I was visiting Kevin’s blog and noticed a post concerning CLIOPATRIA’s top 80, or “recommended” history blogs. It sounded great, so I checked it out.
According to Ralph E. Luker, “there is a group of history blogs that seem to me to be central to history blogging.” Excellent, “central” to history blogging. This is what I needed.
So I started clicking on the links and indeed found some gems: Cabinet of Wonders, Public Historian, and maybe one or two more that I was not already aware of.
But there were some blogs that seemed more “political commentary” in their focus, or not even history blogs at all, see: Talking Points, Ghost in the Machine, Hugo Schwyzer, Altercation, Chapati Mystery, Politics & Letters and the list could go on… also of note, all lean way left. Interesting!
(UPDATE: Eunomia was accidentally listed as a “left” blog, obviously it is not. Durham-in-Wonderland was listed as well, and probably should not have been. I removed them, thanks to Luker for pointing that out. Let me be clear, right or left, I don’t care, they do not belong on a history blog list.)
There were some that sounded so promising! For example, a historian’s craft, (which looks potentially good!), but unfortunately it had only a handful of posts since May as the blogger was in the midst of a PhD Thesis I think. And still this one, Historiblogography, but it was a huge disappointment as well with posts, such as, “anal scars consistent with sexual trauma,” (this is the title of the post) which was followed by a fine choice of the best the English language has to offer.
History blogs at their best, according to Ralph E. Luker.
I hope next time Luker can offer a list with a little more “history” in it. When you say you have a list of “history” blogs, I want history to be the focus. Politics and commentary is fine, so long as there is a significant history element to the blog.
There are some blogs that handle politics and history well, like Civil War Memory for example. Kevin is not shy when it comes to his political views (many of which I disagree with), but he also has 1,2 and sometimes more history focused posts almost daily!
So I have some replacements for the above blogs (if I have more time I will expand later):
History’s Mysteries
Boston 1775
A Student of History
wig-wags
18th Century Reading Room
U.S. History Blog
Today’s History Lesson
TOCWOC
(To save you a comment: yes, some of you might be thinking this is just sour grapes as blog4history was not on the list. Sure it is always cool when someone gives you a hand. And yes, of late I have been very opinionated towards how our politicians are handling the current energy crisis. So this could be looked at as a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. So be it.)
Chris, Thanks for the response. I disagree with you in several ways, as you’ll see in today’s post at Cliopatria, but I appreciate your calling to my attention History’s Mysteries and Today’s History Lesson, which I’ll add to Cliopatria’s History Blogroll.
Mr. Luker, I wouldn’t expect anything less than a defense of your list. Just as I stand by my comments you will of course stand by yours. Kind Regards.
For Mr. Luker’s response: http://hnn.us/blogs/2.html
I do apologize as I should have notified him immediately of my post so he could reply. I did intend to today. However, I am glad someone notified him and seems to have done so pretty quickly!
C
Hi, I want to thank you so much for being included in your top history sites. I never even heard of the HNN Cliopatria’s history list before, so I’m really flattered that you would even consider me to be included. I must say that I think you should be included on that list also, Your site is one of my favorite history sites.
Thanks again!
Thanks for listing Boston 1775 among your possibilities.
I think there’s a higher interest in/tolerance for discussions of modern politics and the political implications of historical study on academic blogs than on those from non-academic historians. On the other hand, I don’t think any approach is truly free of politics.
Chris, It’s one thing to stand by your own comments when they are defensible *opinion*. It’s quite a different thing when the opinion is obviously uninformed. Daniel Larison’s Eunomia is maintained on American Conservative Magazine‘s website. It hardly “leans way left”. In fact, it leans way right. KC Johnson and his Durham-in-Wonder have repeatedly been attacked from the Left — never to my knowledge from the Right. The point is that some of your generalizations are just uninformed. There’s no virtue in standing by those.
Thanks very much for the compliment. JM
Ralph, I see what you’re saying, those TWO I listed there were indeed not left political blogs. I misspoke, after reading/looking through 80 blogs.
You’re missing my main point, Ralph.
So are you saying that… Historiblogography, Talking Points, Ghost in the Machine, Hugo Schwyzer, Altercation, Chapati Mystery, Politics & Letters… are good history blogs? (Nothing against these blogs, they’re fine blogs.) But like you said, are they “central” to history blogging?
