History is rarely a strict chronicle of events, often it is a story woven into many other stories. This blog is the thoughts about History and Museum work, from a young historian.
One of the most irksome
issues in the world of history is the dreaded “uncited fact!” (dun dun dun dun!)
This issue is usually made manifest in freshman history papers that use a quote
or discuss an event that one knows one has read but can’t remember where, so
one just adds it to your paper and hopes for the best.
This problem is the most
widely revealed on the internet where the average person can post anything they
want (like myself and this blog). The most frustrating example was when I was
talking to a gentleman about Woodrow Wilson and he insisted that Woodrow Wilson
was part of the KKK. Now don’t get me
wrong Woodrow Wilson was not a bright shining star when it came to civil rights,
in fact by most standards (if not all) he would be considered a racist. That
being said there is no evidence that I have found that says Wilson was a member
of the KKK and I told this gentleman so. The gentleman then insisted that he
had proof and pulled up a web site riddled with ads with the title “15
presidents you didn’t know were in the KKK.”
I enjoy clickbait articles as much as the next guy (that’s a lie I
really hate clickbait). This is not
evidence, especially when consider that it is completely uncited! It did not
tell you where they got there evidence.
The gentleman then said that history was just stories told from one
person to the next and apparently moved on with his life. History has to be corroborated with evidence
so we as a people can know what truly happened in the past.
I was reminded of this
issue of uncited-ness when I posted a tweet regarding Christmas trees. I have been reading up on the history of some
Christmas traditions and I could not remember exactly where I had read that
only 1 in 5 Americans owned Christmas trees in the late nineteenth century. So, I ended the tweet with
#uncitedfacts. I propose that every time
you find yourself trolling the internet and you find that I put #uncitedfacts,
you should double check the fact in question. Provide a source to either support or dismiss
the fact that I post. As a professor of
mine once said, “History is a conversation,” history should be discussed,
debated but most importantly history should be true.
By the way, It was 1900 that 1 in 5 Americans had a Christmas tree (I still don't have a citation for that). Checkout the Historian Twitter account @historianforeva or the Historian Facebook page at www.facebook.com/Historianforeva
Like many, my wife and I
have a tradition of carving pumpkins in the month of October. This year we decided to have a presidential
theme to our endeavors, so I decided to carve James Monroe and my wife carved
Thomas Jefferson. I think they turned
out pretty good!
Have a Happy Historical Halloween! If you carve a pumpkin like a president or visit a historical ghost tour share your pics and stories on Facebook, twitter or in the comments below.
This post is talk about some odds and ends, I want to
thank everyone who has read my blog and continues to read it, to explain a
comment I got and to shamelessly plug some other projects that I am working
on. First off "The Weaving
Chronicle" has just reached over 2000 views! This may not seem like much,
but it is a pretty big milestone for me as a young historian and writer. So
thank you to all of you read and support my blog. An equally big milestone, is
that I had my first comment that challenged a statement I made in a post! I
have had comments posted by friends who offered encouragement (very grateful
for those too)! When I saw that I had a comment, I had to check it right
away! And when I read it, my heart sank
a little bit but then I reminded myself that criticism was better than silence
and the author was not rude or abusive. So I thanked the commenter and
did a mental fist pump at actually having interest in my blog posts. Here
is the comment in full.
I have to say that, bearing in mind the examples that you
gave, implying that "walls actually have a poor success rate
throughout history" is not entirely substantiated. Walls are physical
barriers intended to keep people (and other critters) out or in. The Great Wall
of China did eventually fail, but it also held back scores of other previous
invaders. The Maginot Line failed as a wall because it was not complete; the
lack of end points and gaps made it more of nuisance than an actual physical
barrier. The other examples (the Berlin Wall and the Korean Border) worked
splendidly for their intended primary and secondary purposes: secondary to keep
people out, primary to keep people IN. If their intent was solely political in
nature, I would agree that they failed in compelling sympathy toward their
respective causes, but as physical barriers they were quite effective.
