Hello! Welcome back Sort of Academic. In my last post, which was also my first post, I introduced myself and gave you an idea as to what some of my goals are for this blog. In this post, we’re going to start at the beginning. Not of time. That’s too much to go over in one post.
No, we’re going to start at the logical beginning of a general discussion about what a historian is. The obvious answer is someone who studies history. But we all learned in school that you aren’t supposed to use the word you are defining in the definition. Doing so doesn’t provide sufficient meaning.
But First, What is History?
We’re going to take another step back and start with a brief discussion on what history is. Dictionary.com defines history as “the branch of knowledge dealing with past events.” More definitions are provided, but they are basically restating that initial definition with a few extra details. I don’t think this definition is surprising to anyone.
Why Should You Care?
I think the next logical question would be “why study history?” Who cares what happened in the past? The way events were recorded was frequently biased and doesn’t change my to do list or that I have bills due.
All of these are worthwhile questions. When we are very interested in a topic, especially one that impacts so many people, it can be hard to fathom that a lot of people don’t care about your preferred topic. Nevertheless, we are going to take a few minutes to examine each of the complaints in the previous paragraph.
First, you aren’t really wrong about bias. But I think any discussion on bias is also going to have to get into historiography, and it will make this post way too long. We will get into the question of bias in a future post.
Second, let’s look at the question “Why study history?”
I’m going to pull directly from an old college textbook to begin this answer: “Everything has a history…The more you understand about these past influences, the more you will know about the present subject to which they are related.” (Benjamin 2001)
History is Closer to Home than You Realize
It can be easy to only consider national and world events or local events impacting relatively large numbers of people as historical. But as the earlier quote makes clear, everything, even the most unassuming person, has a history: a series of past events that makes them who they are today.
Each person’s history influences how they interact with the world around them and potentially leads them to contribute to mass societal changes even if they are just a “little guy”. For instance, maybe they chose to be part of the labor movement that lead to the unionization of coal mines in the early 20th century that lead to better working and living conditions and better pay (Gorn 2002). Or they are part of the current labor movement affecting places like Starbucks and Chipotle.
In short, these individual histories present in each person can coalesce into events that lead to societal change, and sometimes societal inaction.
Historians study these people and events, thoughts and ideas.
So now we are back to the initial statement that a historian is someone who studies history. Groundbreaking observation, am I right?
Historian Stereotypes
I think when we hear the word “historian” most of us think of an old, stuffy white man in a suit, maybe with glasses, pontificating about western civilization. Or a younger white man in a suit, maybe a bow-tie and close cut hair with a glass of wine at a swanky private social event at an educational institution also pontificating about western civilization. You know, Kevin, from Brooklyn 99 (though to be fair, Kevin was a great character).
But is that the only kind of historian there is? No, not anymore. Sure, they are a lot of those stereotypes still around, but there is nothing that says they have to be your only source.
New and Improved Historian Options
With the mixed bag that is the Internet, we have more ways to access history (and basically anything else you want to learn about) than ever. We can find people who just love to research and talk about history, others who are historians but aren’t in academia strictly in the traditional sense, and those who were professors and got tired of the gatekeeping and want to educate through other platforms.
So, we have more of a mix of amateur and professional historians.
Amateur vs. Professional
What makes someone an amateur versus a professional historian? This has proved to be more difficult to answer than I expected. This March 2012 article shows that even professional historians don’t always agree on what makes someone a professional historian.
If you delve through one of the multiple Reddit and History Stack Exchange posts, you will find that quite a few people would argue that the answer to what makes someone a professional historian is as simple as asking does the person get paid to read, write and/or teach history. Yes, then you are a professional; no, then you are an amateur. Professional historians are also generally expected to have a (probably graduate level) degree in history.
How much does this distinction matter?
In the professional corner…
One of the big advantages is that a professional historian has learned how to do research, analysis their findings, and how to properly cite their sources. They also know how to evaluate their sources and decide whether or not the information is reputable. They are by no means perfect at this. But they are likely to be better at it than someone with no training in evaluating sources.
But I am going to stop rambling about sources. I have a future post on sources planned, and this is a topic that is going to come up a lot.
And now for the amateur underdog
That being said, amateur historians can bring something else to the table: a different viewpoint. I found an April 2012 article from the 2012 President of American Historical Association who wrote that he had found that the best way to introduce young people to history is to present the question “How did things get to be this way?” It seems as though amateur historians are more likely to start from this question, whereas a professional history outside of how it affects our present world.
Also, I think amateur historians are more likely to come from diverse backgrounds. They bring an interest in topics that were previously ignored or overlooked by traditional historians. Amateur (and enthusiast) historians encourage all of us to go back and look at the little guy or woman who made the big guys possible. To be fair, amateur historians are not the only ones pushing this shift. But I think they have helped it along.
Something About History Repeating Itself
And we have circled back again to the questions I asked earlier about why we study history or care about what happened in the past. It helps us understand the impact of the past, and how it has made us who we are today.
And historians, both amateur and professional, help us ask and answer these questions of the past.
A note on this post’s sources and citations:
Where possible, direct links to external sources and resources are provided. (The number of bookmarks and tabs I have open right now…hoo boy.)
I am using the Chicago Manual of Style to cite any referenced books. This style is new to me, so there may be some unintentional mistakes and/or inconsistencies. I will do my best to update and improve as I learn.
See the Works Cited page for a complete list of articles and books referenced in this post.
Am I an amateur or professional historian?
At the moment, neither. I consider myself to be a history enthusiast. One of my ulterior motives for starting this blog is to learn about what it means to be an amateur and professional historian, and sort of “move up the ranks” as I learn more. I hope to one day be a published (and therefore, professional) historian.
What’s next?
My first Curiosity Curio post will be ready next week! It will be out by 27 October 2022.
Then it’s time to go to the library.
