Revisionism Revisited: Ian Mortimer Takes Issue with Those Who Put Limits on Historians' Questionings of the Past

By Mortimer, Ian | History Today, March 2004 | Go to article overview

Revisionism Revisited: Ian Mortimer Takes Issue with Those Who Put Limits on Historians' Questionings of the Past


Mortimer, Ian, History Today


ON JUNE 16TH, 2003, George Bush gave a speech in which he defended his decision to take military action against Iraq. The description he gave of those who had suggested that there had never been a real threat from Saddam Hussein's regime was startling: 'Now there are some who would like to rewrite history--revisionist historians is what I like to call them ...'. While the phrase suggests that Mr Bush is not particularly familiar with the nature or methods of revisionist history, his statement places in a very negative context anyone who might query whether assumptions about the past--including those assumptions made in the past--were actually correct.

This raises some important questions, not the least of which are: what is 'revisionist history' and why has it come to have such negative connotations? Neither of these questions has a straightforward answer. Almost all original historical research is 'revisionist' to some degree, in that it revises something we previously thought. However, an article which seeks to 'revise' our understanding of the origins of the Enlightenment would probably not be labelled 'revisionist' as it deals with social history, largely the preserve of the professional. An article, however, which revises our understanding of the supposed murder of Edward V and Prince Richard in 1483 would definitely be considered 'revisionist'. Therefore, when Bush talks about 'revisionist historians', he is mainly talking about those who challenge widely-accepted and well-established historical narratives. So how come these people have succeeded in attracting such distrust that George Bush feels justified in placing his most implacable political enemies in their midst?

At this point, and before discussing why revisionists may have found themselves unpopular, I must confess to a personal interest in the debate. This is on account of the claim in my biography of Roger Mortimer (1287-1330), 1st Earl of March, that we can be sure that the traditional narrative of the death of Edward II in Berkeley Castle is based on false information, and that he was still alive in 1330, and possibly even in 1338-39. It could be said that this gives me an axe to grind; in fact, I could hardly claim otherwise. Yet it seems to me that this puts me in a better position than most to make some observations on the effects of this disparaging of revisionist history and the implications for broader historical enquiry.

There seem to be three fundamental reasons why revisionists have a low reputation. The first is simply that by no means all revisionist research and analysis is of the highest standard. We have all heard of remarkable theories--stone rows, circles and pyramids leap to mind--based on evidence which, at best, might be described as 'flimsy'. Knowledge that such works are published, and sometimes sell in huge numbers, does nothing to confirm our faith in the intellectual quality control of commissioning editors. Furthermore, over the last 150 years the popular press has permitted (and, in some quarters, actively encouraged) new interpretations of events which may collectively be described as 'conspiracy theories'. When is a revisionist theory not a conspiracy theory? Historians may present several differences--including an author's credentials, knowledge, methods, judgement, and objectives--but it is not always easy for the public to be sure of the differences. Indeed, the perennial question of who shot President Kennedy (and why) has encouraged a welter of books, not all of which can be dismissed as ill-informed or simply sensationalist, although many are. It should thus not be considered surprising if public confidence in revisionist historical publications has been undermined by a culture which publishes theories of dubious merit far more often than works of revisionist scholarship.

This point only partly explains anti-revisionism. While it would explain why some works on, say, the identity of Jack the Ripper receive short shrift, it does not explain why a considerable number of hooks written by the well-informed and well-qualified are either overtly dismissed as 'revisionist' or avoided by those whom one would expect to take an immediate interest. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Revisionism Revisited: Ian Mortimer Takes Issue with Those Who Put Limits on Historians' Questionings of the Past
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.