Although he is not reported to have ever been in Portugal, it seems clear that the historian knew relatively well the most recent historiography on Portugal, both Portuguese and foreign. Alexandre Herculano is, perhaps, the author whom Stephens highlighted the most, considering him the founder of a “new school of modern historians” in Portuguese territory, whose premises were based on careful research and critical analysis of documentation. Aside from Herculano, he also underlined the works of Rebelo da Silva, Latino Coelho, Pinheiro Chagas, Luciano Cordeiro, and Oliveira Martins. The latter, who may have been acquainted with the work during his staying in England in 1892, is the author of the preface to the first Portuguese edition of The Story of Portugal (translated by J. T. da Silva Bastos), published in 1893. In that text, in which he recognizes the credibility of Stephens’ narrative and its usefulness for historical vulgarisation, Oliveira Martins presented a critical analysis of great utility. Being guided by the chronological organisation of the narrative, the Portuguese historian listed and corrected multiple lapses and inaccuracies – such as incorrect dates or inaccurate interpretation of some facts – in Stephens’ text. Although he recognized that some of the inaccuracies were due to linguistic limitations, Oliveira Martins was particularly critical of his analysis of the Portuguese-British relations. He appreciated, on the other hand, the Scottish historian’s glorification of the Portuguese heroism.

The history of Portugal was, undoubtedly, one of the subjects that most stimulated Stephens as a historian. However, his historical research is by no means limited to that theme. Another subject that most motivated him was the French Revolution, to which he dedicated several studies, including A History of the French Revolution (3 vols.), published between 1886 and 1891, and Revolutionary Europe (1789-1815), which came out in 1893. Issues that are still at the heart of the historiographical debate, such as the question of nationalisms and nationhood, were also subject of his reflection and analysis. There is, however, a topic on which Stephens has spoken on several occasions that it is worth to develop.

His large experience as a lecturer and the labour he has done as a historian throughout the years enabled him to form a consolidated opinion on what should be the study of History and on what should be the demands of the historiographical work. Distancing himself from the philosophies of history, Stephens proved to be an advocate of the ideas of the “German Historical School”, established by Niebuhr and Ranke. In his point of view, the writing of history should be accurate and unbiased, favouring the search for the truth over the style of the narrative.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | (Pdf)