Posts Tagged ‘History’

“The Age of Experiments”: The United States, 1789-1845

Monday, August 30th, 2010

History 4720

The Lewis and Clark Expedition sights the Grea...

Lewis and Clark

Professor Michelle Orihel

Southern Utah University

Fall 2010

Tuesdays and Thursdays, 10-11:20 a.m.

Location: SC 225

―This I hope will be the age of experiments in government, and that their basis will be founded on principles of honesty, not of mere force. We have seen no instance of this since the days of the Roman republic, nor do we read of any before that.‖

Thomas Jefferson to John Adams, February 28, 1796

Course Description

From catalog: ―A study of the new nation, the War of 1812, the Jacksonian era, placing special emphasis on the political, social, and economic democratization of the United States, together with the difficulties created by change.‖

In an era dominated by monarchical powers, a group of British North American colonists in 1776 declared their independence from King George III. They established a republic, a government based on the consent of the people. This republican experiment was a bold move, a ―leap in the dark,‖ as historian John Ferling has called it. Throughout history, most republics had failed. Never before did a people attempt to establish a republican government over such a large and expanding territory. How did Americans confront the challenge of establishing and securing a republican form of government? How did they adjust to their new roles as republican citizens rather than monarchical subjects? What other challenges did Americans face during the early years of the new republic, a period marked by tremendous political, economic, social, and cultural change?

This course will examine these and other questions about the nature of the early republic, providing an overview of the major political, social, economic, and cultural developments in the United States from roughly the late eighteenth to the mid-nineteenth century. We will cover such topics as the creation of a new national government, the development of conflict between Federalists and Jeffersonian-Republicans during the 1790s, the Jeffersonian Presidency, the Lewis and Clark expedition, the War of 1812, the development of a market economy, religious revivalism, the growth of reform movements and abolitionism, the expansion of slavery in the South, the rise of sectional conflict, Jacksonian democracy, and western expansion. As an upper-division course, this course will combine lectures with discussions. Active student participation is encouraged and expected for students to gain the most from taking the course. Ultimately, this course aims to provide students with an opportunity to enter into an ongoing and vibrant debate about the revolutionary origins of the early republic, the nature of the American founding, and its implications for the United States today.

Learning Objectives.

Students will be able to identify and understand better the main issues, themes, events, and historical actors in the United States from 1789 to 1845.

Through readings in the primary sources and through a variety of active learning exercises, students will gain a vivid understanding of what it meant to live through such a period of tremendous social, economic, and political change.

In this reading-intensive course, readings in primary and secondary sources will help students to develop such practical skills as interpreting evidence, making arguments based on that evidence, and evaluating other historians‘ arguments.

Class discussions and written assignments will further help students to hone the habits of critical thinking, reading, and writing.

Required Books

1. Bookstore: Sean Wilentz, ed., Major Problems in the Early Republic, 1787-1848. 2nd edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. (ISBN-13: 978-0-618-52258-3)

2. Bookstore: Gunther Barth, ed., The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the Journals Arranged by Topic. Boston: Bedford/ St. Martins, 1998. (ISBN-13: 978-0-312-11118-2)

3. Online: Lance Banning, ed., Liberty and Order: The First American Party Struggle. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 2004. (ISBN: 0-86597-418-7)

Note: This textbook is available to download for free as a complete pdf file at the Liberty Fund‘s ―Online Library of Liberty‖ website; go to the following webpage: http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=875&Itemid=27

4. Online: Various items on electronic reserve at the library‘s website

Evaluation

Participation/ Effort: 15%

Reading Journal: 10%

Annotated Bibliography: 10%

Peer Review of Gerrit Smith Document Analysis: 5%

Gerrit Smith Final Document Analysis: 30%

Final Exam: 30%

Assignments

Reading Journal

Over the course of the semester, students will keep a journal that records their reactions to and assessments of the assigned readings for each class. For some classes, the instructor will provide a question for the student to focus on in their reflection. For other classes, the student will decide what question or issues seem most pressing from that day‘s reading. These entries should be between one and two pages. They should demonstrate that you have read and understood the assigned course materials. Students should particularly write about what intrigues them the most about the reading and how that reading helps to advance their understanding of the early American republic. The instructor will collect journal entries at the end of each class. Late entries will not be accepted. These entries will be graded on a Pass/ Fail basis. Therefore, the only grades for this assignment will be 100 (pass) and 0 (fail). These grades will then be tallied at the end of the semester for the final reading journal grade. However, students can opt out of turning in up to three journal entries without it adversely affecting their final grade.

