ESSAY REVIEW II MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCAnON-u.?

Must Biography Be Educational?

William Bruneau University of British Columbia

Michael Bliss. William Osler: A LifeinMedicine. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999. Pp, xiv + 581.

Roland Hill. Lord Acton. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000. Pp, xxvi + 548.

A hoary but persistent tradition has it that people's lives, once in print, become exemplary and educational. Aristotle put his stamp on this idea, Plutarch famously supplied it with content, and, closer to ourown time, the Victorians and the Edwardians gaveit a moralistic twist. One thinks of Thomas Carlyle and his imitators, Leslie Stephen and his "moral progeny," John Morley and his imitators in the field of political biography, and Lytton Strachey, inimitable in his insight that "great" people mostly have feet of clay. In this lineage, the biographer's task (apart from recounting the agreed facts of a life) is to warn readers of moral danger, to urge moral greatness, or to tell of the links between greatness of character and greatness ofdeeds---or all three. In raisingquestions like these, and furthermore intensifying our sensibility, biographers were and are "educating" -but only if one accepts a morally-freighted definition of education.'

Since at least the 1920s biographers have been voting with their pens and their computers.Theirverdict is in.They havemoved awayfrom moralized consi­deration of lives past and present. Under the old job description, biographers found themselves performing functions once restricted to prophets. Fewer and fewer found they could honestly make strong ethical, aesthetic, social, and poli­tical prescriptions, or see this as their primary obligation. The New York Review

I Aristotle, Rhetoric, 1360 a 18-37; Politics,ed. E. Barker, II c. V, § 16. Aristotle thought study of past lives,and of history more generally,wouldencourageaninductivehabit of mind. Historical biographywasnecessaryif one hoped to makepolitical generalizations,especially about the "kinds of people" which this or that constitutional arrangement might suit.

Plutarch,Lives; Moralia (Cambridge,Mass.:Harvard UniversityPress,variousyears).See also Donald A. Russell,Plutarch (London: Duckworth, 1973), and the same author's edited volume, Plutarch: Select Essays and Dialogues (Oxford: Oxford University Press/World's Classics, 1993). Further, P.G. Bietenholz, Historyand Biography in theWork ofErasmus of Rotterdam (Geneve: Librairie Droz, 1966).

For anunpersuasivebut colourfuldiscussionof biographical moralism,see the oft-quoted H. Nicolson, DevelopmentofEnglish Biography (London: Leonard and VirginiaWoolf, later Hogarth Press, 1927).

© Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'histoire de!'education 12, nos. 1/2 (2000): 182-200.

ofBooks and its London cousin show~ publishers.2 But it is fair to say a-new"'1liII1

The new biographer's tone veers ~ often still to the giving of advice. Thall The new biography claims to beoeitDsI and inviting any number of ways to the pages of a single book, and even various parts of a single book. are .

.narrative, and one-ey~

the reader to supply the moral tooe, even to find unifying themes not vi the reader greater power, one miP

Earlierschools of historial ~ through a single writerly point-()£~ personality of the subject simply ~­dispositions, the usual response to ~ tively expressed emotions, of the swIIjI psychology,biographers somc:times.­ofmotives.5 Abiographerwasap;l ltd' data showing how the biographial.... force of his or her "personality." D emphasis on character and po~" ed to the moralized biography.

Released from these narrowdid of all the evidence. Thus Maynard. 51 Freudian account of personality, oalri

2Aregularand thorough surn:yot ~ Elsewhere," offeredeachquarterinB. & i Is. University ofHawai'i, 1977-present ) .FaI::I Lionel Gossman, Basel in the ~ of'" University of Chicago Press, 200c). esp.. Gil on Jacob Burckhardt, 201-410.

JSee, for example,Jo Burr ~. Nineteenth-Century France (Los~

'R. Josselsen and A. lieblich. ~ JI California: Sage, 1999),passim.

5Forasharp,ifout-datedcriticismat.. Doctors(Chicago:UniversityofdJiap:lPII mentinSoICohen,ChallengingO,M ­York:Peter Lang,1999), Ch. 7, -In theN. Education in Europe, 1905-1931l,- 157.....

6Dee Garrison, "TwoRoads T--=" S.Alpern etaZ., eds.,The c~off~ Women (Urbana, Illinois:u~at. biographicalmethod, notions of pene-I

\

. I

1

Ie Educational?

Inmeau iilish Columbia

d/~. Toronto: University of 511.

- and London: Yale University

• people's lives, once in print, become ,. his stamp on this idea, Plutarch ...to our own time, the Victorians and ODe thinks ofThomas Carlyleand his q'aly,.John Morley and his imitators lIDo So:ac~ey, inimita~lein his insight r- In thislineage, the bIOgrapher's task al a life) is to warn readers of moral 11:1 of the links between greatness of ~ In raising questions like these and ,Iiiographe~s.wereand are "educa:ing" I-ed definition of education.' ~ been voting with their pens and ~movedaway from moralized consi­I'the old job description, biographers .-a restricted to prophets. Fewer and -.g~cal?aesthetic, social, and poli­~obligatIon.The New YorkReview

Ill£. Buker, II c. V,§ 16.Aristotle thought .-.idmcourageaninductivehabitofmind._-.u JilOlitical generalizations,especially ~uuonal arrangement might suit. ~UniversityPress,various years).See -..m. 1973),and the sameauthor's edited Ddani: Oxford University Press/World's "1- Biography in theWorkof Erasmus of

..... ipaphical moralism,see the oft-quoted J-iou; Leonardand VirginiaWoolf, later

6riIJauricn 12, nos. 1/2 (2000): 182-200.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 183

o/Booksand its London cousin show that this older form of life-writing still finds publishers.' But it is fairto say a "new" historical biography is busting out allover.

The new biographer's tone veers only occasionally toward admonition, less often still to the giving of advice. These are no longer the biographer's tasks. The newbiography claims to be neither monocular nor monolithic, permitting and inviting any number of ways to write or to argue about past lives, even in the pages of a single book, and even when the inferences and conclusions in various parts of a single book are inconsistent.' Single-minded moralizing, singular narrative, and one-eyed accounts ofpersonality-all are gone.' It is for the reader to supply the moral tone, and at least some of the inferences, and even to find unifying themes not visible on the biographical surface. (This gives the reader greater power, one might say--or a lot more work to do.)

Earlier schools of historical biography imposed "unity" on the object of study through a single writerly point-of-view. A biographer displayed the "singular" personality of the subject simply by describing the habitual practices, the typical dispositions, the usual response to changingcircumstances, and the most repeti­tively expressed emotions, of the subject/object. After the advent of Freudian psychology, biographers sometimes, however amateurishly, tackled the question of motives.SA biographerwas expected (not merely allowed) to selectevidenceand data showing howthe biographical subject made his or herway through life on the force of his or her "personality."? The unity of argument that came with an emphasis on character and personality had rhetorical advantages particularly suit­ed to the moralized biography.

Released from these narrowduties, the new biographer must take account of all the evidence. Thus Maynard Solomon's study of Mozart, driven by a Freudian account ofpersonality, only just qualifies as biography, let alone "new

2Aregularand thorough surveyof reviews ofbiographicalworkswillbefoundin"Reviewed Elsewhere," offeredeachquarterinBiography (Honolulu: Center forBiographical Research and University of Hawai'i, 1977-present). For an exampleof modernist-moralist biography,see Lionel Gossman, Basel in theAgeof Burckhardt: A Studyin Unreasonable Ideas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,2000),esp.Gossman onJohann Jacob Bachofen,109-200,and on Jacob Burckhardt, 20I-41 O.

3See, for example,Jo Burr Margadant,ed., TheNew Biography: Performing Femininity in Nineteenth-Century France (LosAngeles: Universityof CaliforniaPress,2000.

'R. Josselsen and A. Lieblich, eds., Making Meaning of Narratives (Thousand Oaks, California: Sage, 1999),passim.

sForasharp,ifout-datedcriticismof this biographical form,seeJacques Barzun,Clioandthe Doctors (Chicago: UniversityofChicagoPress,1974).Cf.the balancedandconstructiveassess­ment inSolCohen,Challenging Orthodoxies: Towarda NewCulturalHistory ofEducation (New York:PeterLang,1999),Ch, 7,"In theName of the PreventionofNeurosis:Psychoanalysis and Education in Europe, 1905-1938," 157-84.

6Dee Garrison, "Two Roads Taken: Writing the Biographyof Mary Heaton Vorse," in S.Alpernetal.,eds.,TheChallenge ofFeminist Biography: Writing the Lives ofModem American Women (Urbana, Illinois:Universityof IllinoisPress,1992),65-78,but esp.67-8 on Freudian biographical method, notions of personality,and the new biography.

184 Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'histoirede /'education

biography" or history, however well-informed the writing and research." Jan Swafford's study ofJohannes Brahms, on the other hand, replete with detailed evidence on its subject's relations with landlords, barkeepers, publishers, neigh­bours, relatives, whole social classes, and a bewildering range of cultural forces -yet still interested in the underlying problem of Brahms's driving mascu­linity-is certainly "new biography,"!

