More Nonsense About Military History From National Review Online
Cross-posted from Blog Them Out of the Stone Age
My new amigo, John J. Miller, is still grasping at straws to defend his misinformed -- to put it kindly -- article on the demise of academic military history.
In NRO's Phi Beta Cons on September 29, he trumpets the arrival of "Reinforcements":
From a military-history professor:
Your article on the demise of military history as a discipline is right on the mark, except it doesn't go far enough. Grimsley seems blinded by the fact that Ohio State has about the only viable program at a first tier school. Duke and UNC are only shadows of their former selves. Senior military historians are not being replaced and once vibrant programs are dying or are already dead...
Much of the rest of the profession simply loathes military history and has little respect for those who toil in the field.
Note if you please the near complete lack of specifics, including even the name of the military historian who wrote this drivel. The sole exception is the mention of the Duke-UNC program, and here the anonymous military historian is dead wrong.
Duke and UNC are only shadows of their former selves.
What's this guy been smoking?
The UNC military history web site notes the existence of a collaborative military history program with Duke and lists the names of SIXTEEN faculty members who are either full-time military historians (six) or historians with an interest in specific wars (e.g., the War for American Independence and the American Civil War) or military affairs more broadly.