Abstract
In this article I look at Manifestos for history (2007, eds Keith Jenkins, Alun Munslow and Sue Morgan), a collection of articles on the future of history, written by 15 leading and influential historians. In their articles the contributors attempt to define what history should, or might, become in the future, but I use the collection rather to find out what history is today, as seen at least by a number of its leading practitioners. In so doing I attempt to find out what our leading practitioners think about reality, objectivity, fact, truth, identity (agency), and discourse (story); and to discover how they respond to the powerful critique of history mounted by, among many others, our three editors. What I find, to my surprise, is that they have to a remarkable extent succumbed to the blandishments of the ‘postmodern’, abandoning in the process the tried and tested methods of the conventional.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