Other Assignments

Information and instructions on the annotated bibliography, the Gerrit Smith essay assignment (peer review and essay), as well as on the final, take-home exam will be forthcoming.

Weekly Schedule of Topics and Readings (Subject to Revision)

Unless marked as optional, all readings are required.

Abbreviations:

MP = Sean Wilentz, ed., Major Problems in the Early Republic, 1787-1848.

LO = Lance Banning, ed. Liberty and Order: The First American Party Struggle

Week One—Aug 23

TUESDAY:

From Subjects to Citizens: Introduction to the History of the Early American Republic

THURSDAY:

The Revolutionary Origins of the Early Republic

Reading:

1. The Declaration of Independence (you can download and print a transcript of the D of I at this website: http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/declaration.html )

2. MP, chapter 3, essay by Waldstreicher

3. Online Exhibition: ―Declaring Independence: Creating and Re-Creating America‘s Document, organized by the Albert and Shirley Small Special Collections Library, University of Virginia, (http://www2.lib.virginia.edu/exhibits/declaration/index.html)

Week Two – Aug 30

TUESDAY:

The Constitutional Settlement of 1787-88

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 2: documents 1-4, 6, essay by Wood

2. LO, chapter 1: pp. 3-9

3. (Optional) Online Exhibition: Library of Congress, online exhibition on ―Madison‘s Treasures,‖ which illuminates Madison‘s role in drafting the constitution, in the subsequent debates over ratification, and in producing the Bill of Rights: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/madison/

4. (Optional) Podcast Listening: Monticello podcasts, ―Jefferson‘s Worlds: Three Letters on the New Constitution,‖ listed at: http://www.monticello.org/podcasts/index.html

THURSDAY:

Understanding the Process of Historical Change: Interpreting the Early Republic

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 1: essays by Wilentz, Rossiter, Pasley, Perkins 5 5

Week Three—Sept 6

TUESDAY:

Forming a New National Government and George Washington’s Leadership

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 3: documents 1, 2

2. LO, chapter 2: TBA

3. Simon P. Newman, ―Principles or Men?: George Washington and the Political Culture of National Leadership, 1776-1801,‖ Journal of the Early Republic 12, 4 (Winter, 1992), 477-507. (Electronic Reserve)

4. Online Exhibition: ―Alexander Hamilton and the Creation of the United States,‖ organized by the Gilder Lehrman Institute of American History:

http://www.gilderlehrman.org/collection/online/hamilton/index.html

THURSDAY:

The Impact of the French Revolution on America: Popular Politics and Partisan Conflict

Reading:

1. LO, chapter 3: pp. 141-150; 169-170

2. Handout of newspaper articles that covered celebrations of the French Revolution

3. Albrecht Koschnik, ―The Democratic Societies of Philadelphia and the Limits of the American Public Sphere, circa 1793-95, ‖ William and Mary Quarterly 58, 3 (2001): . (Electronic Reserve)

Week Four – Sept 13

TUESDAY:

The Deepening of Political Divisions: From Jay’s Treaty to Washington’s Farewell

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 3: documents 5-7

2. LO, chapter 3: 188-197; 203-221

3. Todd Estes, ―Shaping the Politics of Public Opinion: Federalists and the Jay Treaty Debate,‖ Journal of the Early Republic 20, 3 (Fall 2000), 393-422. (Electronic Reserve)

THURSDAY:

The Presidency of John Adams

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 3: documents 8-11 6 6

2. LO, chapter 4: TBA

3. James Morton Smith, ―The ‗Aurora‘ and the Alien and Sedition Laws: Part I: The Editorship of Benjamin Franklin Bache, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 77, 1 (Jan 1953), 3-23. (Electronic Reserve)

Week Five—Sept 20

TUESDAY:

