ABSTRACT
By 1910 a number of younger historians had launched a spirited attack on their elders. A running criticism of orthodox scientific history became apparent during the first decade of the twentieth century. The fundamental implications of the concept of history as art had been available since 1909, when Benedetto Croce's Aesthetic was translated into English. The professional historians who regretted the loss of literary qualities were very largely conservatives who looked back nostalgically to the condition of history in Macaulay's day, not forward to what history might become. Literary objections to academic history, having started among laymen, bore the taint of amateurism and could be regarded lightly. The scornful attitude of social scientists, appearing at the same time that laymen were turning critical of professional history, threw many historians into a defensive posture. The New History was not an exercise of contemplation, not a theory finely drawn in the interest of system or logical coherence.
