Napoleon Series Archive 2003

Re: The history book I would like to have written

Caroline wrote:
Here's a test to see whether "period style" makes the difference between good, bad writing etc: (yes, I do know that these weren't "histories" in the terms we have been discussing): Compare a page of the very similar (in intention, subject) memoirs written by each of the exact contemporaries: Gleig, Aitchison, Harris, Schaumann. Compare each of these with a page of Wellington's/Moore's letters. You will readily see (as I'm sure you already know) that style varies enormously among them. There is such a thing as period style, but some of these writers are so dull that you struggle along with difficulty, some vague, prolix, florid, while others are to the point, clear, straightforward, even racy.

Caroline:
Certainly. Even in written histories you will find good, easy to read text, and then very poor, hard to read text. If you believe that the histories today are better written, I certainly can agree with you, for a number of reasons. But we are still dealing with generalizations, so it is difficult to be certain.

If you are saying that the histories are better historiography, I can only say "yes and no." There are certainly some brilliant and new works being done.

Caroline wrote:
I don't believe that in any real terms a gap has opened up between academics and populists. While there is such a gap, it appears greater today because both fieldshave expanded considerably recently. It's not an impassable divide. Some of the best popular books are written by academics - so to pursue the argument, a few terms would have to be defined. Again, as argued elsewhere on the forum, it's more often a question of horses for courses.

Caroline:
If you don't believe there is a gap, then how do you explain the awful history in the quote I provided. Wawro is a trained historian, and I would think would have had other historians critique his work, yet in just the first chapter I found dozens of blatantly ahistorical statements like that quote. Can you find similar 'mistakes' in past histories, from a lack of information, but known facts that are completely misconstrued, yet central to their book theme/arguments? We are talking about professional historians here.

Caroline wrote:
One thing puzzles me about the posts - the reluctance to give the laurels to today's writers? I stand by my belief that history writing is better today than it ever was.

Caroline:
Not me. I think there are any number of very fine writers/historians today.
I am unhappy about the 'general' willingness of professed historians to turn their back on historiographical practices and their willingness to produce the tripe such as Wawro, or the very brilliantly flawed presentation and research of a Scott Bowden in his Austerlitz book.

Bill H.

Messages In This Thread

Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Better History 101
Re: Better History 101
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Bad History and Relativism
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: The history book I would like to have written
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Rory Muir's "Salamanca".
Early Christmas
Re: Quotes
Re: Early Christmas
Re: Early Christmas
Limits of Narrative
Re: Limits of Narrative
Feu de Joie for Rory Muir
Why Write History?
How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Re: How We Grow
Right Angle
Re: Right Angle
Footnoting
Re: Right Angle
... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Only 'quite intelligent'?
Re: Only 'quite intelligent'?
Re: ... Left Angle
Re: ... Left Angle
Audiences
Re: Audiences
Follow Ups or Spin Offs
Re: Follow Ups or Spin Offs
Re: Audiences
Re: Right Angle
Re: How We Grow
Reach for your Swords !
Re: Reach for your Swords !
"Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Re: "Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Re: "Full Monty" Footnotes!!
Long Footnotes
Re: Reach for your Swords !
Fair Points
When I was child, I spoke as a child
In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: In defence of Chandler
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: When I was child, I spoke as a child
Re: Limits of Narrative
The Pits
Re: Limits of Narrative
And Good, Durable History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Re: Bad History
Good Military History