Disparate forms of evidence, multiple narratives, thematic variety, and a jostling crowd of barely consistent explanations typify the new historical bio­graphy. To them we should add a characteristic and persistent appeal to context: the surrounding circumstances/structures of social class, public and private taste/preference (in everything from art to sex), social practices (including those that embody genderand!or sex), and politics (understood asany devicewe might use to negotiate differences among and between US).9

There is little so far to distinguish biography from the ordinary social history. Historians use "themes" to organize their evidence and to make sus­tained inferences and arguments, and they like to make narratives whose energy and colour move the reader to continue turning pages. On second thought, there isa difference: when I wrote "multiple narratives, thematic variety," I wanted to show that biographers choose narratives that make a story of the lives they are writing, but may introduce secondary themes having little to do with that story. A book's story-telling narratives may be accompanied by no explanatory themes at all. Musical biography is notorious for this very thing, as for instance the relentlessly factual, chronologically-bounded narratives in MaryJane Phillips­Matz's flat biographyofGiuseppe Verdi, and Leonie Rosenstiel's double narra­tive of the life and (wholly separate) work of Lili Boulanger. 10Historians must give greatest weight to theme and inference, or at any rate, give narrative and theme equal weights.

This means social historians can write biography, and can sound and look like"new biographers" as they tum out their articles and books. But at the final accounting, they must argue a connection between their subjects and their subjects' circumstances and contexts. The argument for subject/context con­nection, or subject/circumstance connection, is everywhere in Bliss's work on Osler, if a little less so in Hill's on Acton.

In the narrative/theme distinction liesa great difference between biography and all social history. The full force of the distinction is easiest to appreciate in one especially important application of biographical and social-historical theory -the history of education.

1Maynard Solomon, Mozart (New York: HarperCollins, 1995). 8JanSwafford,]ohannes Brahms: A Biography (New York: Knopf, 1997). 9For an extended discussion, see W.A. Bruneau, "An Apologia for Biography in French

History," Proceedings of theWestern Society fOT French History, 8 (1981): 568-76. IlIMary Jane Phillips-Matz, Verdi: A Biography (New York: Oxford University Press,

1993); Leonie Rosenstiel, Lili Boulanger: Leben undWerk.trans. and ed. Sabine Gabriel and Rolf Wolle (Bremen: Zeichen und Spuren, 1995).

MUST BIOGRAPHY BEEDUeATIOs..u?

I suggest the new biography isaboute.w. Bliss's study of William Osler and &alii all three in various degrees and ways.L book in the tradition of new b~ works display features of the new fonlll in the history of education.

In what senses is recent btop~ First, new historical biognpay ..

education to be any activity that ~ rions for things, and invites temponlJl ment-at least long enough to c:ousidIlII! may be many more things than m-,.I

Newbiographers are, in this~ listen to the multiple narratives tha· readers to do likewise.II Each ~ displays education at work in the ..

To historians of education. this_ century, the field has splintered. DOa­tion, its institutions or its contClll. written increasingly often from the,. people on the cultural and eduaria-l in elites. For a short while, some pnai as to say that education was built.. people acquired habits and wo~ education as mere socialization.."­tional history in this vein was u.... treatment of colonial American sdII

Since they try to see how nmlDII graphers must come close to 1IiliLiticl subjects in turn "shape" the foras1 examine the interplay of social m.:I emotional states as they expcrimal

"LeonEdel, Writing Lives: PTvtaI-JIi New Biography," 19-214, and esp, ~

12S01 Cohen, Challenging 0rtb0J0 __1 York: Peter Lang, 1999), esp. em. 4-5..•

I lBernard Bailyn, Edueati<mm,.F­fOT Study (New York: Vintage, 1%C",'"

14LawrenceCremin,.ArnericAx ~ Row, 1970), esp. the important ~

150n interactions between ~ WritingaWoman's Life(NewYoR: BallI Identified Woman and Other~. eds., Challenge, 118-21.

• bl-utionlRevue d'histoire de /'education

lIformed the writing and research. 7 Jan - the other hand, replete with detailed .dIords, barkeepers, publishers, neigh­-'a bewildering range of cultural forces ~Jlroblem of Brahms's driving mascu­

lillie ~tives, thematic variety, and a lIIutioos typify the new historical bio­II:IisOc and persistent appeal to context: ~ of social class, public and private ~IIC:I:), social practices (including those Iiia (understood as any device we might"'.een us).' .I.iography from the ordinary social ~ their evidence and to make sus­~ to make narratives whose energy ~pages.On second thought, there ".alies, thematic variety," I wanted to ...~e a ~tory of the lives they are -.es havmglittle to do with that story. - •+' ,ltOIDied by no explanatory themes Ii.-thisvery thing, as for instance the ~~tivesin MaryJane PhiHips­L-d Leonie Rosenstiel's double narra­.ofLili Boulanger. 10 Historians must -.a. or at any rate, give narrative and

~~hy,andcansoundandlook - ~cles and books. But at the final .. between their subjects and their ~arpmentfor subject/context con­IIIiiao. iseverywhere in Bliss's work on.. 1Ia~ ~e~ence.between biography lllilli:RinctionIS easiest to appreciate in ~I and social-historical theory

. ~,1995). lIIr(.Srw-York: Knopf,1997). .....-\8 Apologia for Biography in French ...History, 8 (1981): 568-76. 1lI!J1~_York: Oxford University Press, ..,..e*, trans. and ed. Sabine Gabriel and ..

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 185

I suggest the new biography is about education, in at least three senses. Michael Bliss's study ofWiUiam Osler and Roland Hill's book on Lord Acton illustrate all three in various degrees and ways. I doubt either author planned to write a book in the tradition of new biography. It is a mark of the times that both works display features of the new form, and not a few elements typical ofwork in the history of education.

In what senses is recent biography "educational"? First, new historical biography is "educational" by definition if we take

education to be any activity that opens participants' minds to multiple explana­tions for things, and invites temporary suspension ofpractical and moral judg­ment-at least long enough to consider those explanations equably. (Education may be many more things than that, but let this stipulative definition stand.)

New biographers are, in this general sense, educators.They do their best to listen to the multiple narratives that "life writing" permits, and invite their readers to do likewise. II Each narrative line entails a selection of evidence, and displays education at work in the life of the subject.

To historians of education, this must sound familiar. Over the past quarter­century, the field has splintered, no longer fixated on the rise of public educa­tion, its institutions or its content or its practices.F Its practitioners have written increasingly often from the perspectives of the "weak and the silent," people on the cultural and educational margins, people in the mass rather than in elites. Fora short while, some practitioners of educational historywent so far as to say that education was built into culture-that it was going on whenever people acquired habits and worldviews, bywhatever means." This was to treat education as mere socialization. Among the best known proponents of educa­tional history in this vein was Lawrence Cremin, particularly in his revealing treatment of colonial American schooling and socialization.14

Since they try to see how multiple forces shape their subject(s), new bio­graphers must come close to writing history of education. They ask how their subjects in turn "shape" the forces that are trying to "shape" them." They examine the interplay of social structures, social practices, and their subjects' emotional states as they experiences those structures and practices.

IILeon Edel, WritingLives: Principia Biographica (NewYork: Norton, 1984),Part I, "The New Biography," 19-214, and esp. "Narratives," 173-214.

12501Cohen, Challenging Orthodoxies: TawardaNew CulturalHistory ofEducation (New York: Peter Lang, 1999), esp. Chs. 4-5,105-53.

IlBernard Bailyn, Education in theForming ofAmerican Society: Needs and Opportunities for Study (New York: Vintage, 1960),passim.

"LawrenceCremin,American Education: TheColonial Experience (New York: Harper and Row, 1970), esp. the important seventeenth chapter on "Configurations," 517-43.

150n interactions between biographers and their subjects, see Carolyn G. Heilbrun, WritingaWoman's Life (NewYork: Ballantine, 1988),50-52;also, Lois Rudnick, "The Male­Identified Woman and OtherAnxieties: the Life of Mabel Dodge Luhan," in S.Alpern, eta!', eds., Challenge, 118-21.

186 Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'bistoirede !'education

The idea is partly to display great masses of fact, and to let them suggest plausible narratives of education. Take Swafford on Brahms. The power im­balances in the composer's early life, his poverty-stricken beginnings in 19'h_ century Hamburg, and the consequences-having to play for money in bars, and learning about sex and gender by seeing how women made their living in those bars-these things shaped Brahms, just as he later (in his relations with Clara Schumann) shaped them.

In brief, this kind of biography is about socialization. Ifwe define education as little more or less than socialization, then new biography and history of education almost completely overlap. The trouble then is that almost anything will do. The relation between history and biography easilybecomes tenuous and uninteresting. Educationalhistorybecomes indistinguishablefrom biography,and both shade into fiction, anthropology, ethnography, or even informed journalism. It was this that doomed Cremin's three-volume history of American education to remainder bins across dusty shelves." It is hard to make incisive explanations when writing about everything under the sun, all at one time."

Through the 1980s and 1990s educational historians came to downplay or even to reject Cremin's example, however much they had learned from his failed revision of the field. Some late-20th century practitioners became expert in applying the methods and outlooks of cultural history, critical theory, and the linguistic tum. II These writers worked on questions of gender, embodiment, social practice; and power relations asand when those relations became visible in teachers' and learners' working lives.Meanwhile, a great many other practitioners, worried and bewildered by the diversity of the new cultural history ofeducation, turned to research and writing reminiscent of an older history of education­understood as the study of institutions and public educational politics. The field became multifarious, specialized, and ever more insistent on proper balance between facts and strong arguments. Thus practitioners of education-history specialities find it hard to cross boundaries, and to attempt anything resembling a full-blown synthesis.

