Who are Historians?

by Jack Le Moine

From the latest happenings in the world of history.

This March 1 the Host of the History Carnival will be in Unspoken Assumptions. Last April 17, 2014 she wrote In Defense of Historians. Her essay’s theme is ‘I’m a historian and you’re not.’ I believe that there’s two things wrong with this essay: (1) it fails to address the differences between professional and amateur historians; and (2) it fails to address the underlying causes of the problems professional historians face today.

Hello, my name is Heather and I’m a historian . . .

I have studied history for over ten years. I’ve written about history, researched history, taught history, attended many history conferences, had my work scrutinized and criticized by other historians.

To sum up, she is a historian. She even has a PhD! The essay then goes to it’s first mark: the great unwashed must not criticize the professional.

Michael Grove is not an historian nor is he an expert on the First World War – therefore he has zero right to criticize how historians do their job.

If the reader doesn’t already know who this MG is; the historian doesn't enlighten him. If the reader puzzles at this decision of the historian, consider what right you might have to express your reaction. If you’re not a credentialed professional or if you’re not an expert, is your right 50%, 25%, 10%, or 0%? From the quote above the correct answer to this multiple choice question is zero but one still must wonder how the essayist arrived at that figure? Was it the result of some mathematical calculation or just mere turf war? Like in ‘I’m a historian and you’re not.’

Climate Change Since the Ice Ages

cc-by-2.0 from Wikipedia
photo by Scott Ableman

My take on George Will's latest. His column was published 1/7/15 in the Washington Post.

Summary: The world's climate has changed a lot over recorded history and before.  These changes have impacted human civilization in major ways.

Quote:

 And if climate Cassandras are as conscientious as they claim to be about weighing evidence, how do they accommodate historical evidence of enormously consequential episodes of climate change not produced by human activity?

Narrative:
In the Medieval Warm Period (800 - 1300) the Earth was warmer than anytime in the last 8,000 years.  Northern England had vinyards.  Then global cooling set in and human upheaval resulted.  Farmland had to be abandoned and people starved.

The Little Ice Age occured in the 17th. century.  1675 was known as "the year without a summer."  Lots of change.

The climate is changing because the climate is always changing.

My Views:
While he goes too far in places, (I doubt that the wars of the 1600's were caused by climate change), this does remind us that climate has changed in the past and the change has not been due to human causes.  The problem that ordinary folks like myself have is that with the large amount of emissions that present society puts into the air it is hard not to think that this would have some impact.  I wonder if global warming is a combination of human and natural causes.

---

George Will almost didn't make it as a syndicated columnist. His style was considered too erudite for a general audience.

Whatever one thinks of his views, read his work for use of language and for how he marshals facts and uses logic.

Here's his Wiki bio.