NF Who Are The Best Historians Writing Today? Give Us Your "McPherson List"

Non-Fiction
Just tried to read Jeff Shaara's novel about Shiloh and couldn't get interested in it. Not sure why. Ah, but I digress, since we're talking about non-fiction.
 
I find it difficult to improve on McPherson's list of the best historians writing today, but I will attempt to do so, at the risk of being guilty of favoritism, by replacing David McCullough with Brooks Simpson. Brooks is more than a Civil War historian, though he's made most of his contributions there. He's also a historian of the Presidency and Reconstruction. He writes in a clear, logical manner, is fair and balanced in his writing, and isn't afraid to take a new look at the conventional wisdom. If there's an honorable mention category I would include Joan Waugh, Gary Gallagher, David Blight, and Carol Reardon. There are quite a few additional historians I think are doing outstanding work, and my not including them on this list should not be construed as my not appreciating their work in any way.
I like the inclusion of Simpson.
 
So let me start giving my list. I will list the oldest first. Bernard Bailyn is best known for The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution which is standard issue for many American history courses, but I put him on my list of five for his The Peopling of British North America series of which he has published three volumes. These apply the tools of immigration history to the British colonization of America. Excellent writing. The most recent volume came out two years ago when Bailyn was 90.
 
I agree with cash I would add in Gary Gallagher to the names already mentioned. I agree with most of Eric Wittenburg's list specifically Rhea and Trudeau.

I don't have any original ones to add beyond these.
 
Dr. Ty Cashion, who among other things wrote an amazing history of football and the UIL in Texas.
Dr. Donald Frazier, author of the best books on the Trans-Mississippi.
Dr. Susannah Ural, who has published a number of books on the war....and is still working on that Hood's Brigade book.

Two journalists--S.C. Gwynne, who wrote Empire of the Southern Moon, one of, if not the best books on the Comanche Nation.
Hampton Sides--author of Blood and Thunder--the life of Kit Carson. Another book not new, but the research was top-notch.

And that's my five without naming anyone from CWT (and you know who you are) who I would definitely put in the top of the heap.
 
The second historian on my list is Jill Lepore. She is creative, provocative, and a solid scholar.

I read a lot of pre-19th Century American history and I get tired of reading stuff on the same dozen "Founders". Bailyn and Lepore get beyond the usual focus. Lepore, in particular, sheds light on excluded groups; women, Native Americans in New England and slaves in New York. She also delves into less written about periods like the generation after Plymouth Rock and the decades before the final French and Indian War.
 
I should add that I love Lepore's work in The New Yorker. It is crucial that history informs the non-specialist reader's understanding.
 
There really should be two categories: (a) historians who are read by non-academics (several professors, like McPherson, cross over into this category), and (b) historians whose books may be highly esteemed but who seldom see sales or attention outside the academy or classroom required reading lists. If we're being honest, I think Bailyn and even Foner end up in (b). It would be interesting to see the non-college course sales numbers for "Republic of Suffering." Why does no one mention Jill Lepore? Through NPR and the New Yorker, she gets more exposure than just about anyone. Heck, we could take the Grantland approach and set up a 64 historian bracket and get to a final 4.
 
There really should be two categories: (a) historians who are read by non-academics (several professors, like McPherson, cross over into this category), and (b) historians whose books may be highly esteemed but who seldom see sales or attention outside the academy or classroom required reading lists. If we're being honest, I think Bailyn and even Foner end up in (b). It would be interesting to see the non-college course sales numbers for "Republic of Suffering." Why does no one mention Jill Lepore? Through NPR and the New Yorker, she gets more exposure than just about anyone. Heck, we could take the Grantland approach and set up a 64 historian bracket and get to a final 4.
Hey, I mentioned Lepore.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DRW
Since you limited me to five this required a good bit of thought. My final answer is: Antony Beevor, Laurence Bergreen, David Hackett Fischer, Nathaniel Philbrick and Gordon Rhea. I don't hesitate to pick up anything I see of theirs on the shelves. I'd have had to find a place for Tony Judt if he was still living. (Honorable mention goes to Bernard Bailyn, Richard Evans, Scott Patchan, Hampton Sides, Noah Andre Trudeau and Eric Wittenberg - I keep an eye out for their work as well).
 
There really should be two categories: (a) historians who are read by non-academics (several professors, like McPherson, cross over into this category), and (b) historians whose books may be highly esteemed but who seldom see sales or attention outside the academy or classroom required reading lists.
I am going to do the rest of the questions the Times asked McPherson on another day and that should bring some of those nuances out. Anyway, you should give us your list.
 
The third historian on my list is Eric Foner. Yes, I did read DuBois long before I read Foner, so his Reconstruction was not a total shock, but it was wonderful still. Foner has a large body of work stretching from the Colonial period to the late 1800s and he is a public intellectual, a very New York requirement.
 
Since you limited me to five this required a good bit of thought. My final answer is: Antony Beevor, Laurence Bergreen, David Hackett Fischer, Nathaniel Philbrick and Gordon Rhea. I don't hesitate to pick up anything I see of theirs on the shelves. I'd have had to find a place for Tony Judt if he was still living. (Honorable mention goes to Bernard Bailyn, Richard Evans, Scott Patchan, Hampton Sides, Noah Andre Trudeau and Eric Wittenberg - I keep an eye out for their work as well).
This is the first time Laurence Bergreen appears on the lists. He is the one writer you name that I have not read. Why do you esteem him so highly?
 
So let me start giving my list. I will list the oldest first. Bernard Bailyn is best known for The Ideological Origins of the American Revolution which is standard issue for many American history courses, but I put him on my list of five for his The Peopling of British North America series of which he has published three volumes. These apply the tools of immigration history to the British colonization of America. Excellent writing. The most recent volume came out two years ago when Bailyn was 90.

Definitely putting this at the top of my list.

Thank you.

Another one of his I plan to read is "Pamphlets of the American Revolution, 1750-1765.
 
Dr. Ty Cashion, who among other things wrote an amazing history of football and the UIL in Texas.
Dr. Donald Frazier, author of the best books on the Trans-Mississippi.
Dr. Susannah Ural, who has published a number of books on the war....and is still working on that Hood's Brigade book.

Two journalists--S.C. Gwynne, who wrote Empire of the Southern Moon, one of, if not the best books on the Comanche Nation.
Hampton Sides--author of Blood and Thunder--the life of Kit Carson. Another book not new, but the research was top-notch.

And that's my five without naming anyone from CWT (and you know who you are) who I would definitely put in the top of the heap.
Frazier and Ural are both very good. I am not familiar with Cashion, though.
 
Since we seem to be including journalist-historians, what about Taylor Branch for his MLK trilogy? I'll also argue that Isabell Wilkerson's Warmth of Other Suns is more important and relevant than just about anything coming out of the academy in recent years.
 
Since we seem to be including journalist-historians, what about Taylor Branch for his MLK trilogy? I'll also argue that Isabell Wilkerson's Warmth of Other Suns is more important and relevant than just about anything coming out of the academy in recent years.
Great list. I think that the first two volumes of the Branch trilogy were some of the best books I've ever read.
 
Here is my fourth, Alan Taylor. He won the Pulitzer for History twice, one of only four people to ever do so. His has won the Bancroft and he was a finalist for the National Book Award. His book on Cooperstown was nearly perfect. One of the most beautiful books of non-fiction I've ever read. American Colonies is another great work, and totally different from William Cooper's Town. The Divided Ground is very good. I have not yet read The Internal Enemy, but it too got a Pulitzer. Here are his works spaanning the era from 1760 to 1832:
 
Back
Top