The author makes some good points.
Criticisms and rebuttals are important to the
study of history, as a professor once said “History is a conversation.” History
is not hear say, repeating whatever you have been told. It is a back and forth,
trying to understand the past better. Here
are my reasons for maintaining my opinion:
The Great Wall of China did stand for many years
before the Mongols conquered China and established the Yuan Dynasty but the
point is the wall did fail.
The Maginot Line did not fail because it was
unfinished, it failed because it was an outdated stratagem against a superior
form of warfare.
The Berlin Wall did its job very well however there
are stories of people still getting passed that obstacle (see the link http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/11/07/berlin-wall-escape-stories_n_6090602.html).
That being said the reason it was so successful is the same reason why the 38th
parallel is so successful because of men, mines (there were no mines in Berlin
that I know of) and machine-guns. I for one would not want to see such a
structure raised in Texas. My point is that walls have failed over the
years and will continue to fail. Those that have done their job well, is not
because the wall was too high or thick but because of the threat of force
against those who try to cross it. From ancient China around the globe and to
modern Korea. A wall will not protect the United States nor make it great.
I am very grateful to "unknown" for the
comment and please continue to comment, let me know where I missed it, nailed
it or if you have an idea for me to write about let me know.
Here is the shameless plug. If you like what you
see here, like me on face book https://www.facebook.com/Historianforeva/?view_public_for=299851710031447
and follow me on twitter https://twitter.com/Historianforeva
I and some friends of mine are working on a project
called Popstorian! It talks about the history of film, music, comic books and
all things pop-culture-ish. You can like the Facebook page here https://www.facebook.com/PopStorian/?view_public_for=1423293254642909
and follow our twitter here, https://twitter.com/PopStorian!
I don’t normally use this blog for political messages
but this is the most biased piece I have ever written on this blog. For the sake of full disclosure I am a
Conservative Christian Republican. And
to be honest I don’t like Trump as a presidential candidate for a number of
reasons. The most hilarious of his
tirades is probably how he is going to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.
What is even more hilarious (in a sad sort of way) is that people believe this
could keep America safe or "Make America Great Again!" Walls actually have a poor success rate throughout history. That being said how
about a brief history of border walls!
The Walls of Jericho:
[About 1400 BC] the children of Israel have just
finished wandering the wilderness for forty years and begin their invasion of
the holy land. When they encounter Jericho.
“2 Then the Lord said to Joshua, “See,
I have delivered Jericho into your hands, along with its king and it’s
fighting men. 3 March around the city once with all the armed men. Do
this for six days. 4 Have seven priests carry trumpets of rams’ horns in
front of the ark. On the seventh day, march around the city seven times, with
the priests blowing the trumpets. 5 When you hear them sound a long
blast on the trumpets, have the whole army give a loud shout; then
the wall of the city will collapse and the army will go up, everyone straight
in.” Joshua 6:2-5
Ok! I know someone is crying foul here, “that’s not
history! That’s Bible stuff!” You’re right!
I did say I am a Christian. The debate of the historical validity of the
Bible can wait. (God helped them anyway.)
The Great Wall of China:
From the 3rd century BC to the 17th century AD approximately
2000 years, a little project called the Great Wall of China was being built and
rebuilt! Now that name may seem a little pretentious but here are a few facts
curtesy of Wikipedia, the wall spans over 5,500 miles, about 40 feet thick and
30-40 ft. high. It was designed to keep out invaders, barbarians, bandits, you
name it. In about 1206 AD (when the wall
was a mere 3,100 miles long) Genghis Khan invaded and sacked most of
China. His son Kublai came back finished
the job by establishing the Yuan Dynasty.