The Second American Revolution?: The Election of 1800

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 3, documents 12-13; two essays in chapter

2. Handout of newspaper editorials on the election

3. Douglas R. Egerton, ―Gabriel‘s Conspiracy and the Election of 1800,” Journal of Southern History 56, 2 (May 1990), 191-214. (Electronic Reserve)

THURSDAY:

Thomas Jefferson: His Presidency and Political Thought

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 4, documents 1-3; 5-10, essays by Appleby, McDonald, Gordon-Reed

2. LO, TBA

3. Website Viewing (Spend some time viewing ONE of the two links from the Monticello website):

For links about Monticello (a virtual tour of the house and images), go to the following website: http://www.monticello.org/house/index.html

For links about the lives of enslaved African Americans who lived and worked at Monticello, go to the following website:

http://www.monticello.org/plantation/index.html

4. (Optional) Website Viewing for additional information:

For links to such topics as ―A Day in the Life of Thomas Jefferson,‖ A ―Brief Biography of Thomas Jefferson,‖ A ―Timeline of Jefferson‘s Life,‖ and ―The Thomas Jefferson Encyclopedia,‖ go to the following website: http://www.monticello.org/jefferson/index.html

For an online exhibition of Jefferson‘s life and works organized by the Library of Congress, go to: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/

Week Six—Sept 27

TUESDAY

The First American West: The Settlement of the Ohio Valley

Reading:

1. Gail S. Terry, ―Sustaining the Bonds of Kinship in a Trans-Appalachian Migration, 1790-1811: The Cabell-Breckinridge Slaves Move West,‖ Virginia Magazine of History and Biography (October 1994): 455-476. (Electronic Reserve)

2. Online Reading Assignment: TBA–selected documents from ―The First American West: The Ohio River Valley, 1750-1820,‖ American Memory Project, Library of Congress: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/award99/icuhtml/

THURSDAY

Library Instruction Session (preparation for the annotated bibliography)

Week Seven – Oct 4

TUESDAY and THURSDAY :

The Corps of Discovery: the Lewis and Clark Expedition

Reading:

1. Gunther Barth, ed., The Lewis and Clark Expedition: Selections from the Journals Arranged by Topic.

2. (Optional) Website Viewing:

To browse through primary sources on the Lewis and Clark expedition at the American Philosophical Society, including images of the original journals, go to the following website: http://www.amphilsoc.org/library/digcoll/landc

For background on Jefferson‘s role in the expedition, go to:

http://www.monticello.org/jefferson/lewisandclark/index.html

Week Eight—Oct 11

TUESDAY:

The Second War for American Independence: The War of 1812

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 5

THURSDAY:

The Market Revolution: The Modernization of the American Economy

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 7 8 8

2. Online Exhibition: ―Risky Business: Winning and Losing in the Early American Economy, 1780-1850,‖ organized by the Library Company of Philadelphia: http://www.librarycompany.org/Economics/RiskyBusiness/index.htm

3. (Optional) Website Viewing: For maps and historical images of the Erie Canal, go to: http://www.eriecanal.org

Week Nine, Oct 18

TUESDAY

The Expansion of Slavery in the South

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 8, documents 1-2; 4-6; 8-10; essays by Johnson and McCurry

2. MP, chapter 13, essay by Genovese

THURSDAY (Instructor will be away at a conference) The Experiences of Enslaved African Americans

1. Film Viewing (in–class): ―Solomon Northup‘s Odyssey‖

2. Optional Reading: Solomon Northup, Twelve Years a Slave: Narrative of Solomon Northup, a Citizen of New York, Kidnapped in Washington City in 1841, and Rescued in 1853. Electronic edition available at the website, ―Documenting the American South: Primary Resources for the Study of Southern History, Literature, and Culture,‖ University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill: http://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/northup/northup.html

3. Optional Listening: To listen to recordings of interviews with former slaves, go to the Library of Congress American Memory Project, ―Voices from the Days of Slavery: Former Slaves Tell Their Stories‖: http://memory.loc.gov/ammem/collections/voices/