Newbiographypermits and invites an educational interpretation or under­standing. But history ofeducation, as field or sub-discipline, will not and ought not to assimilate the multiple themes characteristic of new biography. Practi­tioners are having enough trouble seeing how to bridge the divides that separate forms of argument in educational history, let alone inviting and ingesting the questions and insights of biography. The best we can hope for is avague cross­

16S. Cohen, "Lawrence A. Cremin: Lives and Transformations," in Cohen, Challenging, 273-99.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIOS.fJ1

fertilization, awaiting a time when.. mentative and logical requiremenu" when history of education isready to. of the wary sisterhood of classica11D1111i there is little exchange between the_ between scholars researching eidKLl exchange or two--undersunding dial write lives must finally give pr~

Some practitioners of bi~:I think even for a moment of adopc4I biographers do useful work. but in.. "new" they may be failing an in::qxa..... like the educational history tribe. &dii in-house talk and discussion is ncaIaI tional history. But if inter-tribal"­historian's and every biognpber's" some points so similar, that it is~ plinary divide, and to learn what~4

Historically-minded readers ~ Does it consider the multiple ~ attention to education in our first.­work in a systematicway to detta • context, or circumstance, on the .. sustained argument for sub;ea...a:.­ical argument, well done, can .m..­those questions should be put. mdIII

N ow to my promised second md iii easier to see links between ~ consider all three definitio~. not they are professional histon-." professionals in education.

The second definition COT'CrS •

see that individuals learn aprofesa. ality, or accept an ideology or ascu~ ships, in mentoring, in public --mlOlJl in non-formal settings at allages. CJI

educational institutions. In ~ca is explicit, and leaves behind C'rida.

17Fora powerful discussion of the tension between explanation and narrative, theme and get through lifewithout ~ description, see Lionel Gossman, Baselin theAgeofBurckhardt,op. cit., ch. 12," 'Not Narrative, dering it, no biographer could bopbut Historical': TheCulturalHistory ofGreece," 297-346.This section compares and contrasts \

account.Jacob Burckhardt's Griechische Kulturgeschichte with the Kulturder Renaissance in ltalien. 11]. D. Wilson, "The New Diversity in Canadian Educational History," Acadiensis19,2

(Spring 1990): 148-69; Cohen, Challenging,passim.

--

• bbtation/Revue d'histoire de !'education

.-asses of fact, and to let them suggest R Swafford on Brahms. The power im­lis poverty-stricken beginnings in 19'h_ ~ving to play for money in bars, ~g how women made their living in -. JUst as he later (in his relations with

- socialization. Ifwe define education .. then new biography and history of • trouble then is that almost anything • biographyeasilybecomes tenuous and ..indistinguishablefrom biography,and ~y, or eveninformed journalism. II:IIame historyof American education to • is hard to make incisive explanations ~ sun, aU at one time." .-xw historians came to downplay or a much they had learned from his failed .-my practitioners became expert in DIIwr.aJ history, critical theory, and the IGIl questions of gender, embodiment, Iiwben those relations became visible in ..tUIe. a great many otherpractitioners, IIIfthc new cultural history of education, .. of an older history of education­lidpublic educational politics. The field I!IIa' more insistent on proper balance ~ practitioners of education-history Ia,3Ddto attempt anything resembling

• educational interpretation or under­II ex sub-discipline, will not and ought lllnaeristic of new biography. Practi­~to bridge the divides that separate.,.lct alone inviting and ingesting the R best we can hope for is a vague cross­

"Tamfonnations," in Cohen, Challenging,

~ explanation and narrative, theme and ~op.cit.,ch.12, " 'Not Narrative, '2J7-}46" Thissection compares and contrasts nidt the KMItKr tierRenaissance in Italien. --Educational History," Acadiensis19,2

"

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 187

fertilization, awaiting a time when biography is prepared to accept the argu­mentative and logical requirements of history and history of education-and when history ofeducation is ready to move on to a new synthesis. I'm reminded of the wary sisterhood of classicalmusic and "gangsta rap." Both are music, but there is little exchange between the two, and precious little serious borrowing between scholars researching either. It is high time we all moved on to, try an exchange or two-understanding that like socialhistorians generally, historians write lives must finally give precedential force to theme and argument.

Some practitioners of biography still write monothematic books, and few think even for a moment of adopting a multiple-narrative scheme. These "old"

I biographers do useful work, but in neglecting the inferential possibilities of the "new" they may be failing an important intellectual test. The biographical tribe is, like the educational history tribe, a divided house, and much intra-disciplinary, in-house talk and discussion is needed before biographers reach out to educa­tional history. But if inter-tribal discussion is difficult and uncertain, it is every historian's and every biographer's duty to attempt it. Their several jobs are at some points so similar, that it is intellectually necessary to reach across the disci­plinary divide, and to learn what one can.

Historically-minded readers apply to any new biography a series of tests . Does it consider the multiple arguments and optics open to it? Does it pay attention to education in our first, broad sense? Ifnot, why not? Further, does it work in a systematic way to detect the manifold effects of social and cultural context, or circumstance, on the subject/object of research? Does it make a sustainedargument for subject-context connection? The older forms of biograph­ical argument, well done, can withstand all of these questions. My point is that those questions should be put, and that Bliss and Hill should expect them.

***

Now to my promised second and third definitions of education. In both it is easier to see links between biography and history. Able biographers ought to consider all three definitions-but maybe the last two most of all-whether or not they are professional historians, and whether or not the biographees were professionals in education.

The second definition covers all cases where communities are at work to see that individuals learn a profession or avocation or a trade, acquire a nation­ality, or accept an ideology or a set of values. These may happen in apprentice­ships, in mentoring, in public "information" campaigns undertaken by the State, in non-formal settings at all ages, or in schools, universities, and other formal educational institutions. In every case, the intention to educate/inculcate/train is explicit, and leaves behind evidence and clues. No biographical subject could get through life without experiencing this sort of education, and without consi­dering it, no biographer could hope to produce a believable life-story or life­account.

1

188 Historical Studies in EducationlRevued'bistoire de!'education

This second definition is sufficiently narrow, and widely enough agreed on in the writing community, to produce a large and generally strong body of articles and books. This body of work has given the humanities and social sciences-but social and cultural history more than most-a set of specialized norms. It has its own premises, research methods, and forms of argument. It is a field of experts and expertise. None of this means the non-historian or non­specialist is excluded; rather, it means that a biographer who chooses not to explore it loses in argument and expository power. By this standard or defini­tion, the biographers of Osler and Acton are in some slight difficulty.

Before turning to the detail of these two books, I offer a third definition of education, and of educational history, perhaps the most familiar of all.This is education as institution, as visible curriculum (as opposed to hidden curricu­lum), aspedagogy, as carrot-and-stick or currency in the competitive business of life. It is just possible that a person somewhere in the world could live a whole life without much experience of these things, but the absence of them would itself be significant. It matters that by this definition certain followers of the Buddha in some cases rejected education, and others did not. By the same token, the putatively anti-intellectual rejection of schooling in the works of Ivan Illich and his friends, and in Paul Goodman and his followers, has its own significance.

It is just possible to argue that biographers mustalwaysdeal with education in this third sense, and could therefore profit by understandings in the history of formal education. But harried biographers cannot be expected to be expert in every (narrow) field on which they might draw. Short of full-blown expertise, there are many degrees of acquaintance with the field. It is fair to expect, let us agree, that life-writing replete with references to formal education should include more than just one historical perspective on formal education.

For Osler and Acton, whose lives were lived on different continents, formal education naturally had peculiar functions and meanings. Osler spent the greater part of his professional life in formal educational settings, at McGill, Johns Hopkins, and Oxford, not to mention student days in Ontario, Berlin, Vienna, Paris, and London.

Acton had an education mainly in sense 2, in an aristocratic European family based in Britain during the 19th century, but Continental in roots and outlook. His involvement in formal education, sense 3, was nonetheless extended and sustained. He spent eight years asa boy at Oscott, awell-reputed English Catholic boarding school. His ties and commitment to institutional education led him finally and famously to the Regius Professorship of History at Cambridge University. His long years as pupil-apprentice of Ignaz von Dollinger took him to lectures at the University of Munich. He never took a degree, in Germany or in England. Instead he maintained his faithful appren­ticeship to Dollinger, in a decades-long succession of visits to diplomatic archives across western Europe. The two worked hard together in the greatest fight of their lives, the losing battle to persuade Vatican Council I in 1870 to reject the Doctrine of Papal Infallibility.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BEEDUCATIONAl.?

Many narratives may be imposed invite educational argument. The nDJ:IIi

history. A further argument migh::jEurope divided by nationalitybut . . another argument-narrative arises £rc-I\ vate religious practice account fora institutional affiliationswere £rom the the same narrative choices arise: both men, education in the formal ~ tions, and invites divergent n.arratiftsbill on differing inferences about the 3

Whether we see education as formality and intent, it would be haaI some use of the methods and ideas 01.1 threads in the evidence from both8wsl of a kind familiar in new biography.

If (and this is a big "if") biOgtatM a systematic way with the probkm oil taking up the challenges of the new biI they essay a form of educational i.a. .. John Emerich Edward DalbergAcm-,. in Naples to Maria Louisa Pdlinc ... Acton. Ferdinand was the son. and... Englishman who in the 17905 . Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, The AI

Shropshirebaronets-co~ the Church of England....In me Iii occurred[whent]hreeofits mMlIIiwe

. to the faith of their fathers [~ The connection between the FD~ thirty or so pages to explain in Hi'rs that in the tiny, highly intercon.oeaal cracy, the English-Italian connca:ial

The Dalbergs, meanwhile, werea still than the Acrons. Fitted out .... and Italy, the Dalberg clan u~ II often from one pleasant European­of the Napoleonic era, were comic. Dalberg marriage (Hill, 12-13).

