Friday, February 10, 2006

Military History and the Academy

Over at Big Tent Extra Tom has a must read piece in defense of military history. Or, to be more precise, he has a clarion call to military historians to stop apologizing and explaining away what, other historians' ignorance to the contrary, is a vibrant field. I'm as guilty as anyone of having certain stereotypes about military history (and, as an aside to his aside, I would disagree with Tom when he asserts that the most important reasons for success or failure in Iraq will be military; I firmly believe that they will be diplomatic or political). And I certainly pick and choose my emphases when I teach (you have to cherrypick from any subdiscipline in a survey or period-driven class) and in my work on, say, terrorism. That said, Tom's piece really belongs in Perspectives or the OAH newsletter. Read it.

4 comments:

  1. Awww shucks. Thanks.

    I know what you mean about the Iraq line. I was pretty torn when I wrote it. I suppose what I mean is that military historians will sort out how the fighting of the war in Iraq actually relates or does not relate to success and failure. If you know what I mean.

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's exactly the kind of response I'd expect fron one of you guns and trumpets military historians. Why don't you guys update your approach? Apologize now!

    ReplyDelete