[http://www.history.com/topics/great-wall-of-china]
Maginot Line:
Fast forward to the twentieth century after the First
World War the French built a network of forts and tunnels along the Rhine River
all the way to the Italian border. This of course was stop any future
incursions by the Germans. In May 1940,
the German army bypassed the Maginot Line in the famous blitzkrieg taking
France in about a month. To the line’s
credit it would not be taken until June 1940 around the same time as when Paris
fell. [http://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/maginot-line]
The Berlin Wall:
In 1961, Germany was split into two countries. East
Germany, which was communist and allied with the Soviet Union. Then there was
West Germany who was allied to the western nations. To stem the flow of emigration from East
Germany to the West, the East German government began building a wall that
literally cut Berlin in half. The wall was called, “Antifascistischer
Schutzwall” meaning anti-fascist wall. Also known as the Berlin Wall. The wall stood for 28 years and to this day
it is seen as a symbol of repression. [http://www.history.com/topics/cold-war/berlin-wall]
“Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this
gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!” – Ronald Reagan (http://millercenter.org/president/reagan/speeches/speech-3415)
The Korean Border:
There is yet one more wall that makes this list. A wall that is a left over an unresolved
conflict, a symbol of a never ending war.
Along the thirty-eighth parallel that separates North and South Korea,
the Korean Demilitarization Zone (DMZ). A border that is 2.5 miles long and is
constantly guarded. As National Geographic stated “anyone trying to cross the
MDL (Military Demarcation Line) would likely be shot.” (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/features/world/asia/north-korea/dmz-text/1)
Now most people probably have heard of at least one
and probably all of these examples, what the study of history does is take that
knowledge of a few facts and teaches us of building an argument. A wall isn’t going to keep out terrorists or
anyone who really wants to get into the United States. Whenever I hear someone quote Mr. Trump about
how he is going to build a wall on the Mexican border it reminds me just how
much we need to teach history. A wall
won’t keep out terrorists, drugs, or even illegal immigrants. Walls are inept at keeping out invaders,
symbols of tyranny and represent unending war.
On our third and final day in Washington DC my wife
and I managed to find two extremes to a problem in the museum world. We visited the National Archives! Yes, I
finally was able to see the location of the presidential papers of Woodrow
Wilson (although I did not actually see any of his papers). Leah and I
were awed to see the Bill of Rights, the Declaration of Independence and of
course the Constitution. However, there was absolutely NO photography allowed.
Photography can be both the best friend to the museum and their greatest foe.
Particularly flash photography.
The National Archives had a no photography policy and
in the rooms where the Constitution was held they had very soft lighting (just
light enough so you wouldn’t trip). This
was explained by security guards and a number of signs that the bright lights
of a camera’s flash or a few thousand flashes would damage the documents in
question. If one doubted this all they would have to do is simply look at the
Constitution and see the faded words that years of being proudly displayed in
the sun. As I started writing this post
I wanted to submit some sources so people could see that the no photography rule
was not a gimmick to get visitors to buy more post cards (actually I don’t
remember seeing any post cards in the gift shop). It was actually a little harder that I would
have thought because google was full of blog posts that said such rules were
just scams and it didn’t matter if you used flash or not (most of these posts
were referring to art work and not historical documents). In order to protect historical artifacts
curators must control as many environmental factors as they can, that is why
flash photography is often prohibited, why artifact cases have environmental
controls to control the temperature are installed. Simple things like heat, light and even air
can damage a large array of items including paper, ink, paints, dyes, metals,
fabrics and leather products (oxygen is super corrosive, if I were more
science-y I would tell you how that works but I’m not). These are some of the articles I looked up:
The Archives offered one extreme of the no photography
rule while my and Leah’s next stop offered the exact opposite extreme. We
visited Madame Tussaud's Wax Museum in Washington DC, where you are free take
as many pictures as you like. The person who sold us our tickets actually
told to "take lots of pictures." I confess this was the best part for me
because I got to be a little silly and then share all my pictures on social
media. Now, I know what you’re thinking
"Madame Tussaud's is not a historical museum!" Actually, it has
a very long history of entertaining tourist with 23 locations all over the
world and the 24th to open in New Delhi next year. But I'm more concerned about
the Wax museum as an education tool for American History. The Washington
DC location contains wax figures of all 44 presidents as well as civil rights
activists Martin Luther King, Malcom X and Rosa Parks. It also allowed for me
and Leah to take pictures with a couple of our favorite musicians.
