This important book analyzes Sir Walter Raleigh's History of the World in the context of several historiographical innovations and practices, arguing that he was au courant with these developments despite being held in the Tower. Even more important than the light it sheds on Raleigh himself is its contribution to our understanding of sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century European historiographical thinking. The late Renaissance era is characterized by Popper as one that not only believed history was the depository of knowledge that might be applied to the present and future but also counted history writing as a key element in the discourse of counsel.

Popper argues that, during the late Renaissance, history increasingly was distinguishable from rhetoric and was becoming more “erudite, antiquarian, empirical, and inductive” while at the same time retaining considerable theological significance (4). He rejects the view that early modern historiography helped to precipitate modernity by fostering a historical consciousness. He claims instead that its innovation consisted of introducing new scholarly practices that had a profound effect on all aspects of European intellectual and political life in addition to making history the preeminent discipline of early modern Europe. These practices “stimulated the production and circulation of antiquarian, empirical and experimental methods of making knowledge” that undergirded the “remarkable transformations of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries” and “undermined the sacrality of Scripture” (11). He emphasizes an “inductive synthesis” derived from a variety of sources and producing “coherent temporal narratives” that emerged “as the most celebrated mark of intellectual inquiry” in the period (11). He finds these transformations in historical technique and sources central to Raleigh's admittedly noninnovative History.

The book is organized by sections juxtaposing descriptions of the historical innovations of the late Renaissance with Raleigh's popular History of the World. Popper begins with a treatment of Raleigh's decision to produce a universal history and his generation's views of history's role in political counsel. There follows a treatment of Raleigh's familiarity with and use of the chronological studies of his era, in particular the practice of using ancient pagan histories to more fully understand scriptural history. Next comes a discussion of Raleigh's geographical notebooks, focusing on how individual observations began to replace the traditional emphasis on authorial credibility. The knowledge that Raleigh gained through his experiences as a traveler and explorer is discussed in light of this development. Because Raleigh uses his understanding of political institutions and warfare both to emphasize his loyalty to the king and to offer an anti-Spanish policy, Popper suggests that knowledge and expertise were beginning to supersede virtue as the basis of political authority. The book concludes with a discussion of the contemporary and later reception of the History.

Like most books that attempt to change our historical understanding of an era, Popper makes strong claims, several of which are likely to be disputed. He contends that he has described a new, distinctive, and more scholarly phase in historiographical development, one that can be clearly distinguished both from earlier humanist historical writing focused on classical authors and sources and on the Roman past and from the return to humanist historical practice in the sixteenth century. Some will find the notion of a fundamental reorientation questionable given that both the classically oriented and “newer” forms of history writing existed simultaneously during the late Renaissance and the literary humanist version was perhaps the more visible. Popper also suggests that scholarly innovations dealing with past textual materials have been seriously neglected as a motor of intellectual and cultural change and that these innovations played a role in the scientific revolution. Some intellectual historians will be reluctant to accept the claim that history was “the master discipline” that introduced new methodologies of knowledge making in all fields. Although history, natural history, and chorography shared an empirical methodology, it is difficult to see the scientific revolution as stemming exclusively or even largely from the new historiographical developments. In addition, although Raleigh's History and Bacon's scientific writings are seen as sharing the same inductive and empirical practices, it is unclear whether Popper would view Bacon's historical study of Henry VII as a species of humanist rhetorical history or the newer scholarly variety.

Another issue stems from the subject matter of Raleigh's History. Because that work focuses on ancient and biblical history, Popper's use of it as a vehicle for tracing more general intellectual developments necessarily fails to take into account historiographical developments that emerged from late Renaissance investigations of the English, French, and other national pasts. Thus in Popper's account much of English historical practice appears to be of little cultural importance.

The concept of a scholarly late Renaissance that superseded the humanist Renaissance is also likely to be questioned. Something similar to the concept of a late Renaissance was offered by William Bouwsma's “waning of the Renaissance,” which covered roughly the same period as Popper's study. For Bouwsma, however, it was a period of doubt and anxiety rather than historical innovation, and his “late Renaissance” highlighted the works of Montaigne, Galileo, Jonson, Descartes, Hooker, Shakespeare, and Cervantes, none of whom figure in Popper's “late Renaissance.” How to best characterize the “late Renaissance” is likely to continue to engage early modern historians.

Whether or not one accepts Popper's larger claims, it is clear that his immensely erudite study of Raleigh's sources and methods contributes substantially to the history of European historiography and scholarship. His treatment of these developments is a remarkable scholarly achievement.