Week Ten – Oct 25

TUESDAY

Finish viewing ―Solomon Northup‘s Odyssey‖ and discuss the experience of slavery

THURSDAY

The Missouri Crisis and the Rise of Sectionalism

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 10

Week Eleven – Nov 1

TUESDAY

Jacksonians, Whigs, and 1830s Politics

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 11 9 9

THURSDAY Native Americans, Western Expansion, and the Trail of Tears

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 9

2. (Optional) Website Viewing:

For an exhibition on eastern Indian wars organized by the Smithsonian Museum of American History, go to: http://americanhistory.si.edu/militaryhistory/printable/section.asp?id=3

For information about the Trail of Tears National Historic Trail, go to: http://www.nps.gov/trte/index.htm

For a link to the Museum of the Cherokee Indian, go to: http://www.cherokeemuseum.org/html/collections_tot.html

3. Optional Audio Interview:

For an interview with documentary film maker Philip Coulter who traveled along the Trail of Tears, go to http://www.cbc.ca/ideas/features/trail-of-tears/index.html

Week Twelve – Nov 8

TUESDAY:

Antebellum Reform Movements

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 12

THURSDAY Abolitionism and the Underground Railroad

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 13, documents 1-5; 10; essay by Jeffrey

2. Website Viewing:

Online exhibition from the Special Collections Research Center, Syracuse University Library: ―‘That laboratory of abolitionism, libel, and treason‘: Syracuse and the Underground Railroad,‖ http://libwww.syr.edu/digital/exhibits/u/undergroundrr/

Week Thirteen—Nov. 15

The Literature of Politics, Reform, and Abolition: The Gerrit Smith Broadside Collection

To view the various pamphlets contained in the Gerrit Smith Broadside collection, go to: http://libwww.syr.edu/information/spcollections/digital/gerritsmith/

TUESDAY

Writing workshop 10 10

Reading:

George Orwell, ―Politics and the English Language,‖ (Electronic Reserve)

THURSDAY

Bring draft of your Gerrit Smith document analysis to class

Peer Review

Week Fourteen – Nov. 22

TUESDAY:

The Second Great Awakening

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 6

2. Website Viewing:

Library of Congress, online exhibition on ―Religion and the Founding of the American Republic,‖ http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel07.html

THURSDAY:

THANKSGIVING

Week Fifteen – Nov. 29

TUESDAY:

Manifest Destiny, Slavery, and the Politics of Western Expansion

Reading:

1. MP, chapter 15

THURSDAY Final Assessment and Review

December 10, 2010: 11am-12:50pm.: Final Exam

Enhanced by Zemanta

Constitutional Biographies

Sunday, August 22nd, 2010

Who were the signers of the U.S. Constitution? What were their backgrounds?

The National Archives offers a brief biographical sketch of every delegate who attended the convention in Philadelphia in 1787.

For brief biographies of each of the Founding Fathers who were delegates to the Constitutional Convention, select the names or the states below.
(* indicates delegates who did not sign the Constitution)

Connecticut
William. Samuel Johnson
Roger Sherman
Oliver Ellsworth (Elsworth)*
Delaware
George Read
Gunning Bedford, Jr.
John Dickinson
Richard Bassett
Jacob Broom
Georgia
William Few
Abraham Baldwin
William Houston*
William L. Pierce*
Maryland
James McHenry
Daniel of St. Thomas Jenifer
Daniel Carroll
Luther Martin*
John F. Mercer*
Massachusetts
Nathaniel Gorham
Rufus King
Elbridge Gerry*
Caleb Strong*
New Hampshire
John Langdon
Nicholas Gilman
New Jersey
William Livingston
David Brearly (Brearley)
William Paterson (Patterson)
Jonathan Dayton
William C. Houston*
New York
Alexander Hamilton
John Lansing, Jr.*
Robert Yates*
North Carolina
William. Blount
Richard. Dobbs Spaight
Hugh Williamson
William R. Davie*
Alexander Martin*
Pennsylvania
Benjamin Franklin
Thomas Mifflin
Robert Morris
George Clymer
Thomas Fitzsimons (FitzSimons; Fitzsimmons)
Jared Ingersoll
James Wilson
Gouverneur Morris
South Carolina
John Rutledge
Charles Cotesworth Pinckney
Charles Pinckney
Pierce Butler
Rhode Island
Rhode Island did not send any delegates to the Constitutional Convention.
Virginia
John Blair
James Madison Jr.
George Washington
George Mason*
James McClurg*
Edmund J. Randolph*
George Wythe*
Enhanced by Zemanta