Our future Lord Acton spent I England, and his summers in Frma:, his family were cautious and model

I

•E4ucationlRevued'histoire de!'education

Iynarrow, and widely enough agreed on ~ a large and generally strong body of l has given the humanities and social rymore than most-a set of specialized Ia methods, and forms of argument. It is tl this means the non-historian or non­that a biographer who chooses not to lory power. By this standard or defini­IOn are in some slight difficulty. ~two books, I offer a third definition of perhaps the most familiar of all. This is iculum (as opposed to hidden curricu­IIrcurrency in the competitive business I somewhere in the world could live a Fthese things, but the absence of them • bythis definition certain followers of ::arion, and others did not. By the same rqeaion of schooling in the works of ~an and his followers, has its own

:lphers mustalways dealwith education profit by understandings in the history ~ cannot be expected to be expert in ~ draw. Short of full-blown expertise, ~th the field. It is fair to expect, let us bnces to formal education should IlD'SPective on formal education. s were lived on different continents, rfunctions and meanings. Osler spent hma.I educational settings, at McGill, :.ion student days in Ontario, Berlin,

I sense 2, in an aristocratic European IIaltury, but Continental in roots and _cation, sense 3, was nonetheless Jars as a boy at Oscott, awell-reputed ;bes and commitment to institutional • the Regius Professorship of History ~ as pupil-apprentice of Ignaz von ~ity of Munich. He never took a ad he maintained his faithful appren­• succession of visits to diplomatic ~edhard together in the greatest pamaae Vatican Council I in 1870 to r-

MUSTBIOGRAPHY BEEDUCATIONAL? 189

Many narratives may be imposed on the evidence of Acton's life, and all invite educational argument. The narrative argument might come from family history. A further argument might be from cultural and diplomatic history in a Europe divided by nationality but united by cultural and imperialpretension. Yet another argument-narrative arises from the ways organized religious lifeand pri­vate religious practice account for Acton's choices. In Osler's case,although his institutional affiliationswere from the beginning farmore sustained than Acton's, the same narrative choices arise: familial, cultural, and religious. In the lives of both men, education in the formal and visible sense permits competing explana­tions, and invites divergent narratives based on distinct selections of evidence,and on differing inferences about the subjects' motives and intent.

Whether we see education as apprenticeship, or as an activity framed by formality and intent, it would be hard to understand these two men without some use of the methods and ideas of educational history. Similarly, narrative threads in the evidence from both lives suggest inferences and multiple stories of a kind familiar in new biography.

If (and this is a big "if") biographers Bliss and Hill concern themselves in a systematic way with the problem of education, how far do they go toward taking up the challenges of the new biography? And in writing biography, do they essay a form of educational history?

John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton (1834-1902), First Lord Acton, was born in Naples to Maria Louisa Pelline von Dalberg and to Sir Ferdinand Richard Acton. Ferdinand was the son, and the future Lord Acton the grandson, of an Englishman who in the 1790s and early 1800s was Prime Minister of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The Actons were

Shropshirebaronets-eonservative, loyalistsupportersof the monarchyand the Church of England....In the eighteenth century something of a jolt occurred [whent]hreeof its members, independently of eachother, returned

. to the faith of their fathers [Catholicism]. (Hill, xx) The connection between the English and the Neapolitan Actons, which takes thirty or so pages to explain in Hill's book, need not detain us. Suffice to say that in the tiny, highly interconnected world of 19th-century European aristo­cracy, the English-Italian connection was possible and barelynoteworthy.

The Dalbergs, meanwhile, were a German aristocratic family more ancient still than the Actons. Fitted out with relations and homes in Bavaria, France, and Italy, the Dalherg clan usually spoke French and Italian at home, moved often from one pleasant European home to another, and despite the tribulations of the Napoleonic era, were comfortably well off at the time of the Acton­Dalberg marriage (Hill, 12-13).

Our future Lord Acton spent his childhood and adolescent winters in England, and his summers in France, Italy, and southern Germany. Although his family were cautious and moderately conservative, Acton's travels and

190 Historical Studies in Education/Revued'bistoire de ['education

learning made him increasingly cosmopolitan and liberal. He grew up multi­lingual, widely travelled, and conscious of the multiple meanings and narratives of his family history.

His childhood was shaped by the early loss of his natural father, and the acquisition of Lord Granville as stepfather. Granville eventually, and not especi­ally tactfully, pushed Acton into a brief political career as a Liberal. Acton went (spring 1853) with the English delegation to the N ewYork industrial exhibition, then (1856) to Russia as an attache to Granville and a large British deputation for the coronation of Tsar Alexander II, and with Dollinger to Rome in 1857 (for political, scholarly, and religious reasons).

Acton was little inclined to play an active part in British politics. He had returned to England at age twenty-three from studies in Munich intending to

teach EnglishCatholics what he had learned in Germany about the Church and history. As the editor of learned Catholic journals of liberaloutlook, he wasbound to be bitterly disappointed by the thettolike mentality of English Catholics, who were just emergingfrom centuries of oppression. (xxi)

He envisaged acareer as publicist and educator. Hill writes (xxii) that"Acton was particularly interested in the political education of Catholics." Although Acton knew or came to know all the political greats of 19th-century England, Prime Minister Gladstone among them (87-90), he left the Commons as quickly as he decently could." For decades he edited learned reviews with tiny circulations, read by liberal-minded Catholics and Protestants alike (chiefly TheHomeand Foreign Review, TheNorth British Review, and The Rambler), and more especially by those influential Anglicans who followedJ.H. Newman to Rome.

Acton married (157-72) his cousin Maria Arco von Valley in 1865, and among their half-dozen children was Richard, the future heir and second Lord (we are at the fourth remove, by the way, in the Acton family, and the fifth Lord waits in the wings). The family depended in the 19th century on agricul­ture for its income, and Lord Acton occasionally found it necessary to spend time with relatives and friends in Germany and France, or to live in the Riviera. It was a question of maintaining a gentle way of life, but also a convenience in a life given to liberal-Catholic causes. Itwas cheaper to live on the Riviera or in rural Germany than in England, and closer to the springs of international decision making.

In February 1895, Acton was appointed Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge. Prime Minister Roseberywrote his predecessor Glad­stone to say that Acton was his favoured candidate for Cambridge, the Oxford Regius Professorship having just gone to F.Y. Powell. But:

19Hill (354-6) tellshowActonin the 1890s performed theservice of reconciling Queen Victoria and Gladstone, eachto theother's existence. Bothwere well alonginyears, but as stubborn in their suspicions of oneanotheras ever.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL?

1.he isaRomanCatholic.2. I do DOlW find it easyto impart hisknowicdr;r.. 3. I do not think that he was at C>dIIl1 objection.Acton iseminentlyanri-plflil eminently suspicious. (Rosebery cpL ill

Gladstone in the end strongly suppall friends already teaching at ~ needed income, stimulus for new ....

For Acton was an unexpectedly~ as now, objects of curiosity. A you:uc ti lecture, and reported 200 auditors, ACIIIIiI "scientific history" that attended dosdr sources and asserted the revelatory poIIII time in the development of soci~ Hobhouse was teaching at Oxford.0.lil Small at Chicago, allthree were busily~ with journals, students, and ~ was his intention, Acton's ideas fit wdwi of social inquiry. No wonder hisJca:-.i perpetually full.

Acton was disinclined to recoil. • the Cambridge lecture-tutorial ~ structures to shape the ambitions .... 1896, Acton had the opportunity .­educated world: he was to take

generaldirection of amonurnenal'" newscientifichistory, as he badapwIIi made an impression in Camhridp:.. iii

The result was the Cambridge M~ Acton was general editor for the ~ bution to the opening volume. andM an oddly tragic figure, in September.

Let it be said that Hill's workis'" social, intellectual, and religious waIA any standard. It is thus a reliabk ggidd not just a map to Acton's life.HiIlcfialli as it were, of a sustained life-studv. Hill sources, in some cases for the ~ 0-;. that score. 20

But is Hill a "new biograpbcr~iii tied up in the narrative strands be fi.II educational meanings tied up in.~

20Gertrude Himmelfarb, LmJ .~ .. University of Chicago Press, 1952).

• £JMatjon/Revue d'histoire de !'education

apoliun and liberal. He grew up multi­sof the multiple meanings and narratives

:arly loss of his natural father, and the 1Ier. Granville eventually, and not especi­fpoliticalcareer as a Liberal. Acton went .. to the NewYork industrial exhibition, iaoville and a large British deputation for - with Dollinger to Rome in 1857 (for -). • active part in British politics. He had _ from studies in Munich intending to arnN in Germany about the Church c.holic journals of liberaloutlook, he • .". the thettolike mentality of English - centuries of oppression. (xxi) I.a.tor. Hillwrites (xxii) that "Acton was l.ation of Catholics." Although Acton • greats of 19th-century England, Prime III). be left the Commons as quickly as he • learned reviews with tiny circulations, Ptottstants alike (chiefly TheHome and ..and The Rambler), and more especially Iowd].H. Newman to Rome. .. Maria Arco von Valley in 1865, and Iidw'd, the future heir and second Lord way. in the Acton family, and the fifth lIpcnded in the 19th century on agricul­a:asionally found it necessary to spend -rand France, or to live in the Riviera. • w;ay of life, but also a convenience in ~ cheaper to live on the Riviera or in Icloser to the springs of international

pinted Regius Professor of Modern r:aosd>ery wrote his predecessor Glad­.aodidate for Cambridge, the Oxford RIO F.Y. Powell. But:

.perionned the service of reconciling Queen

.......,. Both were well alonginyears, but as .~"

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 191

1.he isaRoman Catholic. 2. I do not feelsurefrom hiswritings that hewould find it easyto impart hisknowledgeto others-to be inshort a good lecturer. 3. I do not think that he was at Oxford or Cambridge. No.1 is the crucial objection. Acton iseminently anti-papal,but Great Britainon thesepoints is eminently suspicious. (Rosebery quo in Hill, 366).