It was about
the time I was giving Leah a piece of presidential trivia about William Howard
Taft that I realized that walking through a room with life sized models of
these historical figures was just as educational as any of the museums we had
visited previously. I have been asked
several times, “if I could have lunch with any historical figure who would that
be?” Leah and I had the next best thing, “if you could take a selfie with a
historical figure who would that be?”
History can be a lot of fun.
I'm a historian and a museum employee, so of course
museums are fantastic to me but let’s face it there are those who are less
nerdy than I, or at least nerdy in different ways. Which means fun has to
be in the equation, especially if a museum wants to stay open. Part of the fun of any road trip is the
pictures, for a museum this can become a conundrum, museums must protect
artifacts like papers, photos, fabrics and leathers, all materials that can be
damaged by flash photography over time. But,
in the world of Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram pics are a must for any trip. Museums
today have to display a balance to stay relevant (open and operating), they
must protect their artifacts and make it fun for visitors.
On the second day of our Washington excursion we
visited an old friend, saw the Holocaust Museum, the Smithsonian’s Museum of
American History and very briefly took a look at the National Carousel (it was
broken so we could not take a ride). But
the highlight of day two, for me, was The Holocaust Museum! I loved the holocaust
museum. It was the most interesting presentation of any museum I have gone
into. They were beta testing an interactive
exhibit, the building’s design was to give the impression of a 1930’s European city,
and throughout the museum they encouraged guests to respond to what they were
seeing.
To be honest, I was not that excited to see the
Holocaust Museum, it was my wife who really wanted to visit the Holocaust
museum. I feel a sadness for the millions
of lives lost during the Nazis’ reign. I had a hard time getting through
Elie Weisel’s Night let alone an entire museum. However, as I walked through the exhibits I
was struck by the presentation, it was not merely facts and numbers that they
tried to convey, it was the emotion of it all.
Firsthand accounts and filmed interviews were everywhere. They not only had exhibits about the Jewish
holocaust but also the Cambodian genocide, and an exhibit on the war in Syria
and refugees from that conflict. I began
to think it is rather like traveling through hell. Some have described
heaven as a place where one is united with passed loved ones and reminded of
happy times. What if hell were the opposite and one must go through the most heinous
acts humans have done (That definition of hell is not supported by any Biblical
text by the way)? But it did strike me that is what the exhibits are supposed
to do, they are meant to hit you on an emotional level. Which brings up an
interesting question, are they giving an honest interpretation of history? Is
this form of emotional history a legitimate way to present what happened? Food for thought (A thought that I am still
mulling over)!
By far my favorite exhibit was the interactive exhibit! A beta testing program that features an image
of a holocaust survivor by the name of Pinchas Gutter. Mr. Gutter was interviewed 6 hours a day for
a week and was asked 1200 questions. His
answers were downloaded into a computer so that patrons could ask him any
question and he could answer as if he were sitting right there in front of you,
much like how Siri on your IPhone would answer you back. According to the
docent this exhibit is merely the beta prototype and in the future the Shoah
foundation will develop a dozen digital survivors so that these survivors could
tell their stories for generations to come.
I also loved how the Holocaust Museum encouraged
guests to interact and react to the museum. In one corner, the museum had three
terminals available so that guests could post their thoughts about the museum. Yet another way the museum attempts to not
only see the museum but to participate in the museum (an example that other
museums would be wise to follow). Even
the museum’s official guidebook says "This museum is not an answer. It is
a question." It requests guests to reflect and react to the concept of
genocide. What if all history museums asked their patrons to not simply accumulate
knowledge but use that knowledge to make the world better.
