POSTMODERNISM AND HISTORY
M Esterman, 2009


THE “AGES OF HISTORIOGRAPHY”
(FROM A POSTMODERN PERSPECTIVE)


PREMODERN HISTORY



MODERN HISTORY



POSTMODERN HISTORY



POSTMODERNIST THEORY ON HISTORY



IS THERE SUCH A THING AS A POSTMODERNIST “SCHOOL”?
¢“Postmodern” Historians


POSTMODERN HISTORIANS AND HISTORICAL THINKERS
¢Do not share all common traits, methodology or purpose
¢Are not all historians but rather apply other theories to history (e.g. Literary, gender etc)
¢Often have competing views about the focus of history/meanings of history
¢Use varying methodologies – not all are trained historians
¢Are from different contexts (time, historiographical, philosophical etc)
¢Have different aims – some to destroy past assumptions, some to question, some to enhance
¢

“POSTMODERN” HISTORIANS – WEBB, EXTENSION HISTORY: THE HISTORIANS
¢Paul Carter, Lost Subjects (1999):
¢Presents his history by means of a series of ‘voices’. No omniscient narrator. (much like
Herodotus?)
¢Simon Schama, Dead Certainties (1991):
—Admits that parts of the history is a “work of the imagination that chronicles historical events”
– either his own interpretation of a variety of sources combined OR entirely his ideas based on
what he understands was likely to have happened.
¢Richard Price, Alabi’s World, (1990):
—Using different fonts to give the idea of different voices – requires reader to imagine various
accents, voices etc.
¢Norman Davies, The Isles (1999):
—Doesn’t use national teminology i.e. “Britain” as he says it detracts from the contribution of
other groups
—Uses various other time-neutral imaginary terms e.g. “Midnight Isles”
—Mixes traditional sources (Celtic archaeology) with non-traditional (myths, ancient Irish
literature & modern songs)
—
¢