Gladstone in the end strongly supported Acton's appointment, as did old friends already teaching at Cambridge. The position provided Acton with needed income, stimulus for new writing, and a psychological boost.

ForActon was an unexpectedly good lecturer. Scholar-statesmenwere then, as now, objects of curiosity. A young George M. Trevelyan went to his first lecture, and reported 200 auditors. Acton had by this time developed a theory of "scientific history" that attended closely to the importance of primary, archival sources and asserted the revelatory power of "atomic facts." This was a crucial time in the development of sociological studies and the social sciences generally. Hobhouse was teaching at Oxford, Durkheim at the Universite de Bordeaux, and Small at Chicago, all three were busily constructing the new discipline, complete with journals, students, and large-scale research programmes. Whether or not it was his intention, Acton's ideas fit well with the ambitions of these rising schools of social inquiry. No wonder his lecture room and list of seminar students were perpetually full.

Acton was disinclined to recommend great changes in the curriculum or in the Cambridge lecture-tutorial system, but nevertheless made full use of formal structures to shape the ambitions and the historical powers of his students. In 1896, Acton had the opportunity to extend his influence across the entire educated world: he was to take

generaldirection of amonumental history of the world....Acton's faith in the new scientifichistory, as he had expandedon it in his InauguralLecture,had made an impression in Cambridge. (392)

The result was the Cambridge Modern History (vol. I, 1902-vol. XII, 1912). Acton was general editor for the series, but became too ill to write his contri­bution to the opening volume, and did not live to see its publication. He died, an oddly tragic figure, in September 1902.

Let it be said that Hill's work is lucid, well-argued, and persuasively set in the social, intellectual, and religious worlds Acton knew. This is fine biography by any standard. It is thus a reliable guide to a hundred years of European history, not just a map to Acton's life.Hill effortlesslyprovides that guide in the margins, as it were, of a sustained life-study. His book uses an enormous range of primary sources, in some cases for the first time, and surpasses Himmelfarb's account on that score."

But is Hill a "new biographer"? Has he understood the educational forces tied up in the narrative strands he finds in Acton's life? Does he understand the educational meanings tied up in Acton's multiple apprenticeships? Finally, does

2°Gemude Himmelfarb, Lord Acton: A Study in Conscience and Politics (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1952).

192 Historical Studies in Education/Revued'bistoire de !'education

he make any use of explanations that arise because of Acton's involvement in formal, recognizably educational activities-from school, to public education through print, to politics, to Cambridge at the end of Acton's life?

As in all big books on big subjects, there are problems. The Actonian contro­versies-on the meaning and possibility of intellectual history, on the meaning and power of atomic facts, on the roots of power in industrial societies, and on practical morality-are left in ~tate 1902. We hear nothing of Lewis Namier's view of Acton's research methods, Isaiah Berlin on Acton's intellectual history and its weaknesses, or Collingwoodon Acton's inconsistent beliefs that history could be idea andfactum all at one time. We have only stage hints to push us to further studies-for instance, to see how Acton's essays on nationality, liberty, religious diplomacyvs. state diplomacy, and the Irish question have been inter­preted by politicians and scholars in the century since Acton's death. (Hill's excuse might be that these later debates followed Acton's death. But they didn't. They were well launched, some as early as the 1850s. These important matters deserve more treatment, even at the expense of another fifty pages.)

As for narratives, Hill provides them by the chapter. On Acton's peculiarly cosmopolitan family and childhood, we have two chapters; on his apprentice­ship to Dollinger, another; on travel to archives and religious meetings two chapters; on politics, two; on editing and writing, two and a bit; and so on. Yet these narrative themes are not written so as to confront one another, as they must have done in life. Hill mentions the tensions in Acton's life between writing and politicking, family life and public life, the country life and the urban life once or twice about the tension, but they immediately recede into the back­ground, to be heard of a hundred pages later.

The book's organization is sensible, but it is not "new" biography. We miss the continual presence of disturbing, even contradictory threads, although Hill scrupulously provides evidence for those threads. The end result is a series of missed explanatory possibilities.

Take the question of money. We know the world agricultural economy decided a good proportion of Acton's annual "salary." But what proportion exactly? Where did his wealth (defined in monetarily and non-monetarily) come from? When he spent months with his German relatives,how much wealth (free rent, business considerations, and the like) changed hands? In what ways was Acton's family economy like to and different from that of his neighbours? Who were his neighbours? Was Acton betterorworse off than they? Moneywas by no means the only measure of a family's wealth. Did the Actons have enough "history" to make up for any weakness in their real estate holdings?

Hill shows just enough of Acton's affairs to persuade us that finances were a persistent background theme, and could well provide a convenient narrative tension throughout the book. There are a dozen more such themes, at the very least, and Hill touches on them all-gender, class, the power of various ideo­logies, urban-rural differences, the daily life of the privileged classes (but not the excluded classes, on whom the Actons relied every day). Hill touches on

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAI1

these, but neither confronts them DOnIIii one another. As a result, Hill misses ­

Let's stickwith money for abit:~ had to learn the ways of the Eu.ropc3II. Did Acton teach them? Did the childn.I Even if nobody talked about this 0.1. about it-it had to be learned one..-ay. almost as much as in the Actons' 2SSCr1i-. tionallife of the whole family, and e.­

There was a significant tension iaAl the warnings of his accountanu. ~ ham house for the 70,000books ofbis. western Europe and storage of thespoW central? Andwhy? Was bookcoJIccri'Ici life, how much time could he spendwiIIII of his bibliomania, in time, IIlODn", ...

the quarterly letters from his ~. 59-62), and at every moment ~... his allotted hours and days. It a ... demonstrate a person's un~~

It would have been nice to 1mc:Jow.. debates on the British Empire, on-. and like matters. We do know a ~ Rule, on the proper spheres of ~ establishment generally, and so ca. .. practical and empirical evidence 01. • matter. Yes, we have the hundreds al. one of these great questions, bat... his Aldenham book list?21

I cannot resist aparalld1rith the. sance and Reformation periods. fOdlil Cambridge students, fellows, and ball able to put to the test the canonical.. and practice." One wonders ~

21Through the good offices of peopa:­the Acton library in 1890,offering it ~ is. A complete book list was prep;ve:i :m...

22Forexamples of the use of book1mn,,_ Refonnation Politics underH~ \"III..l­ed., 1968),88-92, 161H;MarkH. Cz'::s.CI! (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959.cor.:.e::i.. .. University, and Monastic life: The~ all'" of Educational Studies 20 (19n ": 11:-3.1..

• EJw.tion/Revue d'histoire de !'education

IIisc because of Acton's involvement in ilies-from school, to public education IF at the end of Acton's life? 6a-e arcproblems. The Actonian contro­rot intellectual history, on the meaning .ofpower in industrial societies, and on IZ.. We hear nothing of Lewis Namier's iIaBerlin on Acton's intellectual history lAaon's inconsistent beliefs that history ~'We have only stage hints to push us to _ Acton's essays on nationality, liberty, ",md the Irish question have been inter­~ century since Acton's death. (Hill's IlaluwedActon's death. But they didn't. ,as the 1850s. These important matters ~ of another fifty pages.) _by the chapter. On Acton's peculiarly lithave two chapters; on his apprentice­., archives and religious meetings two ...writing, two and a bit; and so on. Yet 1m as to confront one another, as they • the tensions in Acton's life between ~ life, the country life and the urban l1IIc:y immediately recede into the back­plater. ~but it isnot "new" biography. We miss ..contradictory threads, although Hill ~ threads. The end result is a series of

~laow the world agricultural economy"3IIJIllU1 "salary." But what proportion iiaIDooeurilyand non-monetarily) come IGcnmn relatives,how much wealth (free ~.l changed hands? In what ways was Immt from that of his neighbours? Who _ -usc off than they? Moneywas by no IIwahh. Did the Actons have enough •• their real estate holdings? IIibin to persuade us that finances were -'d ..-ell provide a convenient narrative lEa dozen more such themes, at the very pder, class, the power of various ideo­IIr iie of the privileged classes (but not --.s relied every day). Hill touches on

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 193

these, but neither confronts them norwrites so as to make the themes confront one another. As a result, Hill misses an educational aspect of Acton's life.

Let's stickwith money for a bit: Acton had a half-dozen or so children. Each had to learn the ways of the European gentry, and also about family finances. Did A.cton teach them? Did the children learn from the family, taken as awhole? Even l~ no.body talked about this kind of thing-especially if nobody talked about It-it had to be learned one way oranother. In the silences about money, almost as much as in the Actons' assertions about it, there are hints of the educa­tionallife of the whole family, and certainly of Acton's fiscal pedagogy.