The Holocaust Museum brought up many different
emotions for me, the powerful message of stopping future genocides made feel
sad yet hopeful. The museum’s use of the high tech digital survivor and the way
they used oral history and artworks in many of its exhibits made me believe
that this was a museum to be emulated.
The Holocaust Museum is the museum of the future.
How did you feel when visiting the Holocaust Museum? What is your favorite museum ever? What do you think of the concept of emotional history? Write your experiences and thoughts in the comments below!
Last weekend my wife and I celebrated our second
wedding anniversary by taking a trip to the Mecca of school field trips,
Washington D.C. First, I would like to say Leah and I had a blast! Second, it
started off rocky. Leah and I woke up at about 5am (because we are nerds
and we were super excited) so we could make it to the Metro by 7 and to the
first stop by 9. I feel like I should also tell you that I am a pretty big fan
of Woodrow Wilson, shout out to Woodrow Wilson Presidential Library (:http://www.woodrowwilson.org/)
And I am kind of cheap so instead of buying breakfast at the hotel we decided
to get something on the way (like McDonald’s). There was no fast food joints
between the Metro station and our first stop (what kind of city doesn’t have
McDonald’s on every corner)! That first stop was the Library of Congress!
The location of Woodrow Wilson’s presidential papers (or so I thought).
Did I mention it was raining this whole time as well? Hungary and soaking
wet we toured the Library of Congress. The Library of Congress is beautiful! If
you have a chance to go…do it! Here are a few pictures of what we saw.
By the way Woodrow Wilson’s presidential papers are
actually in the National Archives not in the Library of Congress (The Library
has the books and some amazing artifacts but it is the Archives that maintain
the historical documents). We did eventually eat by the way. Refreshed, we
proceeded to our second stop.
The Woodrow Wilson House on S Street (http://www.woodrowwilsonhouse.org/).
This is a beautiful house near embassy row. It is also the house that
Woodrow Wilson spent his last days in. Here are a few fun facts about
Woodrow Wilson and his family! Did you know that Woodrow Wilson loved the
movies? He famously (or notoriously) screened the first movie seen at the White
House which was D. W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation. After he left office,
Woodrow Wilson was presented with a Vitascope (old movie projector) by movie
star Douglas Fairbanks Sr. Woodrow Wilson would sit and watch movies in his
study. Edith Wilson (Woodrow’s second wife) was very proud of her
heritage. She hung portraits of her parents (like the rest of us) in the hall
but she also claimed to be a direct decedent of Pocahontas.
It was pouring down rain again, and we decided to go
to our next stop, the National Cathedral! Another fun fact: Woodrow Wilson is
the only president to be buried in Washington D.C. He was offered a place
at Arlington Cemetery but Edith refused because she was a southern lady.
(Arlington was Robert E. Lee’s old family estate it was confiscated during the
Civil War and made cemetery for fallen Union soldiers).
The National Cathedral became Woodrow Wilson’s final
resting place (I hope you see the theme here).
It was wet, cold, and cloudy all day long, and above
all the cathedral is about ten blocks from the metro station. And so the
march began! Half way there I began to remember every forced march in
history, from Napoleon's campaign in Russia to the trail of tears. I developed
a blister (side note: Chucks are not the right kind of shoe for a city hike). I
began to imagine myself in General Washington's army wintering at Valley Forge
(even though it was May and seventy degrees). As tired as I felt, I could
not complain, it was my idea to go in the first place. Also, my amazing
wife (who is six months pregnant with our first child) walked the whole way
with me. She shall be forever known as Momma Trooper! When we
turned the corner and caught our first glimpse of the cathedral, it was like
the heavens opened up and the Angels started to sing. Granted the sky was very
hazy from the rain and we may have been hallucinating (we were very
tired). As we approached the cathedral, a wedding was about to start
and Wilson's grave was corded off. I still managed to see the grave and I
had every intention of taking a picture of his crypt. But after I saw the
beautiful stain glass windows and the spectacular gothic architecture of the
grand old church (coupled with the worry that I was destroying someone's joyous
nuptials) I could not bring myself to photograph the inside of the church. Some
things should be kept sacred. I snapped a few pictures of the outside and
we started on our long trek back to the Metro station.
