Hexter, J. H. (“Jack”)

(b. 25 May 1910 in Memphis, Tennessee; d. 8 December 1996 in St. Louis, Missouri), historian and educator who specialized in the Renaissance period, developed historical methodology, and studied the growth of freedom in the West.

Hexter, whose given name was Milton Kaufman, always called himself Jack. The first of two sons born to Milton Jacobs Hexter, a cotton broker, and Alma Marks, a home-maker, he was taken to Cincinnati, Ohio, as a young boy. Raised there by his grandmother Fannie Marks, he received his education in the city’s public schools before entering the University of Cincinnati in 1928. Hexter earned his B.A. degree after only three years. He then pursued his graduate studies at Harvard University, where he took an M.A. (1933) and Ph.D. (1937). Under the direction of Wilbur C. Abbott, an authority on Oliver Cromwell, he completed a doctoral dissertation, “The Rise of the Independent Party,” which examined the critical role John Pym played in organizing parliamentary opposition to King Charles I. Revised and published in 1941 as The Reign of King Pym, it earned him recognition as a specialist in Stuart-era history.

Meanwhile, Hexter had begun his academic career, giving classes at the University of Cincinnati (1936), Harvard University (1937), and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1938). He then accepted a position as an instructor at Queens College in New York City. His teaching was interrupted by service in the U.S. Army during World War II, when he worked in military intelligence. On 29 March 1942 he married Ruth Mullin; they had four children.

Discharged from the army in 1945, Hexter returned to Queens College. In 1957, having established his scholarly credentials, he moved to Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri, where he spent seven years as a full professor. Drawn to Yale University in 1964, Hexter became director of the Center for Parliamentary History before retiring in 1978. Still energetic and productive, Hexter rejoined Washington University as a distinguished historian in residence and from 1986 to 1990 as John M. Olin Professor of the History of Freedom.

A voracious reader rather than an archival researcher, Hexter wrote, edited, and translated a dozen books and contributed thirty articles and fifty reviews to various scholarly journals. His work often challenged long-held views concerning English history. In More’s Utopia: The Biography of an Idea (1952), Hexter placed the famed humanist in the context of early sixteenth-century political conditions as well as Thomas More’s own family situation. He co-edited a new version of Utopia (1965), offering a fresh interpretation of the text and More’s purpose in writing it. Finally, in The Vision of Politics on the Eve of the Reformation: More, Machiavelli, and Seyssel (1973), he compared the political theories set forth in Utopia, The Prince, and The Monarchy of France.

Hexter’s provocative articles, collected in Reappraisals in History (1961), stirred considerable controversy. In “The Myth of the Middle Class in Tudor England” he denied the traditional belief that the Tudor monarchs favored wealthy merchants and financiers. His “Storm over the Gentry” challenged the prevalent interpretations concerning rural landowners and their participation in the English Civil War. Heated replies from scholars whose judgments Hexter had questioned soon followed. He used lengthy review-essays to analyze major works by Lawrence Stone, Christopher Hill, and Fernand Braudel. Republishing these in On Historians: Reappraisals of Some of the Makers of Modern History (1979), Hexter praised the authors’ contributions but critiqued their methodology. The sole scholar Hexter genuinely admired was Garrett Mattingly, whose Armada (1959) he lauded for its sound scholarship and elegant prose.

Even as Hexter engaged in historical polemics, he formulated his own philosophy of history and methodology. Beginning with Reappraisals in History and continuing with Doing History and The History Primer (both 1971), he assailed the “analytical philosophers” who, he claimed, misunderstood the true nature of historical writing. He rejected their claim that “scientific” laws could be applied to his discipline. Rather, in “doing history,” the trained specialist should employ “common sense” rules to construct a narrative. Hexter also insisted that words be carefully weighed, since the rhetoric of historical writing embodies the structure of an historian’s thinking. Using personal experiences instead of far-reaching theories like Marxism, the professional could better grasp the thoughts and actions of historical figures. Hexter proposed a series of simple rules, the most important being to “render the best and most likely account of the human past that can be sustained by the relevant evidence.” Ultimately the historian’s peers would judge the quality of a work. Puckishly, Hexter used the 1951 baseball pennant race to illustrate his concept of historical narration.

During his second stay at Washington University, he founded and directed the Center for the History of Freedom. Its purpose was to trace the development of liberty in the West between the seventeenth and twentieth centuries. The collapse of Soviet communism gave added impetus to the project, which included annual conferences, each dealing with a different phase of freedom, and subsequent publication of the proceedings. To its initial volume, Parliament and Liberty from the Reign of Elizabeth to the English Civil War (1992), Hexter contributed an essay on the freedom of elections under King James I, seeing in this small episode the first efforts to challenge royal prerogative, a step toward the growth of modern freedom.

In later years, Hexter, who was short and stocky, gained considerable weight because he loved fine cuisine. Suffering from a chronic heart condition, he died at his home in St. Louis at the age of eighty-six. He is buried there in Bellefontaine Cemetery.

Hexter’s importance resides not only in his conscientious scholarship and advocacy of good writing. Ever the gadfly, he enjoyed questioning received ideas about the past and demolishing unsound philosophical attitudes toward it. He firmly believed that by applying “common language, common sense, and credibility” to historical studies, professional historians could “advance knowledge, understanding, and truth.”

Hexter’s papers remain in his family’s possession, but a collection of his correspondence is held at the Center for the History of Freedom at Washington University. In a humorous essay, “Call Me Ishmael, or a Rose by Any Other Name,” American Scholar 52 (summer 1983), Hexter explains how he adopted the name Jack. An extensive bibliography of his writings is presented in Barbara C. Malament, ed., After the Reformation: Essays in Honor of J. H. Hexter (1980), which also offers a discussion by Louis O. Mink of Hexter’s philosophy of history. Appreciations are found in the American Historical Association’s Perspectives (Mar. 1997), Journal of the History of Ideas (Apr. 1997), and Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 143 (June 1999). An obituary is in the New York Times (16 Dec. 1996).

James Friguglietti