Anyone who has used nineteenth-century Latin American historians will appreciate this discussion of their historiography. Colmenares attempts to understand why historians viewed the past the way they did in their effort to pursue the often contradictory aims of scholarship and political—sometimes personal—advocacy. In doing so, the book raises weighty questions familiar to contemporary practitioners of the craft.
Colmenares argues that historians used mainly European models, or “conventions,” to understand a local reality that did not lend itself easily to foreign forms. Because of this tension between foreign models and Latin American culture, Colmenares claims that historians essentially failed to provide understanding, and instead produced histories that centered largely on independence and the exploits of its heroes. The literary techniques used by historians, although useful for their purposes, were inappropriate for the social phenomena under scrutiny. Yet, however flawed their work, Colmenares does not minimize the impact of these historians, for they contributed significantly to establishing an identity for the emerging national states.
While the author attempts to describe the overall parameters of nineteenth-century Latin American historiography, his book emphasizes the work of South American historians, particularly Chileans and Argentines. This is an understandable tribute to the stature of those historians, but one misses references to Mexican, Brazilian, and Caribbean historians. Likewise, one misses references to important works by contemporary scholars who have discussed nineteenth-century Latin American historiography, particularly Simon Collier, Charles Hale, and Gertrude Yeager. Still, Colmenares has written a concise and insightful study of the craft of nineteenth-century Latin American historians.