Despite such a day we had fun. We learned about the
Library of congress, we visited Woodrow Wilson's home and saw some amazing
architecture at Woodrow Wilson’s final resting place.
The second day was a little better…
Have you ever been to Washington DC? Tell me your experiences in the comments below!
Last time I explained that I had to retake the GRE and
shared some of my strategies for studying.
Well, my scores from my second attempt have just come in! I was told
that I should share them so you can make a comparison. So here the are!
Notice a great improvement in writing! Which was what I was
aiming for this go-round but I also an improvement in the Verbal
Reasoning portion as well. And miracle of miracles I didn’t lose any points in
the math portion. To be honest these scores are somewhat mediocre but GRE scores aren't the only thing grad schools are looking for. There not to bad.
Moral of the story is, study every day. It doesn’t have to be a lot, just thirty
minutes every day.
Since in my last post I explained my impressions of grad
school, I thought it would be appropriate to explain my experience with the GRE
in this post. For those who don’t know
the GRE stands for Graduate Records Examinations (it’s kind of like the SAT for
college grads who desire go for masters or PhD work). I took the GRE for the first time in January
2015. These are my actual scores.
(Don’t judge
me! I actually did make it into grad school. Granted it had very little to do
with these scores…) I really did get into grad school but it was on a probationary
basis, meaning I had to take the GRE again and bring up my writing scores. So
here are some of the things I learned while studying for the GRE both times.
The GRE is set up into three sections, Writing,
Vocabulary or reading comprehension, and quantitative (math ewwww!) The first part is the writing, you have to
analyze an issue and write a response in 30 minutes for the first essay and for
the second you must analyze and respond to an argument in 30 minutes. Here is an
example for one of my better “analysis of an issue” Essays.
Equal opportunity is a foundational ideal for Americans. It is part of the American dream that someone
can be anything they want to be and get paid for it. In accordance with this, a person should get
paid according to the work they do and how well they do it. Athletes are an excellent example of this
concept. Athletes are paid in proportion to their ability, their work load and
their desirability.
Everyone has the
opportunity to be a professional athlete but not everyone has the ability to be
a professional athlete. Athletes have unique skills and abilities that allow
them to play sports at a level higher than most. I certainly do not have the abilities of my
friend Darius who is an excellent football player let alone someone like Kobe
Bryant or Eli Manning who have spent their whole lives perfecting that
ability. These individuals make a salary
based on those abilities. Likewise many
athletes would not be hired let alone paid well as a nurse or a teacher.
An athlete’s work load is quite high as well. Athletes must literally dedicate their lives
to be the best to stay desirable to their employers, with workouts every day,
practices, and games. Many times an
athlete must be far from their families for long periods of time. Many contracts stipulate that athletes must
make appearances at functions they may not personally support. As someone once said the price of fame is
high.
All this being said, some may still have a hard time
understanding why an athlete is paid so much more than a nurse or teacher. Do not these professions require the same
dedication and sacrifice? That is true,
however desirability also plays a part in our society of equal
opportunity. Teachers and nurses are not
watched on television or asked to promote products. It is about what the public is willing to pay
and let us face it, the general public sees healthcare and education as
rights. Things they are entitled to,
therefore believe these things should be free and provided for them. The public does not invest in these areas of
employment as they do professional athletes.
