Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-11T07:11:54.238Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Party, Purpose, and Pattern: Sir Lewis Namier and His Critics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 January 2017

Jacob M. Price
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The recent death of Professor Sir Lewis Namier (19 August 1960) provides an occasion to assess, albeit most tentatively, if not the man (I did not know him well), then at least his contribution to the writing of English history. The need for such an assessment is a little ironic, for Sir Lewis, for all his renown, has left a somewhat indistinct after-image among historians in this country. Ever since the appearance in 1929 of his great work on the Structure of Politics at the Accession of George III, his name has been a fixture in bibliographies and in the knowingness of knowing graduate student and cannier undergraduate. Yet few in this country have read his work through – that is, his monumental works on eighteenth century politics on which most of the estime of his succès d'estime has been built. Many more are familiar with the lectures, reviews and critical works on modern German and diplomatic history to which he devoted much of his productive effort between 1933 and 1953. Though these last are works of some importance, the ultimate reputation of Namier as a scholar must rest on his eighteenth century work — in fact upon his publications of 1929 and 1930. It is this work and some of the methodological questions it raises which are under discussion here.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of British Studies , Volume 1 , Issue 1 , November 1961 , pp. 71 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © North American Conference of British Studies 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. This paper is concerned primarily with the methodological aspects of Sir Lewis Namier's work. For a discussion of some specific problems in interpreting English eighteenth century history, see Fryer, W. R., “The study of British politics between the Revolution and the Reform Act”, Renaissance and Modern Studies, I (1957) 91–114 CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2. 2 vol. (London, 1929); 2nd ed., 1 vol. (London, 1957).

3. Including: Conflicts: studies in contemporary history (London, 1942)Google Scholar; 1848: the revolution of the intellectuals (London, 1944)Google Scholar; Facing East (London, 1947)Google ScholarPubMed; Diplomatic prelude, 1938-1939 (London, 1948)Google Scholar; Europe in decay; a study in disintegration, 1936-1940 (London, 1950)Google Scholar; In the Nazi era (London, 1952)Google ScholarPubMed; Vanished supremacies: essays on European history, 1812-1912, (Collected Essays, I) (London, 1958)Google Scholar.

4. Raymond, John, “Namier, Inc.”, New Statesman, 19 October 1957, 499–500 Google Scholar.

5. Structure of Politics, 2nd ed., ix–xi Google ScholarPubMed.

6. See note 3.

7. The Chatham Administration 1766-1768 (London, 1956)Google Scholar.

8. The end of North's ministry 1780-1782 (London, 1958)Google Scholar.

9. For example, one of the myths exploded by Sir Lewis was Horace Walpole's tale of the supposed new influx of East India nabobs into Commons in the election of 1761. Structure of Politics, 2nd ed., 158, 170–172 Google ScholarPubMed.

10. This was by no means original with Namier.

11. Butterfield, Herbert, George III and the historians, 1st ed. (London, 1957), 10 Google Scholar; 2nd ed. (New York, 1959), 10.

12. Sedgwick, Romney, ed., Letters from George III to Lord Bute, 1756-1766 (London, 1939)Google Scholar.

13. Walcott, Robert Jr., “English party politics (1688-1714)”, in Essays in modern English history in honor of Wilbur Cortez Abbott (Cambridge, Mass., 1941), 81–131 Google Scholar.

14. Barnes, Donald Grove, George III and William Pitt, 1783-1806 (Stanford, 1939)Google Scholar. Although Professor Barnes is not interested in structural analysis to the degree characteristic of the Namier school, he works within the Namier tradition (or methodological and interpretive mode) and extends it chronologically in a most significant way.

15. King George III and the politicians (Oxford, 1953)Google Scholar.

16. Sutherland, Lucy Stuart, The East India Company in eighteenth-century politics (Oxford, 1952)Google Scholar.

17. See above, notes 7, 8.

18. Owen, John B., The rise of the Pelhams (London, 1957)Google Scholar.

19. Walcott, Robert, English politics in the early eighteenth century (Oxford, 1956)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Brunton, Douglas and Pennington, Donald H., Members of the Long Parliament (London, 1954)Google Scholar.

21. Keeler, Mary Frear, The Long Parliament, 1640-1641; a biographical study of its members (Memoirs of the American Philosophical Society, XXXVI) (Philadelphia, 1954)Google Scholar.

22. Politics in the age of Peel: a study in the technique of parliamentary representation, 1830-1850 (London, 1953)Google Scholar.

23. Elections and party management: politics in the time of Disraeli and Gladstone (London, 1959)Google Scholar.

24. Including: The Elizabethan House of Commons (London, 1949)Google Scholar; Elizabeth I and her parliaments, 2 vol. (London, 1953–1957)Google Scholar.

25. E.g., work like Beard's, Charles A. An economic interpretation of the constitution of the United States (New York, 1913)Google Scholar. Few have noticed how closely the work of Beard and his critics (e.g., McDonald, Forrest, We the people: the economic origins of the constitution (Chicago, 1958)Google Scholar anticipate and parallel what English critics sometimes regard as the peculiarly “Namierite” technique of collective biography. Although ‘results’ have sometimes led to controversy, in general quantitative technique would seem to be much more generally accepted and frequently used among historians of the United States than among historians of England.

26. Wedgwood, Josiah Clement, et al., History of parliament … 1439-1509 (London, 1936)Google Scholar.

27. England in the age of the American revolution.,

28. See note 12.

29. (London, 1931).

30. See below pp. 92.

31. Pares, Richard, “Round the Georgian mulberry bush”, New Statesman, LIV, (23 November 1957) 698–699 Google Scholar.

32. Watson, J. Steven, The reign of George III (Oxford, 1960)Google Scholar.

33. The historical material on the following pages represents my personal synthesis of the work of Sir Lewis and his school. In all probability, none of them would care to phrase their findings in precisely the terms here used.

34. See note 20.

35. Brooke, Chatham administration, ch. 6; Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 219-223, 2nd ed., 222–226 (substantially altered)Google Scholar.

36. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 204–207 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 202-205.

37. Ibid., 1st ed., 205; 2nd ed., 203. Professor Butterfield is not clear. It is possible that in commending the historian who “puts the microscope on the event” (i.e., the vote on Dunning's resolution), etc., he is not suggesting the analysis of divisions.

38. Edward, and Porritt, Annie Gertrude, The unreformed House of Commons, 2 vol. (Cambridge, 1903–1909)Google Scholar; Laprade, William Thomas, ed., Parliamentary papers of John Robinson, 1774-1784 (Royal Historical Society, Camden 2nd ser., XXXIII) (London, 1922)Google Scholar.

39. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 294–295 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 294-295.

40. Cf. above, pp. 2-3.

41. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 208–212 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 206-210.

42. The eighteenth-century commonwealthman (Cambridge, Mass., 1959)Google Scholar.

43. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 211–213 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 209-211.

44. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 205 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 203.

45. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 214-215, 298 Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 212-213.

46. “King George III: a study of personality”, Personalities and powers (London, 1955), 39–58 Google ScholarPubMed.

47. As in note 46.

48. Ibid.

49. Ibid., 1st ed., 205; 2nd ed., 203.

50. Cf. his Christianity and history (London, 1949), esp. ch. I, VGoogle Scholar.

51. Butterfield, , George III and the historians, 1st ed., 273, 2nd ed., 274 Google Scholar.