American History Box

Sunday, July 25th, 2010

Perhaps the most convenient source for exploring important documents from American History is the AMDOCS page of the “World Wide Web Virtual Library

Whether you looking for specific information from a time period, or even if you want to explore the wealth of American Documents in the virtual library, this is the website for you. This is not the sizzling or flashy website you have grown accustomed to, but the Virtual Library contains one of the very best sources on the web for those seeking first hand knowledge of American History.

They have even collected everything in one convenient box. Click a year and the adventure begins.

QUICK FIND
800 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 1500 1600 1625
1650 1675 1700 1725 1750 1775 1787 1800 1825
1850 1860 1865 1875 1900 1910 1913 1917 1920
1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005
Enhanced by Zemanta

Revolutionary Negotiations: Indians, Empires, and Diplomats in the Founding of America

Wednesday, July 7th, 2010

By Leonard J. Sadosky

Revolutionary Negotiations

Book Description

Revolutionary Negotiations examines early American diplomatic negotiations with both the European powers and the various American Indian nations from the 1740s through the 1820s. Sadosky interweaves previously distinct settings for American diplomacy–courts and council fires–into one singular, transatlantic system of politics.

Whether as provinces in the British Empire or as independent states, American assertions of power were directed simultaneously to the west and to the east–to Native American communities and to European empires across the Atlantic. American leaders aspired to equality with Europeans, who often dismissed them, while they were forced to concede agency to Native Americans, whom they often wished they could ignore. As Americans used diplomatic negotiation to assert their new nation’s equality with the great powers of Europe and gradually defined American Indian nations as possessing a different (and lesser) kind of sovereignty, they were also forced to confront the relations between the states in their own federal union.Acts of diplomacy thus defined the founding of America, not only by drawing borders and facilitating commerce, but also by defining and constraining sovereign power in a way that privileged some and weakened others. These negotiations truly were revolutionary.

Buy it now.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Jefferson changed ’subjects’ to ‘citizens’ in Declaration of Independence

Sunday, July 4th, 2010

By Marc Kaufman from The Washington Post

“Subjects.”

That’s what Thomas Jefferson first wrote in an early draft of the Declaration of Independence to describe the people of the 13 colonies.

But in a moment when history took a sharp turn, Jefferson sought quite methodically to expunge the word, to wipe it out of existence and write over it. Many words were crossed out and replaced in the draft, but only one was obliterated.

Over the smudge, Jefferson then wrote the word “citizens.”

No longer subjects to the crown, the colonists became something different: a people whose allegiance was to one another, not to a faraway monarch.

Scholars of the revolution have long speculated about the “citizens” smear — wondering whether the erased word was “patriots” or “residents” — but now the Library of Congress has determined that the change was far more dramatic.

Using a modified version of the kind of spectral imaging technology developed for the military and for monitoring agriculture, research scientists teased apart the mystery and reconstructed the word that Jefferson banished in 1776.

“Seldom can we re-create a moment in history in such a dramatic and living way,” Library of Congress preservation director Dianne van der Reyden said at Friday’s announcement of the discovery.

| Read More!|

Enhanced by Zemanta

Revisiting the days of the Berlin Wall

Wednesday, May 26th, 2010

Jack Miller Center Returning Fellow, William Anthony Hay, reviews a recent volume by Norman Stone in the Wall Street Journal.

How the West Won

Revisiting the days of the Berlin Wall, Cuban missiles and Reaganite resolve

By WILLIAM ANTHONY HAY

The outcome of the Cold War may seem inevitable in retrospect, but it hardly appeared that way during the four decades of high-stakes conflict. In the West and in the developing world of former European colonies, many perfectly intelligent people, without any great ideological investment in either side of the debate, concluded that the Soviet Union offered a successful path to modernity while the U.S. and its allies faced crisis or decline. The Soviets had seemed to master the basic delivery system of a vast welfare-state apparatus—health care, literacy, housing and even, it was said, basic consumer goods—while the West was subject to the vagaries of free-market boom and bust, with widening inequalities in the private realm and evidence everywhere of public squalor. Only during the mid-1980s did reality shatter the illusion. Communism and then the Soviet Union itself collapsed from within. The totality of the Western victory prompts an interesting question: How could so many have gotten so much so wrong?

|Read More|

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Is Google Good for History?

