Abstract
Works by Samuel Finer, Oliver MacDonagh and Maurice Wright illustrate different dimensions of influence in the genre of administrative history. In chronicling the deeds of Sir Edwin Chadwick, a high profile nineteenth century civil servant, Finer demonstrated the purchase of (Benthamite) ideas upon the role and organization of government. No less so he set new standards in administrative biography, mobilising a wide range of primary and secondary sources. Oliver MacDonagh's contribution to administrative history was not so much a body of empirical material as an explanatory tool. Whatever its weaknesses, his model of government growth stoked controversy, providing a foil for his critics as well as inspiration for his advocates. The simple elegance of his model as an ‘ideal type’ gave it an extensive applicability beyond the period for which it was developed. Maurice Wright's work on the mid-nineteenth century Treasury was more in the Finer mould, setting new standards for the study of public agencies, based as it was upon a careful sifting of archive sources. Thus he successfully challenged previously held assumptions about the ability of the Treasury to control an important area of public expenditure. No serious scholar ever again took Treasury power at face value.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