In a perfect world there would be people to invest in
education and healthcare on the same bases as they do their entertainment but
that world does not exist. To raise the
opportunities for nurses and teacher to that of athletes those in charge must
change an entire culture. As Sam Walton
once said, the customer is all of our employer. – Practice Example from me
Not bad for 30 minutes. And no fair stealing my ideas! Practice a lot on
this portion, take advantage of every practice essay prompt you can find, this
was my fifth practice essay. (The ETS or company who produces the GRE offers a
pool of practice prompts on their website. https://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/prepare/analytical_writing/issue/pool)
The second part is the Vocabulary section. The first time I took the GRE, I used a book from
the Kaplan test preparatory company. It was quite helpful (I did make it into
grad school remember). I remember one particularly helpful hint and now I pass
that hint to you. The book said that the
most common vocab words were as follows (in no particular order):
Assuage
Opaque
Mitigate
Precipitate
Prodigal
Vacillate
Adulterate
Abstain
Apathy
Corroborate
Engender
Audacious
Anomaly
Erudite
Propriety
Zeal
Placate
Fervid
Lucid
Loquacious
Gullible
Laudable
Pragmatic
Ephemeral
Laconic
Pedant
Equivocal
Volatile
Enigma
Capricious
Desiccate
Homogenous
No! I’m not going to tell you what they mean, you
still have to study, but it was true I started seeing these words all over the
practice exams, in the exam itself and later on in Grad level classes. Alright
I’ll give you a hint on one! (see video below)
A cool side note is that Liberty University (my alma
mater) offers a senior cap class for history majors and a requirement for this
class is to take three GRE practice tests. (I did not realize this before I
took the exam the first time.) It was in this class that I was introduced to my
new best friend (at least for the GRE prep). I had to take the GRE a second time and The GRE for Dummies was the most helpful
of any resources I found.I have never
much liked the “For Dummies” books before but this one has lots of good stuff
in it.
Another resource I found when I was searching for
study aids, was Magoosh’s (https://gre.magoosh.com/)
app for vocabulary words in the GRE and other standardized tests, in a flash
card style game that helps you learn and practice vocabulary used in the test
and the best part is that the app is free.
So if you have access to the technology, take advantage of it. [Here is a
screenshot of this app.]
I learned all sorts of great long words that I use
every day since taking the GRE…just not in this post.
And there is of course a math portion as well but I’m
a history so…guessing is a perfectly fine strategy. Unless you are, you know, a
math guy. In all honesty, most of the
math portion is to test your logic skills.
So, if you know a little math and your logic skills aren’t bad and you
have a forgiving grad school, you’ll probably do fine.
If I may summarize what I have learned while studying
twice for the GRE it is this, always take advantage of the many tools offered
to you. I hope the few that I provide in
this post help. The other point I would
like to hammer home is study. I did not
do that great of a job preparing the first time and it hurt me. The second time I wrote seven practice essays
while being timed and practiced my vocab words almost every day. If you do a little each day leading up to
your GRE it is not as intimidating. I hope
you do well and good luck in grad school!
I
wanted to write a piece for those of you who are thinking about pursuing their master’s
degree. I have not had the easiest time trying to get my grad degree but
I intend to stick with it and I encourage you also, because of three very
important reasons. A master's degree gives you credentials for professional
work. It is a learning experience that includes learning what is being debated
in your field. Lastly, a Master's
program allows you to network with likeminded individuals.
A
master's degree gives you bona fides, credentials that open opportunities for
employment wide open. If you desire to
teach a collage level class than you will need at least a master's degree.
Other professional positions like to see that you have a master's, like museums
looking for a curator or an archivist. Saying that you are a master's
student also gets you certain opportunities, for example when I'm applying for
jobs I always tell potential employers that I'm a master's student.It tells them that I am ambitious and that I
care about what I am doing with my life and that I have chosen to further my
career with them. I have also told people that I am a master's student
when I'm doing research, people often seem more helpful when they realize you
are a students doing a project for class (that’s my experience anyway).
