No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
British Historiography Decentralizes
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 January 2014
Extract
One of the most remarkable features of the British historical scene since World War II has been the rapid professionalization of local history. The National Register of Archives was set up in 1954 “to record the location, content and availability of all collections of documents, both large and small, in England and Wales (other than those of the central government).” From 1949 something akin to a diary of the burgeoning interest in this area was provided by the journal Archives. Neither the work of the National Register nor the informed discussion of Archives would have been possible, however, without the labours of permanent professional archivists who were to be found in most county and other major local record offices by the 1950s. It is not the purpose of this article, however, to record archival activities as such or to follow the subdividing of these activities throughout the 1950s indicated by the Bulletin of the National Register of Archives, the Lists of Accessions, and the many catalogues issuing from local archives.
For the archivist, interest in local records seemed to follow naturally enough upon his scientific training in national collections. But such was not the case for the academic historian for whom “nationalization” of history had become identified with the development of scientific history itself. While the president of the Historical Association could admit in his Jubilee Address of 1956 that “One of the most important features of the first half of the twentieth century is the realization in one field after another that history is much more than the mere story of governments,” this realization has been very gradual.
- Type
- Research Article
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1969
References
1. E.g., Archives, II (1953–56), 382–86, 402–03Google Scholar; III (1957-58), 148-58; VI (1963-64), 8-12.
2. Wrigley, E. A. (ed.), An Introduction to English Historical Demography (London, 1966)Google Scholar.
3. See Finberg, H. P. R. and Skipp, V. H. T., Local History: Objective and Pursuit (Newton Abbot, 1967)Google Scholar. Several of the other new universities are now planning to study local and regional culture as part of their program.
4. Parallel developments are reflected in the review Etudes Rurales for France. The interest in local history has been phenomenal in many countries of Europe since World II. See, e.g., Virrankoski, P., “Local History in Finland,” Scandinavian Economic History Review, XIV (1966)Google Scholar.
5. Archives, III, 151Google Scholar. From the inception of this journal local archivists have insisted upon the importance of their archives for the larger historical picture.
6. Leon Bagrit's remark in the Reith Lectures for 1964 can serve as an example of this new conceptualization: “One of the elements in the Gordonstoun system, for instance, is that of learning to serve the local community in which you live and then expanding your interest to the nation at large.” Bagrit, Leon, The Age of Automation (London, 1965), p. 38Google Scholar.
7. For a useful introduction, see Shepherd, Clovis R., Small Groups, Some Sociological Perspectives (San Francisco, 1964)Google Scholar.
8. The generally small measure of cooperation between historians and sociologists has been described in the report of a survey by the British Academy. Research in the Humanities and the Social Sciences (London, 1961), pp. 57–59Google Scholar.
9. Raftis, J. A., “Social Structures in Five East Midland Villages,” Econ. Hist. Rev., second series, XVIII (1965), 83–100Google Scholar; “The Concentration of Responsibility in Five Villages,” Mediaeval Studies, XXVIII (1966), 92–118Google Scholar; “Changes in an English Village after the Black Death,” ibid., XXIX (1967), 158-77.
10. “Historical Population Studies,” Daedalus, XCVII (Spring 1968)Google Scholar.
11. International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (New York, 1968), XI, 235Google Scholar.
12. DeWindt, Edwin, “Land and People in Holywell-cum-Needingworth” (Ph.D. thesis, University of Toronto, 1968)Google Scholar.
13. A Faculty Research Grant by the Social Science Research Council of New York made it possible to undertake this work in 1966, and the grant was extended to assist completion of the work in 1967.
14. Archives, I (1949–1952)Google Scholar, No. 1, 19, No. 2, 12; II, 90.
15. It is indicative of the admirable cataloguing of these archives that all but two counties were able to answer immediately with precise information. This fact does not suggest that such information is adequate to the purposes of the social survey.
16. Field, R. K., “Worcester Peasant Buildings,” Medieval Archaeology, IX (1965), 105–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Baker, A. R. H., “Field Systems in the Vale of Holmesdale,” Agricultural History Review, XIV (1966), 1–24Google Scholar.
17. All of these court rolls have been seen by the writer except Hoddesdon and Tottenham.