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

January 8, 2010

SAN DIEGO — At a discussion of “Is Google Good for History?” here Thursday, there weren’t really any firm “No” answers. Even the harshest critic here of Google’s historic book digitization project confessed to using it for his research and making valuable finds with the tool.

But that doesn’t mean Google Books wasn’t criticized. In a discussion at the annual meeting of the American Historical Association, scholars questioned the way Google has organized the books project and whether it was doing enough in quality control. At the same time, though, many comments suggested deep appreciation for the company’s efforts. And some suggested that Google has become something of an unfair target for academics who pay little attention as other companies charge college and university libraries high fees for their materials. Over the course of the discussion, not only did Google take a few hits, but so did librarians and professors (although the Google representative left it to the academics to criticize themselves).

Dan Cohen, director of the Center for History and New Media, at George Mason University, kicked off the discussion with a strong defense of Google’s book digitization efforts. ”Is Google good for history? Of course it is,” he said. “We historians are searchers and sifters of evidence. Google is probably the most powerful tool in human history for doing just that. It has constructed a deceptively simple way to scan billions of documents instantaneously, and it has spent hundreds of millions of dollars of its own money to allow us to read millions of books in our pajamas. Good? How about great?”

|Read More|

History Experiment at Indiana

Friday, December 18th, 2009

The History Department at the University of Indiana is reexamining how history is taught/modeled in the classroom. According to a piece in the Chronicle (“A Teaching Experiment Shows Students How to Grasp Big Concepts,” 15 November 2009): “All too often, undergraduate history students make a hash of essay questions . . . They fill their blue books with disconnected strings of names and dates. Or they sketch a plausible argument but leave out supporting evidence.” Do history professor’s expect too much of students who search in vain for a thesis? Does the average student in a history class have much of any understanding of change over time, contingency, or how to read a primary source document?

Read More

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

History Beyond the Ivory Tower

Tuesday, October 13th, 2009

Writing History for the Academy and Beyond

Donald A. Yerxa

Senior Editor, Historically Speaking

Co-Director, The Historical Society

Historical inquiry today is amazingly robust at multiple levels—from the topics historians explore to the approaches they employ. The output is staggering. Although some of it pays far too much attention to eccentric topics for my taste, much of it is interesting and substantial. This is not the place to attempt a comprehensive survey of the entire discipline. But I do want to note number of noteworthy trends—some encouraging and others not.

Because historians are open to almost any aspect of past human experience, contemporary historical inquiry reinforces “a greater sense of the otherness of the past.” This cuts two ways. Recognition of the otherness of the past is a key ingredient of a mature historical consciousness. But so is an appreciation for continuity, as Wilfred McClay so eloquently argued back in 1996 in his marvelous essay “Mystic Chords of Memory.” Too much otherness and the past is not just a foreign country, but, as the Downeast Maine saying goes, “you can’t get there from here.”

Historians celebrate novel interpretation and the rich complexity of the past. Stressing complexity is a necessary corrective to misleading caricatures of the past. But it has also spawned skeptical resignation that the new scholarship can ever reveal an underlying coherence. Despite the conceptual tension between complexity and coherence, they are not sworn enemies. The challenge is to use the findings of the new scholarship to advance more intricate and satisfactory patterns, as John Hedley Brooke has argued. Robust fields are rarely tidy. But historians have a responsibility to make sense of the past; otherwise, they risk becoming guardians of antiquarianism.

