Introducing The Military History Foundation

by Cliopatria

In the wake of John J. Miller's National Review Online article "Sounding Taps," in which so many senior military historians essentially endorsed the thesis that academic military history was all but defunct, I've run out of patience. Plainly a number of senior figures in the field would rather wring their hands in despair than do the work of developing a strategic plan to grow the field. Well, if nobody else will do it, I'll give it a go myself.

I've created a new domain, militaryhistoryfoundation.org, and have begun to generate pages dealing with commentary on the state of the field and resources for building the field, especially in the realm of fund-raising. I've already interviewed one Ohio State development officer to begin learning to ropes; I meet with another this afternoon.

If it seems pretentious to pursue such an undertaking, you'll get no argument from me. But I'd rather be considered pretentious than passive. I figure at a minimum I can get the ball rolling.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Robert Chisholm - 10/7/2006

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

Jaron M. Bernstein - 10/7/2006

I strongly endorse this idea. The only way to grow the field is to reach out and actively try to make a difference.

Dan Todman - 10/6/2006

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.

Kurt Niehaus - 10/6/2006

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.