The recent centennial of the founding of the American Historical Association has given historians a properly historical reason for considering the present state of their discipline. The profession's introspectionist analysis may be said to have begun a few years ago with the publication of The Past Before Us: Contemporary Historical Writing in the United States, an upbeat and self—congratulatory volume intended by the sponsoring AHA as a demonstration of "state of the art " historiography. Introducing this volume, editor Michael Kammen stated that after a changing of the guard in the 1970s, the professional historical community is mainly concerned with questions of social history, intergenerational conflict, and human responses to structures of power.
Having repudiated the basic commitments to nationalism and the ideal of scholarly detachment that had always sustained historical writing in the United States, professional historians found themselves—not surprisingly, one might add—cut off from their cultural environment. That this situation is markedly different from the formative period of historical scholarship can be seen in centennial numbers of the American Historical Review, the most recent expression of the profession's reflective tendency, which have explored the nature of historical thinking at the time of the association's founding a century ago.
What has been all but ignored in these official efforts at intellectual stocktaking is the enduring body of historical writing produced by American scholars between the end of the founding period in the early twentieth century and the onset of the excitement of the 1970s. Perhaps it is the thoroughness with which scholars have for two decades described the shift from progressive consensus to New Left history that accounts for this neglect. Whatever its reason, however, the oversight is fortunately rectified by the appearance of an "unofficial " volume on American historiography, Twentieth—Century American Historians which describes an approach to history that reminds us that until very recently history faithfully maintained its literary orientation and narrative character. It is a bit astonishing to learn that historians like Douglas Southall Freeman were nationally known figures whose books sold in the hundreds of thousands. It is instructive to recall that several of the most widely read and influential writers of history, such as Allan Nevins, Claude G. Bowers, and James Truslow Adams, possessed no formal historical training. And it is heartening to read of a time when, despite its academic institutional setting, cultural alienation was not asserted as a sign of intellectual sophistication and certification.
Although by no means uncritical, the authors of the essays in Twentieth—Century American Historians have approached their subject with an attitude of respectful admiration for the accomplishments of their intellectual mentors. It is unusual, moreover, to find in contemporary scholarship the open—mindedness to conservative points of view, and immunity to orthodox liberal assumptions, that inform this volume.
If the claims made in the passage are correct, how would contemporary historians of the American Historical Association be expected to respond to a work that provides a nationalistic interpretation of American history?[A] They would probably embrace it because it reflects the New Left approach to American history.
[B] They would probably embrace it because it appeals to their sense of national pride.
[C] They would probably denounce it because it conflicts with their philosophical orientation.
[D] They would probably denounce it because it violates the principle of scholarly objectivity.
If the author of the passage was interested in further justifying the position made within the context of this passage, he would most likely find merit with which of the following books?[A] A book about popular resistance to government policies written from an orthodox liberal perspective
[B] A book about the origins of the Civil War written for an intelligent middle—class audience
[C] A book about parent—child conflict in the American family during the First World War written for professional historians
[D] A book about the development of American nationalism written for New Left scholars
Based on information in the passage, which of the following statements in NOT true?[A] Contemporary historians have largely overlooked the scholarly contributions of historians who published in the early decades of this century.
[B] Contemporary historians are generally less interested in economic history than social history.
[C] Contemporary historians are generally not receptive to conservative interpretations of history.
[D] Contemporary historians have usually closely analyzed the works of earlier historians such as Allan Nevins, Claude G. Bowers, and James Truslow Adams.
Suppose that the American Historical Association has decided to sponsor a volume of essays about the American government's decision to enter World War II. How would this information affect the passage's claim about the current orientation of that organization?[A] It would tend to undermine the passage's claim.
[B] It would tend to support the passage's claim.
[C] It would tend to undermine the passage's claim only if it could be shown that the essays concentrate mainly on social questions.
[D] It would tend to support the passage's claim only if it could be shown that the essays focus primarily on military matters.
In the context of the passage, the phrase "intellectual stocktaking " (start of third paragraph) refers to:[A] attempts to attack the orientation of the American Historical Association.
[B] assessments of the New Left's influence on the writing of American history.
[C] efforts to assess the intellectual development of American historiography.
[D] changes in the ability of middle—class individuals to follow historical debates.
In pointing out the distinctions of later American historians, the author notes earlier twentieth—century American historians. Implicit in the author's discussion of these historians is the assumption that:[A] these historians ignored the concept of scholarly objectivity.
[B] contemporary historians almost never write from a liberal perspective.
[C] New Left thinking has enriched the presentation of American history.
[D] D. historical scholarship should be accessible to the intelligent layman.
Which of the following assertions would most strengthen the author's claim that many contemporary historians are "cut off from their cultural environment " (line 19)?[A] They are very familiar with the writings of earlier historians like James Truslow Adams.
[B] The only people who read their books are other professional historians.
[C] They are criticized by the authors of essays in Twentieth—Century American Historians.
[D] Their intellectual sophistication has made them receptive to the conservative perspective.