New Times,
New Thinking.

  1. Long reads
1 November 2012updated 24 Sep 2015 10:46am

Popular history has been conquered by a complacent liberalism

Television history, in particular, has changed - and not always for the better.

By David Priestland

At the end of September, the BBC screened the first part of its eight-part History of the World, written and presented by Andrew Marr. Within days of the show’s first episode, another world historian, Eric Hobsbawm, died, at the age of 94. Although the proximity of the two events was coincidental, it did seem as if the baton was being passed from one public historian, keen to paint the “big picture” and with a taste for the grand sweep, to another.

However, a closer comparison of the two men reveals how far popular history has changed and not always for the better. For Marr’s series shows the extent to which the struggle to interpret our history has been won by a complacent liberalism. And victory has been rather easy, as many historians have simply refused to join the fight.

Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month
Content from our partners
Chelsea Valentine Q&A: “Embrace the learning process and develop your skills”
Apprenticeships: the road to prosperity
Apprenticeships are an impactful pathway to employment