Historians - Test

The post is dated 2011, but is actually from 8/28/21

Just a bit of fun at their expense.  I listen to history podcasts and read professional historians from time to time.  They put a fair bit of effort into reminding me that any historical document or report should be read in terms of "who gets to speak." Whoever is writing the account is likely to come from a very restricted circle of who has learned to write, and who is not censored or destroyed within their society. It is the expanded version of "the winners write the histories."

All quite true.  The inscriptions on stelae represent what the ruler wants the people or posterity to believe happened, not necessarily what did happen. Priests writing summaries of the year's events in their annals are likely to stress things that affected the church and take the church's side in quarrels. Women were able to express their views of things far less often. 

What I have never heard an historian mention is that they are the ones who get to speak now. I imagine someone has thought of this and it does make the rounds as a repeated caution among them.  Yet I have never seen any evidence in the content that they hold this thought before them as they contemplate. Academic historians are a selected group with consistent political and cultural beliefs, who draw their wages from similar sources, and have been vetted for their attitudes. I am recalling one who told me he could not take on the dissertation he would like because it would never be approved these days. Some politically correct hook (he did find one he was not unhappy with) must be a major focus. Environment, minority ethnicity, economic oppression, gender. 

It is the elephant in the room when discussing history.

Which reminds me:  We should be reluctant to draw parallels between events from the past and out own, because we will be self-serving.  This is especially true of professional historians, who will identify many significant objects in the room and their curious properties, most of which are unnoticed by the amateur, all the while ignoring their pet elephant. It is just a matter of playing chess against oneself. However complicated the game and however much we improve, we can guarantee the victory to one side or the other at will. And we do.