Recently, Patricia Cohen raised important questions in a New York Times piece on the decline of traditional historical fields in today’s academy. There can be little doubt that the status of fields like diplomatic, economic, military, constitutional, and intellectual history have changed considerably in recent decades. These fields, critics charge, have focused far too much on elite decision makers, and now other fields have gained momentum and faculty slots, especially cultural, non-Western history, and gender history. These sub-disciplinary categories are by no means rigid, however. Cultural and intellectual history, for example, frequently slosh together, as David Hollinger and Sarah Igo write in a forthcoming forum in Historically Speaking. Moreover, traditional fields themselves have been influenced by newer cultural and transnational approaches. That said, these are not trivial changes, and it is understandable that some are deeply distressed by these trends. But the conversation “about how the pie is divided,” points to matters that I find far more troubling than intramural historical turf squabbles.

Before I speak to these, however, I should note the larger social context for all this historical inquiry. Many observers have commented on the enormous public appetite for history. The signs are everywhere: from best-seller book lists to multiple history channels to Civil War reenactments. A key question of course, as John Lukacs has noted, is how this appetite will be satisfied. The fear is that there will be demand for the cultural and intellectual equivalents of junk and fast food—satisfying at one level, but hardly nourishing.

Given the appetite for history, there is a pressing need for good history writing. But what is it? There are at least three dimensions to good history writing (and here I borrow loosely from Bruce Mazlish): (1) the empirical (history is an evidentiary field; historians base their work on reliable sources; as Stephen Pyne argues in his guide to history writing, Voice and Vision, historians can’t make things up and neither can they leave out something that really matters); (2) the hermeneutical (there is necessarily an interpretive dimension to history; the empirical is employed in the service of the hermeneutical); and (3) the aesthetic (history is literature; again citing Pyne: “the best history will use literary craft consciously”).

We should take some comfort in the encouraging trend of prominent academic historians writing superb history for the general public. Take the accomplished Cornell classicist Barry Strauss, for example. He has written trade books in recent years on the Battle of Salamis, the Trojan War, and Spartacus. These combine impeccable historical research and analysis with the narrative flair of an accomplished storyteller. Then there is David Hackett Fischer’s whose Paul Revere’s Ride and Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington’s Crossing wonderfully demonstrate the value of exhaustive re-examination of seemingly familiar historical events in larger contexts. Strauss and Fischer are by no means alone; scores of academic historians now appreciate the importance of making their work available to thousands of general readers, not just a few fellow specialists.

The appearance of more titles by academic historians on best-seller lists, however, does not resolve the nagging problem of the disconnect between academic history and the public. People look to historians to provide them with greater understanding about why the world is the way it is. But as Margaret MacMillan argues in Dangerous Games: The Uses and Abuses of History, “the historical profession has turned inward in the last couple of decades, with the result that much historical study today is self-referential.” She rightly laments the emphasis academic history places on theory and specialized language. Graduate training and promotion criteria contribute mightily to the problem. The profession, as David Greenberg perceptively noted in Slate last year, expects graduate students to be saturated in historiography and rewards a rather narrow style of argument and writing that almost always falls within acceptable historiographical niches. Similarly, Stephen Pyne worries that historians’ obsession with historiography has seemingly blocked interest in historical writing. Good writing, he observes, is not adequately stressed in graduate schools, where fledgling historians are rewarded for unpacking texts not packing them in the first place. The results, I would argue, are as predictable as they are unfortunate. Academic history is unnecessarily overspecialized, over-theorized, and fragmented. It is often jargon-laden and increasingly irrelevant to the general public. At precisely a time when people are hungering and thirsting after good history, the profession too frequently serves up mere historianship, to borrow Lukacs’s wonderfully apt term.

Adam Hochschild and others noted in a recent Historically Speaking forum that discussion of academic history and the public also needs to be viewed in the light of yet another context—a depressing one. The historical ignorance of the average American high school and undergraduate student is appalling. (The same could be said for their knowledge of the American governmental system and the principles on which it has been based.) Theirs is “an unstructured, chaotic past” without any meaningful chronological or geographical frameworks. Unfortunately, too many academic historians view history education as peripheral to the central tasks of their careers: gaining promotion, tenure, and good standing in the profession. Once again, the burden of historianship.

History, then, is a robust but messy field that, unfortunately, has not been as attentive to the wider public as it should. All academic disciplines function as guilds, gatekeepers of their fields. It would be naïve to think otherwise. But I remind my fellow historians that too much emphasis on historianship is a bad thing, especially when the wider public needs so much more.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]