked for MI6, and like many spies, wasn't big on honesty, intellectual or otherwise.
I'd give the book 3 stars, but Academics (even those who are spies in their spare time) can only generate so much interest. It doesn't help that HRT never wrote a great book and wasn't exactly a "Deep Thinker".
Interesting Tidbit: Historian Lewis Bernstein Namier was responsible for getting HRT the Regius Professor of History over AJP Taylor. Seems Bernstein-Namier was a big friend of Harold MacMillian, the PM who made the decision.
Unlike AJP Taylor, Trevor Roper was NOT a rebel or non-conformist. Frankly, he often comes off as an establishment toady, with conventional political and historical views. Anti-Catholic. He worked for MI6, and like many spies, wasn't big on honesty, intellectual or otherwise.
I'd give the book 3 stars, but Academics (even those who are spies in their spare time) can only generate so much interest. It doesn't help that HRT never wrote a great book and wasn't exactly a "Deep Thinker".
Interesting Tidbit: Historian Lewis Bernstein Namier was responsible for getting HRT the Regius Professor of History over AJP Taylor. Seems Bernstein-Namier was a big friend of Harold MacMillian, the PM who made the decision.
September 23, 2019
Hugh Trevor-Roper appears an arrogant, malicious, intellectual snob. He gained both financially and academically from his misjudged authentication of the 'Hitler Diaries'. Throughout his Oxford and Cambridge careers he used influence and money to full advantage with little heed to anyone below his perceived social scale who sought assistance, thereby forgetting his own middle class start in life. Perhaps his later reported regret at attending Charterhouse rather than Stowe speaks volumes!
Adam Sisman has written a warts and all biography well worth reading.
Adam Sisman has written a warts and all biography well worth reading.
September 1, 2022
An interesting life, well-lived
April 13, 2024
8/10
A very fine biographical portrait of a rambunctious intellectual and his environments, filled with dramatic intrigue, Oxbridge plotting, and puffed-up personalities.
A very fine biographical portrait of a rambunctious intellectual and his environments, filled with dramatic intrigue, Oxbridge plotting, and puffed-up personalities.
January 8, 2016
I am in some ways "the ideal reader" for this biography: an Anglophile and a British Historian, as well as someone with a considerable interest in mid-20th century intellectual history. I was in graduate school in the 1980s, and I was aware at the time of several of main skirmishes and battles fought between Trevor-Roper and his intellectual peers over the course of several earlier decades. Reading this book now, I can put them into perspective more much clearly than I could at the time, so that now I can perceive nuances and shades of conflict that were undecipherable at the time. There's a lot of great "back-story" in Sisman's biography: of course, it helps to be already somewhat familiar with what the "front-story" was. (I'm thinking in particular about matters involving Trevor-Roper's well-known public feud with Evelyn Waugh, but it also pertains to his engagement with rival historians and "frenemies" like Lawrence Stone, Keith Thomas, and A.J.P Taylor.)
Other reviewers have commented on the considerable length of Sisman's text: 575 pages. Really, the length is justified by Sisman's "mission" to maintain and defend Trevor-Roper's professional reputation. In the last decades of his life, Trevor-Roper made a series of unfortunate decisions that tarnished the name he had earned for himself with his careful and probing work in the earlier part of his historical career. He accepted the Mastership of Peterhouse College, Cambridge, a position for which he was unsuited and which proved to be in his own words "seven wasted years"; he maintained his association with the "Times" newspaper concern long after Rupert Murdoch took it over, when it was clear to outsiders that Murdoch was using Trevor-Roper's prestige as a cover for his own union-busting policies; and most notoriously, he lent his name, position, and expertise to the doomed effort to pass off the supposed Hitler Diaries as genuine. Sisman does succeed in presenting a good case that Trevor-Roper should be remembered not for this later mis-steps, but rather for his earlier sterling work, especially for "The Last Days of Hitler" which is just as interesting and readable today as if was when published nearly 70 years ago.
