Category: Book Review

Bebbington, David W. Patterns in History: A Christian Perspective on Historical Thoughts 4^th Edition. By David W. Bebbington. (Waco, TX: Baylor University Press, 2018, Pp. ix, 233). Reviewed by Albert Morales.

History takes the form of an image of the past. Historians research the collective memory during a period and provide the facts they learn. But is there a pattern in history? David Bebbington, a British historian, a Professor of History at the University of Stirling in Scotland wrote a book called Patterns in History: A Christian Perspective on Historical Thought. He researched to see if there is repetition of history by analyzing historical thought in a Christian perspective. His attempts to prove his thesis by offering “a study of theories of history designed for those who may occasionally have been provoked into asking themselves whether there is a pattern in the past” (Bebbington 2018, 1).

Bebbington’s book maps out the philosophies of religion ranging from Cyclical to Postmodern history. The initial chapter, “What is History”, introduces the thesis and explains the historical process. He focuses on the discrepancy of historiography. He believed that history books omit what took place in the past. He blamed evidence and historians, “there would be no problem if the evidence were total and reliable, but in fact it is normally meager and often misleading” (Bebbington, 2018, 3). Bebbington adds that some historians misjudge their sources.

His content in chapter one is rich with examples to prove his theories. He used a book, Leaders of Public Opinion in Ireland by W.E.H Lecky to explain the bias that some historians have in their writing. Lecky wrote several editions of this said book. The number of Irish supports for legislative Independence changed in each edition, as they were released throughout the years. He argued that this was Lecky political opinion and not firm evidence. By the end of chapter, he gives the reader an explanation of the philosophy of historiography. He explains that by the end of the book, we will have the meaning of history and how Christians interpret history.

In the following chapter, Bebbington moves to the view of Cyclical history. His narratives include Greco-Roman, Chinese Dynasty, Ancient Middle East, and Indian history. He studied the popularity and the pattern of growth “in the rise and fall of dynasties, nations or civilizations” (Bebbington 2018, 40). The Christian view of history differs from Cyclical history. Bebbington briefly mentions that there may be some similarity there is no essential association. He mentions the Old and New Testaments. He explains that some historians argued that the philosophy of the Old Testament is an example of cyclical. But, adds that “Christian idea of history is derived from belief in a God who intervenes in the world” (Bennington 2018, 43).

The most provoking chapter is the philosophy of historiography. This chapter supports Bebbington’s viewpoints in the 1^st chapter. He discussed the analysis on how historians write and the interest it convenes in philosophy, “this subdiscipline is critical because it criticizes the process of composing history” (Bebbington, 2018, 161). Bebbington describes that many writers lack passion within this field which leads to inaccurate analysis. He continues with the debates between the schools of positivists and idealists. The differences of positivists and idealists on the issue of historical explanation. Bebbington explains, positivists “answer that it is a matter of identifying causes” and idealists “questions the whole concept of causation when applied to the human world” (Bebbington 2018, 166).

Bebbington’s book is well written and contains various summaries of theories from ancient times to today. He offers different outlooks that historians can and should provide to its audience. Bebbington believes historians as any person can embrace a Christian outlook on history. But he questioned if Christian historians could put their concept of historical process in their writing. He explains that Christian historians “can all too easily fall into the twin trap of describing overboldly the outworking of the divine will and of ignoring details that do not readily fit into the resulting scheme” (Bebbington 2018, 201). Christian historians had to learn humility. He understood the importance of a Christian worldview. He believed faith and history should be brought together.

McFeely, William S. Frederick Douglass. New York: W&W Norton Company, 1991.

The Frederick Douglass story is beyond remarkable. A runaway slave turned abolitionist, during a time African Americans struggled for freedom and equal rights. During his life, Douglass wrote multiple autobiographies. His work was written beautifully with much detail. To this day, many historians appreciate Douglass’s most powerful narrative and his most spectacular success is his life story.  William McFeely book titled, Frederick Douglass, reiterated this appreciation. McFeely’s book captures Douglass’s unique story and effectiveness as a proponent of freedom and equality for African Americans.

