2nd Presentation

In In Defense of History, Richard J. Evans attempts to the defend the modern tradition of history against its post modern criticisms. Evans begins his defense of history by describing the history of history itself. Evans introduces Leopold Von Renke as the father of the modern history. Von Renke argued that the past should be portrayed "how it essentially was." Von Renke also believed that historians had rely on primary sources in order to avoid bias. Historians were also responsible for proving the legitimacy of their sources. Evans also explains the tendency of historians in the 19th century to approach history as a science. Evans seems to believe that history is both "weak science" in that it must be objective, but cannot provide general laws, and an art, in that it utilizes some of the techniques of literature.

Evans argues against postmodernist interpretations of history, which argue that language makes it impossible to objectively present the facts. Postmodernists believe that it is impossible to write a history without insert some sort of bias into it. Postmodernists support the idea that each group should be responsible for writing its own history in order to avoid majority bias. Ultimately Evans believes that the "hyperrelativism" of the postmodernists is not in itself enough to really provide an accurate view of history. Although it may be impossible to provide a completely accurate truth, that is no reason not to attempt reach as close to the truth, through sound research, as possible. Although objectivism has its flaws, Evans believes some sort of concept of the truth is necessary in order to understand history.

Evans is unable to completely disprove the postmodernist take on history. Instead, he argues that there must be a dialogue between the modernists and the postmodernists in order to find the best way to analyze history.