by Kevin Morris

Created on: February 10, 2007   Last Updated: May 08, 2007

It is difficult to overestimate the degree to which the romantic tradition has influenced the teaching of the humanities, particularly history. Romanticism, as outgrowth of Enlightenment thought is a fascinating artistic and intellectual movement, and one with many strengths. The romantic tradition can glorify ideals and virtues; it can foster national unity and inspire young minds. But the romantic tradition is not scientific or objectiveit is a way of looking at the world. As such, romantic values should never be presented as fact or be allowed to obscure alternative worldviews. Unfortunately, however, the romantic tradition has done exactly that in the teaching of history.

Any history textbook used in American schools and universities is awash with romantic influence. We read stories of national ascension and imperial decline, we examine the heroes and villains of wars and conflicts, and we examine technological progress and philosophical enlightenment. Many of these accounts are accurate and worthy of presentation. The problem of the romantic presentation of history is not in its content but in the nature of presentation itself. The medium, in this case, is the message.
Reading a romantic account of history will be gripping and illuminating, but it will also be misleading. Describing British imperialism and medieval feudalism with abstract terms and significant individuals makes historical inquiry accessible and efficient, but also distorts the nature of the human experience. Reality does not consist of romantic notions of national struggles and sweeping change, but of the decisions and actions of individual men and women. While romantics textbooks "the nation of X invaded and conquered the nation of Y," the reality of human experience illustrates that such "abstract actions" do not exist. Generals can give orders and soldiers can obey, but nations cannot invade. Societies and nations are not capable of thought and action; such capacities are only present in individual human beings.
This "methodological individualism" I have just described has long been a staple of economics and psychology, but has failed to penetrate the romantic fortresses entrenched in the mainstream analyses of politics and history. New left academics failed to displace this abstract and teleological approach to history, instead choosing to craft a new analysis of history, one that included the ideas and experiences of formerly marginalized groups. I don't mean to dismiss these trendsthe

• 1
• 2
• Next Page >>