Other reviewers have commented on the considerable length of Sisman's text: 575 pages. Really, the length is justified by Sisman's "mission" to maintain and defend Trevor-Roper's professional reputation. In the last decades of his life, Trevor-Roper made a series of unfortunate decisions that tarnished the name he had earned for himself with his careful and probing work in the earlier part of his historical career. He accepted the Mastership of Peterhouse College, Cambridge, a position for which he was unsuited and which proved to be in his own words "seven wasted years"; he maintained his association with the "Times" newspaper concern long after Rupert Murdoch took it over, when it was clear to outsiders that Murdoch was using Trevor-Roper's prestige as a cover for his own union-busting policies; and most notoriously, he lent his name, position, and expertise to the doomed effort to pass off the supposed Hitler Diaries as genuine. Sisman does succeed in presenting a good case that Trevor-Roper should be remembered not for this later mis-steps, but rather for his earlier sterling work, especially for "The Last Days of Hitler" which is just as interesting and readable today as if was when published nearly 70 years ago.
August 23, 2012
Although I thought this biography frequently served up too much information, I couldn't stop reading it. Trevor-Roper left behind a pile of 80-percent finished manuscripts when he died, and he never really wrote the great book in his field (early modern England) that was expected of him. But, through his essays, mostly, he put his stamp on many a major historiographical debate of his day. He knew everyone and argued with almost all of them. I was in graduate school while T-R was still actively trying to integrate political and social history, and some of the controversies Sisman puts a human dimension to were matters my classmates and I confronted, which might explain why I kept reading and reading these nearly 600 pages. Politically conservative, and puckishly irreligious, Hugh Trevor-Roper had a great gift for, among other things, seeing contemporary relevance in historical events. He damaged his reputation by hastily publishing criticism of the Warren Commission report, which he was forced to retract, and later, and much more seriously, by authenticating an alleged Hitler diary, later proven to be a fraud, but he was nevertheless a public intellectual of the first rank. He was one of a kind, no doubt, but we could use more like him in the public discourse of our own day.
May 12, 2013
Hugh Trevor Roper was the reason I chose to study history at University. Unfortunately, like him, I went to Peterhouse (he as Master, I, as lowly undergrad) and we actually overlapped by a year. Our only encounter was a written apology from me for some drunken misdemeanor; something else, I discovered from this book, we had in common. Three years earlier, I had eulogised him to Maurice Cowling during my entrance interview and may thereby have contributed to Cowling's recommending him for Master , thus contributing to his '7 wasted years' there and, quite possibly, his Hitler diary humiliation. Anyway, this book reminded me of why I was so excited by his writing and also why I was so unexcited by studying history - and by college life in general - at Peterhouse. That section of his life was painful for me to read, but virtually all that preceded it was a massive pleasure. The highlights for me are his vicious duels with Evelyn Waugh and A L Rowse but there is masses to enjoy here. HTR initially studied Classics and underlying all his subsequent work as an historian was a love of reading and writing.
March 8, 2012
A very readable and interesting biography of the historian that mistakenly thought (at first, and under huge pressure from Rupert Murdoch) that a bunch of notebooks presented as Hitler's diaries were authentic.
I appreciated the insights the book provides in university politics and the quirky college system as practised in the UK. Especially the description of the goings on at 'Peterhouse' college before and during the time that Trevor-Rope was master there are hilarious and almost incredible. The comic novel "Porter house blues" by Tom Sharpe may have been based on true stories about Peterhouse.
Read
November 29, 2010An engrossing account of academic life in Oxford and Cambridge. The intrigues and infighting among the ‘dons’ described by the author made me thankful to be at the University of Chicago. It is a very good ‘read,’ perfect for a long trip. - R. H. Helmholz
Read
November 24, 2015A perfect biography - tightly written, insightful and very funny in its own understated way. It lifts the lid on the sheer viciousness of academic life. The book is superior to his earlier study of AJP Taylor because Trevor Roper had a more interesting life and is more satisfying that his latest study of John Le Carre because he is not constrained by a subject that is still alive.
January 12, 2013
Being a historian and living in Oxford (with a partner at Christ Church) this seemed to me to be a must-read. I knew very little of HT-R before reading the book and it was an enjoyable read throughout. Sisman has written this book well and I couldn't put it down.
September 10, 2025
Excellent biography of a man who was one of the top historians.
However, his ego, his disdain for some colleagues, and a certain
"so-called" diary led to his down fall.
However, his ego, his disdain for some colleagues, and a certain
"so-called" diary led to his down fall.
December 11, 2015
This book was great.
February 20, 2013
A must.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews