The modesty of John Burrow’s title, preferring as it rightly does the indefinite to the definite article, is reflected in the attractive and becoming modesty with which he undertakes an unprecedented exploration of over two thousand years of historical writing. His book is a hugely ambitious project, and one which works wonderfully. That it does work so satisfyingly for the general reader is due, in no small part, to its author’s now sadly unusual sense of the historian’s need for intellectual modesty when considering the chronicles of human experience. Although Burrow properly disavows the temptation to write a grand narrative, there is a consistent theme in the book, which is what one might call a peculiarly historical sensibility, concerned with the sheer multiplicity of human experience and the plurality of histories resulting from considered reflection on that experience. If he is occasionally impatient with the ‘scientific’ variant of history that grew up in the new-found intellectual and political confidence of nineteenth-century Europe and America, complete with its grand narratives and self-conscious achievement of historical ‘objectivity’, it is largely because it tends to ride arrogantly over the larger sensibility which Burrow identifies in historians from ancient Greece to such celebrators of the everyday details of the human comedy as the late Richard Cobb.
Follow Literary Review on Twitter
'Sabotage became so prevalent that bankers even created their own terms – ‘asymmetric information’, ‘lack of financial literacy’, ‘the principal-agent dilemma’ – to describe how they might turn a dime from customers’ gullibility or ignorance.'
'Unlike much that was extracted from India, these paintings were not plunder, and those who created them were properly remunerated and often received due credit.'
@PParkerWriting on 'Forgotten Masters: Indian Painting for the East India Company'.
‘"I feel", Lowell told Hardwick ... "as if I were pulled apart and thinning into mist, or rather being torn apart and still preferring that state to making a decision."'
Richard Davenport-Hines on the letters of Robert Lowell and Elizabeth Hardwick.