If the Society for Military History leadership won’t adopt a strategic plan to build the field, we may as well do it ourselves. For details, click the logo.
Flash presentation by Stephanie Wiseman
Created by OnePlusYou
-
A Library of Military History Essentials
(Under Construction)
Mark's Books
Iraq Body Count
Iraq Coalition
Casualty Count
3 Comments
This seems like a great idea. I like that you are planning on being pro-active and not just recording what has or hasn’t happened to the field.
Comments re the similar introductory post at Cliopatria
by Kurt Niehaus on October 6, 2006 at 1:07 PM
This sounds like a great idea. Not just discussing whether or not military history is becoming defunct, but actively making sure it doesn’t happen.
by Dan Todman on October 6, 2006 at 3:04 PM
I’d like to strongly support Mark’s call for military historians to think about how they can work together and what their aims should be. I would add that we need to do this not primarily for selfish reasons of growing the field, but rather because we offer a key means of understanding a significant aspect of the past. History as a whole benefits from us being part of the mainstream. Within my own field, recent rapprochement between cultural and military historians of the First World War has immeasurably improved the work of both.
Much recent debate has picked up on a strong discourse within the academy without offering much real analysis of complexity and variation or any plan for a way forward. Historians as a whole are much better at individual than communal action, by inclination and experience. Even if some of us feel that there is little cause to fear for the future of military history, we do need to think positively about where we are and where we might be going. If there is a challenge, we will be better placed to meet it. If the challenge is primarily to recognise what is going right and to build on it, we will take those chances rather than ghetto-ising ourselves.
I suspect that historians, military and otherwise, will react to Mark’s efforts in a wide range of ways, not all of them positive. Please do not let those reactions form a barrier to engagement. Above all, get behind Mark’s belief that critical analysis and action are better responses than either passivity or complacency.
by Jaron M. Bernstein on October 6, 2006 at 9:34 PM
I strongly endorse this idea. The only way to grow the field is to reach out and actively try to make a difference.
by Robert Chisholm on October 6, 2006 at 10:21 PM
It’s high time those of us in academia with an interest in military history began to do something other than lament how lonely it all seems. But if we are going to mobilize, what do we do? Mark Grimsley has proposed several ideas in the past, but no one appears willing to take him up on them. Who will make the case to college administrations for campaigns to endow chairs? Let’s step up ladies and gentlemen. Prepare those catchy presentations for your VP of Development.
There is clearly a market for nuts and bolts military history among both students and the public. Can military history be integrated into other classes (World History springs to mind as an obvious candidate) in a way that shows off its relevance to other fields? I’m going off to a regional World History Association teaching workshop in hopes of beginning just this.
Others have commented in this ongoing exchange initiated by Mark about how military history has shaped the way historians treat their own fields (ante- and post-bellum periodization, etc.). Well then, let’s make the case at conferences that knowledge of the nuts and bolts is important to understanding how war shaped those times.
Per ardua ad astra, folks.
Rob Chisholm
Columbia Basin College
Comment re cross-post at Civil Warriors:
Dave Powell wrote:
Mark,
Anything a non-academic can do?
Dave Powell
Mark G. wrote:
Actually, you just did it. In the (very) short run, a public show of support for this initiative is welcome. I hope that everyone who thinks this is a good idea will say so, either here, on Blog Them Out of the Stone Age, or Cliopatria.
I’ve spoken with two university development officers this week, and although this vision extends well beyond Ohio State, they have been generous with ideas and suggestions. Within a few days I expect to start placing specific ideas on the MHF web site, and I will include ways that non-academics as well as academics can help.
Eric Wittenberg wrote:
Mark,
Count me in, too.
Eric