Titlebook: Herbert Butterfield and the Interpretation of History; Keith C. Sewell Book 2005 Palgrave Macmillan, a division of Macmillan Publishers Li

補(bǔ)助

frugal

ineluctable

,Butterfield’s Critique of Acton,le Whig except Fox, who was no historian, or a single historian save Acton, who was no Whig’.. In the Preface Butterfield indicated that the subject was the whig interpretation in ‘the accepted meaning of the phrase’; a statement which drew from Carl C. Becker the confession that he ‘did not recall

Embolic-Stroke

Popcorn

Expository Historiography,f the relationship between these two standpoints is one of the central issues confronting the interpreter of Butterfield. In what respects was he a friend or a foe of whigs and whiggism? J. G. A. Pocock has described the reconciliation of the anti-progressivism of . with the celebration of the whig

opportune

Coronary

Technical History,ative methodological particularism. On the contrary, his numerous references to providence seem to have prompted him to articulate with increased forthrightness the notion of a non-interpretative form of statement. As if to relativise the rest of the . lectures, ‘technical history’ was discussed in

Guileless

,Butterfield’s Critique of Interpretations,in particular. As a result, the weight of any such discussion lies primarily with whig historiography, rather than with the question of Butterfield’s concept and critique of interpretations as such. This question was only implicit in ., but became more explicit in the 1948–51 discussions concerning

fender

The Three Ways or Levels of History,technical history. It then also became necessary to establish the relationship between the writings that used providence as an explanatory device, and expository history, purporting to be the result of applying a strictly scientific generalising procedure to the concrete facts established by technic

令人苦惱