There was a significant tension in Acton's life between his bibliomania and the warnings of his accountants. Acton constructed an entire wing to his Alden­ham house for the 70,000books of his library.Book-collecting across eastern and western Europe and storage of the spoils becamea central part in his life. But how central? And why? Was book collecting itself an education? Given Acton's busy life, how much time could he spend with those 70,000 books? The cost to Acton of his bibliomania, in time, money, and energy, must have been very evident in the quarterly letters from his lawyers, estate managers, and accountants (Hill, 5?-62), and at every moment when he had to make choices about how to spend his allotted hours and days. It is precisely these kinds of decisions that demonstrate a person's underlying value-systems and principles.

It would have been nice to know how far Acton's library showed traces of deba~es on the British Empire, on the question of State support for education, and like matters. We do know a great deal of Acton's views on Irish Home Rule, ?n the proper spheres of Church and State, on the dangers of religious establishment generally, and so on. But how revealing it would be to see the practical and empirical evidence of all this ...in Acton's selection of reading matter. Yes, we have the hundreds of articles Acton wrote and edited on every one of these great questions, but what of the practical evidence to be found in his Aldenham book list?21

I cannot resist aparallel with the insights of students of the English Renais­sance and Reformation periods, fortunate in having booklists of Oxford and Cambridge students, fellows, and booksellers from the 16th century, and thus able to put to the test the canonical generalizations about university curricula and practice. 22 One wonders whether Hill might have been led to these sorts of

21Through the good offices of people who knew both men, Andrew Carnegie purchased ~he Acton library in 18.90, offering it afterward to Cambridge University Library, where it still IS. A complete book list was prepared in the summer of 1890.

22Porexamples of the use of booklists, see James K. McConica, English Humanists and Reformation Politics underHenryVI/IandEdwardVI (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965, corr, ed., 1968),88-92, 161ff; Mark H. Curtis, Oxfordand Cambridge in Transition, 1558-1642 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1959, corr. ed. 1965),282-90; and W.A. Bruneau, "Humanism, the University, and Monastic Life:The Case ofRobert Joseph, Monk of Evesham, ~ British]oumal of Educational Studies 20 (1972): 282-301.

194 Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'histoire de l'education

questions had he adopted some of techniques of the new biography (and bibliography).

On the question of formal education, Hill has little to regret. His discussion of Acton's education at Oscott and later Munich and Cambridge (for as a teacher, Acton remained a learner) is fine. However, there is a "but." Accom­plished practitioners of institutional!educational history could have offered several viable and helpful lines of inquiry and argument, had Hill read them. Their absence does not disable his book, but it is poorer without them. Two examples will suffice.

The new collectively written history of Oxford University rightly makes much of the educational work done by publishers, broadcasters, and journalists, many directly connected to the institution.P The activities of the Extension Department in publication and broadcastingare part of the story, but far more is the work of the publishing arm, the Clarendon Press and the larger Oxford University Press." Students of institutional history of education nowadays do not neglect things like university or school presses. Acton was an instant bene­ficiary of the Cambridge University Press. How then did he see his work at the Press, especially in comparison and contrast with the rest of his professorial functions? What overlying or underlying educational theory drove the man? Hill does not get around to telling us. I think he knows, and that he may yet write about this. 25

The remaining definition of educational history, the one concerning ap­prenticeship and mentoring, led to massive publication and research in the last century, and promises to do likewise in the new one. Some of that newwork is done under the label of adult education, and some published as historical anthropology. The central questions have to do with the quasi-formal business of shapingand helping others to learn their professions, to become autonomous in theirfields (anything from accountancy to politics), and to become mentors in their turn."

There are no references to work from that branch of educational history in LordActon, but Hill asks questions typical of the field. Readers of Himmelfarb on Acton will recall her description of the estrangement between Dollinger and Acton, with its emphasis on intellectual differences that eventually ended the

23T.H.Aston, gen. ed., History of the University of Oxford (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984- ),8 vols., but see esp. vols. 6, pt. I, and 8 in its entirety.

24p. Sutcliffe,The OxfordUniversity Press:An InformalHistory (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978); Michael H. Black, Cambridge University Press, 1584-1984 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984).

25ProfessorHimmelfarb's book is unhelpful on matters of educational argument and theory in Acton's life and writings. Here is an attractive PhD thesis-in-waiting.

260n this general question, see Elizabeth Smyth, et al., eds., Challenging Professions: HistoricalandContemporary Perspectives onWomen's Professional Work (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1999), esp. introductory essay at 3-24.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATION.'t.l1

men's partnership." Hill offers (J.Cl--l.,J showing how far the two were ~ until Dollinger's death. Dollinger....1I! then in profound disagreement wida Ii stopped their correspondence, filledwi sincere fellow-feeling. Hill is reveaa.. teacher with pupil with teacher, tha" relation alive.Hill has written, wit.ho.tl riceship and mentoring.

-In choosingto write about WJ..I.iam 011 difficulty anyone writing the Weofa" gettingpastthe hype. In Osler'scuc." he died, and have remained busily at"" some way of drawing this tiger's ttaiItl that Oslerians and Oslerologists l-..:s..

Bliss has been careful and -indili mind (and in balance) ahost of ~ mildly inconsistent. We have. for CI:IIII minded academic medical man atJ~ that he was naive in battles betwea:aPIlI especially dear whether Osler wzs .. disputes, or merely bored with acadrwi was all at one time a strong-miNW~ politician, yet these viewsare dd~ out Bliss draws a little from the.. traditions of good social history: I.ct. worry if there seem to bean ~

It takes a good deal of skill to ...,.

complete with a little self-<iepto .. -",. emerges a likeable and hugely CDtip:IiiI writes an entire chapter (-Osler's At colleagues came to be so worshipiwl.' "industry," the networks of AmcricII!. mutual dependencies, and the: peaIii Osler's textbook-all these forces..II explain the rise, fall, and rise of 0siIIII

Here the competing ~~ their own chapters (as with Hill'sAd water to an English-born Anglianm

27Himme1farb, LordActon: A ~. ~

• f,J-ution/Revue d'histoire de /'education

Idmiques of the new biography (and

..Hill haslittle to regret. His discussion Iller Munich and Cambridge (for as a -- However, there is a "but." Accom­~tional history could have offered ..,. and argument, had Hill read them. ... but it is poorer without them. Two

.,.of Oxford University rightly makes p.lJbshers, broadcasters, and journalists, Ilion. zs The activities of the Extension -mg are part of the story, but far more Ilarcndon Press and the larger Oxford IiamI history of education nowadays do !IDolpresses. Acton was an instant bene­__ How then did he see his work at the ~ with the rest of his professorial ill educational theory drove the man? .1 think he knows, and that he may yet

~~toIf' the one concerning ap­I....-enew-one. Some of publication and research in the last

that newwork is iDa. and some published as historical ~to do with the quasi-formal business IIil-professions, to become autonomous ~topolitics),and to become mentors

- that branch of educational history in icalofthe field. Readers of Himmelfarb ~esttmgementbetween Dollinger and lldiHerences that eventually ended the

-., ofOxford (Oxford: Clarendon Press, .1. ia entirety. ~History (Oxford: Clarendon Press, ..~ 158~1984 (Cambridge: Cambridge

... em matters of educational argument and

.&aA:ti¥e PhD thesis-in-waiting. • ~ et al., eds., Challenging Professions: ....J Prr:!esUma1 Work (foronto: University ..... >-24.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 195

men's partnership." Hill offers (301-2,308-9,316-24) a multiple explanation, showing how far the two were connected by inclination, habit, and practice until Dollinger's death. Dollinger was by then excommunicant, and Acton by then in profound disagreement with his old teacher. Their differences never stopped their correspondence, filled with ideas and touched throughout by a sincere fellow-feeling. Hill is revealing on the many forms of educational work, teacher with pupil with teacher, that had kept the life-long Acton-Dollinger relation alive.Hill has written, without ever intending it, a fine study of appren­ticeship and mentoring.

***

In choosing to write about William Osler (1849-1919), Michael Blissfaced the difficulty anyone writing the life of a "saint" must resolve, one way or another: getting past the hype. In Osler's case, the hagiographs were at work even before he died, and have remained busily at work ever since. Professor Blisshad to find some way of drawing this tiger's teeth, and denying the ready-made narrative that Oslerians and Oslerologists (yes, there are such persons) would have liked.

Bliss has been careful and "inclusive" in research, determined to keep in mind (and in balance) a host of arguments/narratives, even if some of them are mildly inconsistent. We have, for example,the argument that Oslerwas astrong­minded academic medical man at Johns Hopkins, and the rather different case that he was naive in battles between people, departments, and faculties. It is not especially clear whether Osler was simply taking the high road in academic disputes, or merely bored with academic politics. It might seem odd to claim he was all at one time a strong-minded academic and a weak-minded academic politician, yet these viewsare defensible and probably correct. In bringing them out Bliss draws a little from the new biography, but much more from the traditions of good social history: let the evidence decide the themes, and don't worry if there seem to be an alarmingly large number of themes.

