Reviewed by Michael J. R. Gaffikin University of Wollongong, Australia
It is a peculiar characteristic of our times, or perhaps our discipline, that we feel the need to have histories of many of our recently created institutions. One interesting possible implication of this is that we are not convinced of the ability of historians to unearth the truth of our past. Rather than leave it to some later historical researcher to educe the past from a variety of documents, we prefer to place our faith in the story presented by “someone who was there.” This approach, as any oral historian would admit, is fraught with difficulties.
Perhaps it is pointless to speculate on why a doyen of accounting history, Louis Goldberg, was charged to write the history of the Accounting Association of Australia and New Zealand (AAANZ) and no reason is given in the book. What is of greater interest is how he went about it and what did he achieve? The history of AAANZ starts in 1954 and Goldberg played a major role in its formation and its early development. In addition, he is an accomplished historian with a proven track record. Therefore, not only would it be highly likely that there would be substantial extant documentatoin with which he would be familiar but Goldberg would be able to recall significant events in the history of AAANZ and be an eminently appropriate person to select those documents most suitable for the historical reconstruction.
Reading the work would seem to confirm these views. Not only is it interesting and seemingly complete but its structure clearly indicates Goldberg’s professionalism as a historian. He does state that he had difficulty obtaining some of the documentation, which he presumes was “dispersed or destroyed,” but he has managed to produce sufficient documents which, he hopes, “speak for themselves in telling the story” [p. v]. The history is presented in three parts, the first dealing with the problems in the creation of the Association, the second, its development according to various themes, and, the third, philosophical reflection on the existence of the body.
A substantial portion of the first part comprises source documents connected by loose narrative. Goldberg’s role is clearly indicated and herein lies some of the methodological difficulties, alluded to above, of this sort of history. The author has referred to his contributions to the formation of the Association in the third person yet clearly the inclusion of the material owes much to his personal recollection. Despite the protests of the would-be positivists, history need not pretend to be objective. The efforts by the author to give the appearance of an objectivity seem forced. True to Collingwood’s precepts he has attempted to recreate something of the attitudes and circumstances of the early days of the Association. Having been a major actor in the early developments it is hard to see how he can remain “objective”: he has to select those events that seem to him to describe the atmosphere and attitudes of that time. As an aside, it is worth noting that almost all the authors of the source material are still alive. It would be interesting to know how they view the reproduction of what in many instances is personal correspondence.
The analysis in the second part is very clearly presented and interesting. Goldberg’s technique of analyzing the development of the different functional aspects of the Association again demonstrates his capacity for effective historical writing. The only criticism here also relates to his own involvement. The early developments, in which he was personally involved, receive fuller treatment than later aspects (they were probably more interesting any way!).
In the third part Goldberg has examined the Association in terms of how it can be viewed as an entity, the definition for which he has turned mainly to Gilman. In some respects it is difficult to see why he has done this. It would be disappointing if he only felt this was necessary to satisfy those who believe in the need for “contemporary relevance” of all historical research. However, viewed in the context of his other work, that is doubtful because he has always signalled a predilection for philosophical reflection. What is surprising is his dependence on non-philosopher Gilman for his notion of entity.
Goldberg’s examination of the idea of an entity is a little similar to a sociologist’s attempt to define a society. It seems that he feels it is important to know whether the Association fulfills the requirement of an entity in order to determine whether it is possible to talk of its development. It is doubtful that Gilman would have been concerned with the notion of entity for other than pragmatic purposes — in order to be able to know what data to include in the accounting system. But, in the conclusion Goldber turns to C. T. Devine.
It is only disappointing that the last section and the concluding chapter are so brief. Goldberg’s capacity for original and penetrating thought are exemplified in the last paragraph in which he comments on history, research and accounting theory. This in itself would justify commending this book to fellow historians but there is even more of interest contained in it. Not only does it detail the efforts of a group of accounting academics searching for common goals, it reflects on some of the problems that such activity involves. It is a worthwhile addition to the accounting history literature.
