Still More Noted

Brian Ulrich - 6/8/2006

I thought the opening was for the modern period. That could be 19th and 20th centuries.

Manan Ahmed - 6/8/2006

"Given this, which is undeniably true (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/cv.htm); with Cole's modern "scholarship" consisting mostly of quasi-political writings on near-contemporary events)"

No. It is not undeniably true. It is undeniably false. He has one book on Baha'is out of 6. And unless you have read his "scholarship" and know that it is "quasi-political on near-contemporary events" [whatever THAT means], you shouldn't jump to undeniable conclusions.

Robert KC Johnson - 6/8/2006

Perhaps, then, the next time Yale has a senior opening in 18th and 19th century US history, I'll apply--I could just about double my current salary. After all, according to the Cole precedent, the History Department doesn't seem to think that the era of research expertise needs to really correspond to the era of the job opening, as long as the scholar is dealing with the same region.

As a Harvard grad, I know Yale has its problems, but though I realize New Haven isn't the greatest place in the world to live, I had always thought that a university that aspires to elite status could at least attract a few candidates whose teaching and research interests coincided, especially for a topic as important to contemporary Americans as the 20th century Middle East. Apparently not.

David Silbey - 6/8/2006

You didn't disappoint me, Dr. Johnson. I had expected you to condemn it in the abstract while still finding a way to wiggle out of actually condemning the Cole situation. That's exactly what you did.

Robert KC Johnson - 6/8/2006

Sorry to disappoint you, David. Collegiality is an inherently illegitimate concept that has no place in personnel decisions for higher education, either as a sole factor or a contributing factor.

I noticed another interesting element from the Jewish Week piece.

--"According to the source, most of Cole’s scholarship pertains to the Baha’i faith and is limited to the 18th and 19th centuries, a liability for a professor charged with teaching about the contemporary Middle East."

Given this, which is undeniably true (http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/cv.htm); with Cole's modern "scholarship" consisting mostly of quasi-political writings on near-contemporary events), how could the Yale History Department (or at least 13 of its 23 senior members) have considered Cole the most qualified candidate for a position in modern Middle Eastern history, which is traditionally defined as the post-Ottoman era?

As I raised in my discussion with Ralph yesterday, I see no reason to assume that the decision in the History Department was oriented around academic standards, and the decision of the senior appointments committee was politicized. That History would have extended an offer to someone whose scholarship falls almost totally outside the era for which he was applying would, it seems to me, raise strong questions about the appropriateness of the decision.

David Silbey - 6/8/2006

"My colleague, KC Johnson, will no doubt be disturbed that the question of "collegiality" was apparently raised as an issue"

He'll find a reason not to be.

Jonathan Dresner - 6/8/2006

In fundamental ways the cultural-anecdotal history of Herodotus, the political-structural history of Thucydides, and
the various forms of “national” history of Livy, Josephus, and Eusebius set the terms of debate, providing a set of languages that define, in Gadamer’s terms, a horizon of understanding and meaning in which
historians down to the present still operate.