            Douglass has told his story since he left Covey’s Farm. From his first published work, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, An American Slave, his goal was to give hope to slaves and free blacks throughout the nation. He wanted to provide the horrific details about the institution of slavery. McFeely thesis mirrors Douglass’s goals. “It brings his story forward to the time of its writing, but the slavery days are still there, as if to remind an American eager to forget that slavery cannot be purged from the national memory” (McFeely 1991, 6).

            McFeely starts with Douglass’s early upbringing on the Talbot County. He explains Douglass’s struggle with his mother. Douglass had no memory of his mother during his days at Betsy’s Cabin. He only recalled the few times his mother visited Aaron Anthony’s fields. Douglass himself suggests, “I cannot say I was very deeply attached to my mother” (McFeely 1991, 5). The first few pages of the book are devoted to this broken relationship. It was powerful to read that a son has no recollection of his mother due to slavery. McFeely has many of these similar instances throughout his book. Douglass had special relationships with women throughout his life.

            Douglass relationship with women started with his grandmother, “the central presence in this life during his childhood”.[1] McFeely takes note of this relationship, “Douglass’s stress on the impressive competence of his grandmother” (McFeely 1991, 7). Another important relationship was with his master sister-in-law, whom he called Miss Sophia. She treated him with kindness and taught him the alphabet. “I was treated as a child” (McFeely, 1991, 26). These relationships with women were important to Douglass. McFeely’s biography does a good job bringing these relationships to life.

            The biography dwells into several other aspects. Another important one is Douglass days in Ireland. Douglass left America shortly after publishing his first autobiography. An interesting letter was written to William Lloyd Garrison while in Limerock. Many Irish were suffering in Ireland, these poor Irishmen heard Douglass’s speech about inequality in America but couldn’t get pass their own suffering. Douglass writes to Garrison, “I see much here to remind me of my former condition and I confess I should be ashamed to life my voice against American slavery, but that I know the cause of humanity is one the world over” (McFeely 1991, 137). He felt that the chain was linked to all people who suffered. This chapter was powerful with its revelation that a once enslaved man could have pity for free whites.

            McFeely’s biography is well written and built around the life of Frederick Douglass. But some historians have criticized McFeely’s writing methods. Richard McMurry wrote a review in The Mississippi Quarterly and explained “the tone of the book is burdened with the current politically correct academic fad”.[2] McMurry also does not appreciate the lack of cited work found in the biography. The book does contain a lot of quotes but there are notes with the cited work for each quote towards the end of the biography. Some of McMurry’s criticism could be considered a reach since the biography has notes and biography. It’s not uncommon to find positives and negative reviews so it’s important to discuss both.

            Waldo Martin’s tone is different than McMurry, “McFeely does a marvelous job of deconstructing the self-constructed Douglass and sensitively explores the interconnections between the public and private man”.[3] Martin reviewed explains McFeely details on how Douglass maintains his relationships with prominent women throughout his life. “Douglass relationships with black and white women throughout his life demonstrates a man more at ease with women than men.”[4] Martin review is more in line with other historians.

            Frederick Douglass life will always be researched and written on. His story is too remarkable and accomplish to not enlighten others. Many Historians point to his rise to prominence as evidence of his importance in written history. McFeely’s biography does not fall short of this notion. It provides details into his early life in Talbot County to Cedar Hill. His days as a Pre-Civil War abolitionist to being appointed as the Commissioner of Haiti. McFeely does not fail in his biography on one of the most important abolitionists in American History.

---

[1] James McPherson, “The Agitator – Frederick Douglass by William S. McFeely”, (The New Republic, Mar 11, 1991), 38

[2] Richard McMurry, The Mississippi Quarterly 44 (no. 4 1991), 511

[3] Waldo Martin. The American Historical Review 98, (no. 2 1993), 565

[4] Ibid.

References

Gerteis, Louis S. “Book Reviews – Frederick Douglass by William S. McFeely.” The Journal of American History 78, no. 4 (03, 1992): 1448

Martin, Waldo E. The American Historical Review 98, no. 2 (1993): 565-66.

McMurry, Richard M. The Mississippi Quarterly 44, no. 4 (1991): 509-12.

McPherson, James M. “The Agitator – Frederick Douglass by William S. McFeely.” The New Republic, Mar 11, 1991. 37-41