You know at this point we can debate it all day. I frankly do not know how you defend several if not many blogs you list at being “central.”
But, yes, keep harping I am “uninformed.” Fine, TWO, I got it wrong on TWO. Should I list two more that are left political blogs to replace those!?
J. L. Bell, I think you’re right. Academia is a different world. Good or bad, not saying either.
The reason I do not feel mixing politics and history is good, well, let me just refer to Rebecca West who put it best: when politics comes in the door, truth flies out the window…
C
Chris,
I came to this discussion a little late. Thanks though for mentioning my blog as a possible replacement to the more politically centered blogs on the Cliopatria list.
Brett
Well, speaking for my own inclusion (Ghost in the Machine) on the list (for which I’m quite grateful to Ralph Luker), I’m guessing it may in part have something to do with the fact that I’ve been doing it longer than anyone else (since Nov. ’99, i.e. six years longer than you — see also: http://www.historians.org/perspectives/issues/2005/0505/0505tec1.cfm)
If your problem with my blog is that I don’t post enough about US history, i’d refer you to the GitM history archives (http://www.ghostinthemachine.net/cat_history.html), the history book reviews subsite (http://www.kevincmurphy.com/orals.html), and/or the continuing discussion on progressivism at GitM, which I’ve partially collated at http://www.smallrrepublic.com.
If your problem with my blog is that it comments on current affairs from the left, well tough.
In any case, since I’ve never seen your referrer in my stats before, I have to presume that you don’t actually read my site at all, and just swung through to make your point. In which case, how you would know whether i deserved to be listed or not?
Most continuing visitors would know that I’ve always posted on politics and film as well as history, and not judge the site solely by the most recent updates.
At any rate, picking a fight with a blog-list you’re not on is an old and venerable tactic for raising the hits on an unread website. I’d begrudge you the cheap tactic, if I hadn’t once did the same thing, back in February-March 2000. So, good luck with that.
Kevin, please read my post AGAIN! I have nothing against your blog, I have something against the list you were on as being described as “central” to “history” blogging. I disagree it is such a list. It is a list of some history blogs, some political commentary, and some I could not identify.
That is all! I’m sure your blog is a fine blog. Post all the current events you want. It’s your blog. I only visited it once, from that list.
Congrats on your success
Chris, Let me approach the politics/history issue from a different angle: if you wanted to write a paper about the politics of Rebecca West, you’d have what she wrote — including any publications about historical subjects — as primary sources. Right? You wouldn’t ignore them because of what she said about politics and history, would you? If you ignored her written work as evidence for your subject, you’d have just done a terrible research job. In other words, it’s an illusion to think that we set aside our identity — our gender, social class, ethnicity, religion, and politics — when we write history. Writing history is a process of making choices about what is important, what is interesting, what makes a difference, etc. You surely don’t think that your being an American has no decisive influence on the fact that you decide to blog about the American Civil War. The choice to blog about the Civil War is, already, in many ways a political decision.
Ralph I appreciate this last post. It’s almost impossible to disagree with you on your examples: Rebecca West, and Civil War blogging as a “choice.” Of course, politics is a huge part of historical evaluation or investigation when looking into the past. I am speaking of political commentary of the here and now and those who are preoccupied with politics of today are really not running a history blog. When we speak of politics today, then we are acting as political commentators living in the here and now. Also, I think those who cannot separate themselves from today when they write about history are not historians at all in the pure sense of it.
I discuss this in my recent post/review: “The Purpose of the Past: Reflections on the Uses of History”
http://www.blog4history.com/?p=378
Anyway, very good post and I appreciate you coming back and following up. If you want to post a follow-up to this I will not respond in order to give you a final say as this whole series of correspondences was my doing. Kind Regards, C,,
This debate is very interesting but rather too USA-centred. Figures like Ralph Luker are totally unknown in Europe and beyond. Who is he to make judgements on the merits of so many blogs? In any case, isn’t there far too much ‘political correctness’ and far too much concentration on issues of gender and race in his choices? What interests him is not necessarily interesting to others who do not share his priorities.
thanks for the kudos to my blog… the feeling’s mutual… i’ll have to check out the list…