Edward Hallett Carr was a historian, from Britain, hi was also an international relations theorist, and fierce opponent of empiricism within historiography. E. H. Carr is the most famous in present time, because of his examination of historiography, What is History? which was written in 1961.
Otherwise, Geoffrey Rudolph Elton was also famous German-born British historian. He is pretty interesting about his role in the Carr–Elton debate when he actually defended the nineteenth century interpretation of empirical, “scientific” history, against E. H. Carr's views. Elton wrote his 1967 book The Practice of History largely in response to Carr's What is History?.
In fact, Elton was a strong defender of the traditional methods of history and was appalled by postmodernism, once intoning on the subject: “... we are fighting for the lives of innocent young people beset by devilish tempters who claim to offer higher forms of thought and deeper truths and insights – the intellectual equivalent of crack, in fact. Any acceptance of these theories – even the most gentle or modest bow in their direction – can prove fatal”.
Elton saw the duty of historians as …show more content…
H. Carr's What is History? and G. R. Elton's The Practice of History, I find that John Tosh, in the most recent edition of his own widely read methodological primer The Pursuit of History describes Carr's book as "still unsurpassed as a stimulating and provocative statement by a radically inclined scholar". Keith Jenkins, much less inclined to view Carr as a radical scholar, never-the-less confirms the consequential nature of What is History? suggesting that, along with Geoffrey Elton's The Practice of History both texts are still popularly seen as "'essential introductions' to the 'history question"'. Jenkins concludes both Carr and Elton "have long set the agenda for much if not all of the crucially important preliminary thinking about the question of what is
Otherwise, Geoffrey Rudolph Elton was also famous German-born British historian. He is pretty interesting about his role in the Carr–Elton debate when he actually defended the nineteenth century interpretation of empirical, “scientific” history, against E. H. Carr's views. Elton wrote his 1967 book The Practice of History largely in response to Carr's What is History?.
In fact, Elton was a strong defender of the traditional methods of history and was appalled by postmodernism, once intoning on the subject: “... we are fighting for the lives of innocent young people beset by devilish tempters who claim to offer higher forms of thought and deeper truths and insights – the intellectual equivalent of crack, in fact. Any acceptance of these theories – even the most gentle or modest bow in their direction – can prove fatal”.
Elton saw the duty of historians as …show more content…
H. Carr's What is History? and G. R. Elton's The Practice of History, I find that John Tosh, in the most recent edition of his own widely read methodological primer The Pursuit of History describes Carr's book as "still unsurpassed as a stimulating and provocative statement by a radically inclined scholar". Keith Jenkins, much less inclined to view Carr as a radical scholar, never-the-less confirms the consequential nature of What is History? suggesting that, along with Geoffrey Elton's The Practice of History both texts are still popularly seen as "'essential introductions' to the 'history question"'. Jenkins concludes both Carr and Elton "have long set the agenda for much if not all of the crucially important preliminary thinking about the question of what is