It takes a good deal of skill to keep all these balls in the air. Bliss manages it, complete with alittle self-deprecatinghumour. In his persuasive treatment, Osler emerges a likeable and hugely energetic figure. Making avirtue of necessity, Bliss writes an entire chapter ("Osler's Afterlife," 477-504) showing how Osler's colleagues came to be so worshipful. The workings of the medical publishing "industry," the networks of American, Canadian, and Britishphysiciansand their mutual dependencies, and the peculiar niche in medical history occupied by Osler's textbook-all these forces, along with the man's personality, help to explain the rise, fall, and rise of Oslerian worship.

Here the competing narratives are consistently present, and not just in their own chapters (as with Hill'sActon). Osler was born in a Canadian back­water to an English-born Anglican curate. "Willie" thus knew first-hand about

27Himmelfarb,Lord Acton: A Study, 146-50.

196 Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'histoire de !'education

rural and peasant life, its toughness and its rough democracy, its hard lessons on the fragility of people and power of Nature. Bliss continually draws us back to these narrative themes with persuasive examples, always maintaining an appa­rently effortless balance between description and analysis. Through his career as student at the Toronto Medical School and then at McGill's Faculty of Medicine (M.D., CM, 1872; see Bliss, 65-67), later as medical practitioner in Montreal and lecturer in Medicine at McGill, Osler's family background and well-rooted naturalism help to explain his enormous breadth of interest, and his diagnostic powers. Bliss succeeds as no one has until now in showing how the background is tied to the foreground-how Osler's private and personal history explain his practical and intellectual outlook, how subject is connected to context and circumstance.

Blisssucceeds where Hill does not. Acton was a mediocre politician, in the usual partisan and parliamentary senses of the term. The reason may well be his internationalized family life, and the relatively small number of hours and days he spent in Britain in many, if not most, years of his life. Acton was simply out of touch. There was besides Acton's psychological distance from the"ordinary" Irish and English constituents he was expected to represent, and his honest distaste for deal-making. These two themes, social and psychological, do not figure in any systematic way in Hill's biography. Bliss's book is fashioned so that the themes are strong from one end to the other.

Questions of nationality and tribalism arise in both Acton's and Osler's cases. Hill acknowledges these must have been "problems" in the life of his subject, but does not return to them in any powerfully explanatory way. We finish the Acton biography uncertain just how far, if at all,Acton's Englishness accounted for his failure in 1870, his peculiar literary output, and his eventual distance from his old mentor. In the Osler biography we are not left with this kind of uncertainty. Osler's open-hearted interest in the miserable conditions of life in late 19th-century Montreal, his Canadian-ness, his pragmatic and anti­specialist view of science, and his honest ambition to make enough money to be comfortable, persistented all through his adult life. Professor Bliss never loses sight of those themes, and nearly always asks the educational questions about Osler's ability to persuade his colleagues, his students, his patients, and, later, the public of his ideas and vision.

Osler spent months in England doing advanced medical study (68-75), then a winter (1873-4) in Berlin and Vienna (75-8). The power of the German academic profession, the pedagogies of the clinic and the classroom, and the organization of medical science and medical practice in Prussia and in Austria, had visible and lasting effects on Osler's outlook. Compare Acton's life of learning in Munich and chez Dollinger. On this comparison, Hill fares at least as well as Bliss.

Osler diverged sharply from Acton, of course, in the length of his teaching career. Osler had taught for decades before his appointment (1905-19) to the Regius Chair of Medicine at Oxford. It began with a relatively brief stint in Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania (1885-9), where he combined

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAl1

teaching and clinical practice. by DICJlWI American, and British joumals. His. Hopkins University and hospiul (1.

Osler's twenty years in the U~ almost the same moment, author of ~ day, The Principles and Practice af ..... intestate, as it were, Osler did not..~ his medicine through clinicalpraaia'" a taste for medicine to the young. txJ.I skill (especially in fund-raising for bbcIIIiI this, we knowwhy Osler was ableto_ and to continue publishing hundreds.

Although the scholarly ~I university history, he misses few ~ deals directly, for instance, with ~ Osler's attitudes to admission., ~

The real'others,' the stranger,in o.w grown up in the what waseffcai'4_ [aftertheadmissionof women]-­clinic, and for many men this ... ­suddenly finding female jounWiRs iI angry,petulant,and morethan a.liiala At the veryleast,asW.T. Connp1 1 sink. (230)

Osler openly discouraged women &.II tions were in. After that, he trened... attitude to the barely suppressed .. disregard it, and drawJewish ~ It was as if Osler's pedagogy 1nS50"

The student beginswith the pma.... studieswith the patient,usingboaIEsIII The student starts, in faa, as a"'" machines, with the structure DId. ... familiar. Teach him how to obscnir.I the lessonswill come out of mr _ medicine and surgeryit isaute ._ a text, and the best teachingis a..1 emphasis) (238) Bliss was fortunate in having~a:I

clean sentence put to shame 1llaIlY.-lii was no less fortunate in Acton,1be. shaping and re-shaping of Jmd:iaI pal practice, always driven by the sam£. kins (238). In Hill's Acton, the~ publication) may have changed a p cannot be sure, and certainly anat&

I

• bbt«tionlRevue d'bistoire de /'education

ii:s rough democracy, its hard lessons on ~. Bliss continually draws us back to ~les, always maintaining an appa­ipion and analysis. Through his career Il.oo1 and then at McGill's Faculty of ~7), later as medical practitioner in ~ill. Osler's family background and • enormous breadth of interest, and his tODe hasuntil now in showing how the ..,..Osler's private and personal history ..nook, how subject is connected to

.Actonwas a mediocre politician, in the

.of the term. The reason may well be his ~ly small number of hours and days ,-years of his life. Acton was simply out ,dialogical distance from the"ordinary" 5apected to represent, and his honest lanes,social and psychological, do not Iiography. Bliss's book is fashioned so mel to the other. IIism arise in both Acton's and Osler's I.ft been "problems" in the life of his • any powerfully explanatory way. We ~ how far, if at all,Acton's Englishness eaaJiar literary output, and his eventual JlIIer biography we are not left with this .-d interest in the miserable conditions JC,anadian-ness, his pragmatic and anti­m-obition to make enough money to be ..adult life. Professor Bliss never loses ..a,sks the educational questions about ... hisstudents, his patients, and, later,

IIiDg advanced medical study (68-75), iama (75-8). The power of the German • the clinic and the classroom, and the .-aIpractice in Prussia and in Austria, ~s outlook. Compare Acton's life of l:.On thiscomparison, Hill fares at least

"ofcourse, in the length of his teaching IiDre hisappointment (1905-19) to the • beganwith a relatively brief stint in !JInIW. (1885-9), where he combined

I

I, I MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 197

I!\

teaching and clinical practice, by now publishing a great deal in Canadian, American, and British journals. His next move was to the still-new Johns Hopkins University and hospital (1889-1905).

Osler's twenty years in the United States saw him married (1892) and, at almost the same moment, author of the most successful medicaltextbook of the day, The Principles and Practice of Medicine. Where Acton died historically intestate, as it were, Osler did not. After reading Blisson Osler's way oflearning his medicine through clinicalpractice and university teaching-how he passed on a taste for medicine to the young, how he combined authorship with political skill (especially in fund-raising for laboratories and hospital buildings)-afterall this, we knowwhyOsler was able to write his great book, in dozens of editions, and to continue publishing hundreds of articles and papers throughout.

Although the scholarly apparatus to Bliss's book includes few works on university history, he misses few themes favoured by writers in that field.. He deals directly, for instance, with matters of gender and race in his discussion of Osler's attitudes to admission, grading practice, and career planning (see 230-7):

The real'others: the stranger, in Osler's medical lifewerewomen.Osler had grown up in the what waseffectively an all-male medical world....Everyday [aftertheadmissionof women] menandwomenintereactedinclassroom and clinic, and for many men this was not an easy adjustment. Like athletes suddenly finding female journalists in the locker room, they were uneasy, angry,petulant, and more than a littlesuspiciousof the newcomers'motives. At the veryleast,asW.T. Councilman...said, they couldno longerpee in the sink. (230)

Osler openly discouraged women from applying, but only until their applica­tions were in. After that, he treated them with his trademark.equanimitas. His attitude to the barely suppressed anti-Semitism of some colleagues was to disregard it, and drawJewish students deeply into his teaching and his learning. Itwas as if Osler's pedagogywas so dominant a consideration that others faded.

The student beginswith the patient, continueswith the patient, and endshis studieswith the patient, usingbooksand lecturesastools,asmeansto an end. The student starts, in fact, as a practitioner, as an observer of disordered machines,with the structure and orderly functions of which he is perfectly familiar. Teach him how to observe,give him plenty of facts to observe, and the lessons will come out of the facts themselves. For the junior student in medicineand surgeryit isa saferule to haveno teachingwithout apatient for a text, and the best teaching is that taught by the patient himself. [Osler's emphasis] (238) Bliss was fortunate in having as a subject a person whose ability to write a

clean sentence put to shame many an historian or literary figure of the day. Hill was no less fortunate in Acton. The difference is that in Bliss's Oslerwe see the shaping and re-shaping of medical pedagogy, ideas of curriculum, and medical practice, always driven by the same outlook that drove the pedagogy at Hop­kins (238). In Hill's Acton, the pedagogy (in his case public education through publication) may have changed a good deal across Acton's adult life, but we cannot be sure, and certainly cannot guess at the reasons for change.

198 HistoricalStudiesin Education/Revue d'histoire de l'education

These comparisons show that Professor Bliss did all three types of educational history, and did them well. I think his work is chiefly an educa­tional biography, and belongs in that category, among others. It is arguably the equal of professorial biographies of Froude, Rutherford, Virchow, Eve Curie, Einstein (and especially the more controversial ones in this group-s-Rutherford, Curie, Einstein).

