ABSTRACT
The first major criticism of Christopher Hill's The World Turned Upside Down: Radical Ideas During the English Revolution focused on the method he used to conduct his research and his analysis. Critics such as the historian J. H. Hexter accused Hill of picking and choosing his sources in order to support his arguments, without taking their original context into account. Hill responded to J. H. Hexter’s accusation that he had been a “source miner” and a Marxist “lumper”. Hill argued that all historians were source miners and lumpers to some extent, and that it was the historian’s job to impose some sense of order and interpretation on the past. While Hill was aware of the criticisms aimed at The World Turned Upside Down, he defended his approach, considering it important that the topic of radical Puritanism during the revolution should be identified as a subject warranting more study.
