# How accurate was Macaulay's history (esp of James II?) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 15, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-accurate-was-macaulays-history-esp-of-james-ii/637789 "2012-10-15T17:11:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![No\_Wikipedia\_Cites](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@No\_Wikipedia\_Cites](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/No_Wikipedia_Cites)\ **Post date:** [October 15, 2012, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-accurate-was-macaulays-history-esp-of-james-ii/637789/1 "2012-10-15T17:11:58Z")
In Macaulay’s _History of England_, he casts James II in a negative light, though it seems convincing enough, and William of Orange in a good one. How accurate is Macaulay’s view? I know it has been criticized as the “Whig View of History” but other than that phrase, what exactly was wrong with his history (concerning those two Monarchs)? ---
**Author:** ![Malden\_Capell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/malden_capell/32/5274_2.png) [@Malden\_Capell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malden_Capell)\ **Post date:** [October 16, 2012, 8:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-accurate-was-macaulays-history-esp-of-james-ii/637789/2 "2012-10-16T08:45:41Z")
I’ve read Macaulay and enjoyed it a lot. He is critical of James, and deservedly so in my view. Some more modern historians have tried to re-interpret James as a genuine champion of religious liberty, but personally I think Macaulay is right: he used the phrase ‘religious liberty’ as a smokescreen for trying to forcefully convert England and Scotland back to Catholicism. I haven’t read volume 3 yet - regarding the Williamite War in Ireland - and I imagine I’ll be more critical of that volume owing to a tendency on Victorians to whitewash Protestant activities in Ireland.