These two men exhibited still more commonalities: -Osler had a happy family life (until the death in 1917 of his and Grace's only son in Belgium [Bliss, 438-42]), as did Acton, but forthe early deaths of too many of his children); -remarkably similar working habits and capacity for work (Hill and Bliss deserve much credit for paying attention to the daily working livesof scholars who marry intellectual demands with the bothersome pressures of administration, academic politics, and daily life); -their determined bibliophilia and bibliomania; -and finally, their deaths in office as Regius Professors, one at Oxford and the other at Cambridge, Acton in 1902 and (Osler in 1919).

These similarities are the stuff of narrative, more than of thematic explanation, but raise additional points to which an historian of education would want to attend.

It remains to ask of Blisswhat he might have learned from a more systematic reading of work on the development of all the professions and disciplines in the 19th and 20 th century universities. Would the works of Fritz Ringer, Konrad Jarausch, Roger Geiger, George Fox, and even Edward Shills, have helped him to see further and more sharply into his rich evidence?

Hill missed severalopportunities. Reading about the controversies overcurri­culum, pedagogy, and public relations at Johns Hopkins, we could be forgiven for concluding that Oslerwas in the grip of friendships and animosities that decided the academic history of medicine in the university. But anyone who reads Fritz Ringer's (already outdated, butstill valuable) Fields a/Knowledge, orMaryJ0 Nye on Science in theProvinces, or Axelrod on infighting in (Canadian) universities: any of these show that Osler's fights were surely about matters of academic territory, the certification of knowledge and the control of it, inside and outside the university, shifting boundaries and barriers between disciplines inside the university, and betweenpractitioners and teachers of them...outside the academy altogether. If the fights were overpower, certification, control, and territory, then personal differences have secondary and symbolic importance. I am not sure, to take this one further step, howbest to interpret Osler's membership in the AMA (see Bliss, 149),or in any of the numerous and similar societies, some formal and

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL?

Here, Bliss would have profited from.. was (if unwittingly) reading and ~

Let me add instantly that on the ­the evolution of medical science,lmica tent guide. His sure touch and easy ... understood the elements of ph~ dispute the two-way connection bet au on one hand, and the rise of seven!" practice on both sides of the AWnDc.1 Bliss has covered all the bases. The COIIII covered the bases in the field of ~ still more-the history of the uniw:ai

-We have, then, two biographies of .. whose rhetoric and argument s~

ent with the "new biography.- Bliss" excellent in theirways, and both uDdaI cation of new biography.

Itmatters not abit if either _lila' It does matter that this approach basil become so widespread a group of alii and not just literary biograpba's..

On the formal definition of edtar::::IIi using the full fruit of recent resc:ardail plines, and professions. Hill wooJd.. of this material in accounting for ~C11

Bliss does pick that fruit, ~ graphy. He would have gone fwtlxnl American experience with the bdpah But his book is no less a good book.

Finally, on the question of II'fl" •

main departing point for biognphy.~ treatment of Acton is remarkably ~ one dominant and lengthy appr...... hundreds (Sir William Osler and his. Canada, the USA, and England).Tbdl ened by closer attention to a smallSlIIIIIlIII ship and apprenticeship worked. cd

I

national, some localand intimate (rather on the style of the Cambridge Apostles, come to think of it). Was the AMA membership and activity more than away of jassertingwhich group of doctors ought to make the New Order in American, or in British medicine? Or was it rather an outcome of earlier fights over the mean­ing of certification, the rise of specialisms and rewards for specialists, and so on.

E.JMaaion/Revued'histoire de l'education

llDfessor Bliss did all three types of LI think his work is chiefly an educa­qt>ry, among others. It is arguably the -.Ie, Rutherford, Virchow, Eve Curie, .m.aI ones in this group-Rutherford,

R commonalities: ..u the death in 1917 of his and 08-42]), as did Acton, but for the iIdren); iIsand capacity for work (Hill and • attention to the daily working 1m!demands with the bothersome-= politics, and daily life); .. bibliomania; .Ilegius Professors, one at Oxford • in 1902 and (Osler in 1919). -.more than of thematic explanation, aiUtorian of education would want to

iahave learned from a more systematic • theprofessions and disciplines in the lid the works of Fritz Ringer, Konrad Ie9cn Edward Shills,have helped him to idaevidence? -'ngabout the controversies over curri­Jahns Hopkins, we could be forgiven for iimdships and animosities that decided ~_'Cisity. But anyone who reads Fritz lie) F~ofKnowledge,orMaryJo Nye .iofightingin (Canadian) universities: ~ surely about matters of academic =--I thecontrol of it, inside and outside l'-ricrs between disciplines inside the heachen of them...outside the academy ~on, control, and territory, then Is,mbolic importance. I am not sure, to -.p-o Osler's membership in the AMA .3Dd similar societies, some formal and _ the style of the Cambridge Apostles, IIIIcrsbip and activity more than away of _make the New Order in American, or .-come of earlier fights over the mean­.aod rewards for specialists, and so on.

MUST BIOGRAPHY BE EDUCATIONAL? 199

Here, Blisswould have profited from work in the professional field in which he was (if unwittingly) reading and writing-the history of higher education.

Let me add instantly that on the history of the medical profession, and on the evolution of medical science, basic and applied, Bliss is a clear and consis­tent guide. His sure touch and easy writing at times had me thinking I actually understood the elements ofphysiology and microbiology. We cannot seriously dispute the two-way connection between Osler's medical teaching-as-research on one hand, and the rise of several branches of medical science and clinical practice on both sides of the Atlantic, so in the history of science Professor Bliss has covered all the bases. The complaint remains that he has by no means covered the bases in the field of history on which he ought surely to depend still more-the history of the university.

***

We have, then, two biographies of learned and publicly effective academics, whose rhetoric and argument structures suggest they are at least partly consist­ent with the "new biography." Bliss does it better than Hill, but both are excellent in their ways, and both understand and accept the educational impli­cation of new biography.

It matters not a bit if eitherwriter has ever even heard of "new" biography. It does matter that this approach has informed their work, just because it has become so widespread a group of attitudes and practices among biographers, and not just literary biographers.

On the formal definition of education, the Acton biography is further from using the full fruit of recent research in histories of formal institutions, disci­plines, and professions. Hill would have done better to introduce at least some of this material in accounting for the curiously fractured career of Lord Acton.

Bliss does pick that fruit, whether or not it turns up in his notes and biblio­graphy. He would have gone further at key points in his discussion of Osler's American experience with the help of such university historians as Ringer, et al. But his book is no less a good book for all that.

Finally, on the question ofmentorship, and an explicit treatment of this as a main departingpoint for biography, especially of men such as these. Here Hill's treatment of Acton is remarkably strong. He has the advantage of dealing with one dominant and lengthy apprenticeship (Acton-Dollinger), rather than hundreds (Sir William Osler and his hundreds of would-be apprenticeships in Canada, the USA, and England). The Osler biography could havebeen strength­ened by closer attention to a small sample of case studies showing how mentor­ship and apprenticeship worked, evolved, and succeeded (or failed).

200 Historical Studies in Education/Revue d'bistoire de /'education

***

Must biography be educational? Yes, and for many reasons, ofwhich we are in presence of perhaps a dozen. Would biographers benefit from a closer study of at least some professional work in the field of educational history, particularly as it has grown up to be in the past quarter-century? Yes.

We have in Hill's and Acton's books not just first-rare biographies, but two first-rate works of history. I end with the suggestion that the historical bio­grapher must surely accept the historian's mantle and obligation, that is, to accept new and evolving applications of historical method wherever appropriate. It can be done, and these authors have come close to doing so. Another generation of historians may now tum to take up these great methodological challenges. We would wish only that as they do, they aim to retain the standards of readability and accessibility that made Hill on Acton, and Bliss on Osler, into books general readers will buy.

Book Reviews/Comptes reM

Bonnie G. Smith. The GenderofHlS1II9 Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harnrcll

One is often embarrassed by the h~ of history will be described as -grippiIII "enlightened" aswell as "shocked- byt difficulty is how to convey that, for c. Smith's extraordinary exploration alii the nineteenth century and evolved ..

In this fascinating study, the procIII and dialogue with colleagues, Smith • have been part and parcel of history's" aprofession. The GenderofHistm] all early nineteenth-centurywomen. ~ men in the late nineteenth and ~. women professional historians and~. and everyday life."

What could conceivably be-shad of "narcohistory," a genre p~1Ii designed to alleviate pain. Smith cOIIIi famous practitioner of this genre. ..

history explicitlyconfronted the~ with ghosts and tombs, but also.... alongon hugedoses ofopium-~ psychicstates,andbodilyfeelinp'"

Like Coleridge and Sir Walter Scoa;. access to the historical spirit. Tbe Iii erotic, and detachment not the ~

ThroughthephysicallypresentbIAIIIIi or liberal, questionsCanemnisn.. individual as the fundamentof 0dII These statements givesome ~

She acknowledges there are many. Smith's interpretation emphasizes ~ the birth of amateur history, consi:sti writing of multiple traumas, and~. other traumas experienced by ninda of self, a feeling that women hadc.

Chapter 3, "What is a Histon-il and of the erasure of women as bodu Budding male professional ~ word as distinguished "from the..

© Historical Studies in Eduanan &-:-~