I'm
sure most professors believe that my next point should have been the first
mentioned or least considered the most important but in my opinion it is the
second most important (The first is using my degree and getting a job). That is
learning, you will work your butt off and by doing so you will learn. As
an undergraduate history major you have learned to research, write and have a
knowledge of who are the best scholars in your field. Grad school will
push that knowledge to the max! While you read a book per week, per class.While doing that, you will also be expected
to research on your own and write a graduate level paper. You will be
introduced to debates and to the leading minds in your field. And you will be
introduced to their books, lots and lots of books. Professors will push
you to do the best job you can, to make you the best scholars possible (hint:
pick a good school or at least one you like the professors at).
Finally
a master's program will give you networking opportunities. If you do it right
this will be the greatest asset you take out of grad school.As the old proverb goes "it's not what
you know, it's who you know," so make friends. Be on good terms with
your professors, and your class mates. Those class mates will graduate
and become fantastic teachers and scholars and if you know them, jobs, research
projects and looking for advice can be that much easier.
Now
it is time for me to be honest with you, these points are only my impressions
of grad school. I did not do much (or any) research in preparation for this
post.After only one semester, this is
why I think it is important for me to finish what I have started and why you
should start.
This past fall I
was introduced to a genre of history that I had not come into contact before or
if I had I did not realizes it.Micro-history! Micro-history is usually an account of a person, a small
group of people or a small event from the past.The key word is small, it’s like looking at history through a
microscope, examining how one community lived amidst of a larger event. For an example looking at how a slave in
Lynchburg survived the civil war.I was
given to read two micro-histories during my first semester at grad-school, The Worms and the Cheese by Carlo
Ginzburg, a story of a 16th century heretic who was burned at the
stack for heresy against the orthodox teachings of the Catholic Church. The other book was A Midwife’s Tale: The Life of Martha Ballard Based on Her Diary
1785-1812 (a better book than the title might imply) by Laurel Thatcher
Ulrich, an account of a New England community based on a Midwife’s diary.
I found that I
enjoyed this genre of history a great deal, it reminded me of why I love
history so much.It’s all in the
story.What micro-history does very
well, is that it takes a large concept like the Reformation, American Civil War
or World War Two and looks at a small piece of it.Showing that these larger concepts are not as
monolithic as a survey class may imply. Micro-history also brings history down
to an eye level, it makes history more human. Reminding readers that history is little more
than the memories of people.It looks at
ordinary people who lived through extraordinary times and tries to examine
their thoughts.
Micro-history
offers an alternate perspective that history often glazes over. It allows a peek at people like Mennochio from
The Cheese and the Worms who would
not otherwise get a spot in a history book and yet were significant to a larger
story.A historian may use a piece of evidence
such as court transcripts as a source to make a larger point and miss the
cultural, social, and political significance of the particular event. I decided after reading The Cheese and the Worms that I would use it if I ever taught a
Reformation or Church history.It is
easy skim over everyday people during The Reformation.Typically when a student is introduced to The
Reformation they are shown Luther, Calvin, Protestant Martyrs, and the
Religious wars.People who are larger
than life and events that were huge in scope.“Microhistory acknowledges different perspectives in the larger
narrative.” [1]
As interesting a discipline
as micro-history is there are some drawbacks to the historian, “such as lack of
debate from other historians, making a smaller point and then projecting it on
a larger issue.” [1] A problem with microhistory is that typically there is not
a lot of scholars that study the same single life or small event, so it is
harder to find challenges and debates about the micro-historian’s points.“Debating and questioning one’s understanding
of the facts is essential to maintain a high level of historical excellence.” Another problem with micro-history is that often
it lacks the context that larger scoped histories have.It also may be tempting for someone who reads
a micro-history like A Midwife’s Tale
and then assume that every village in colonial America is exactly the same. “One
needs an understanding of the culture around the narrative to understand the
significance of the situation.”[1]
Despite these
drawbacks to micro-histories, I greatly enjoy them and believe they are very
helpful to the larger picture as well as the small. In every history class the question always
plagues history teachers, “what should I keep and would should I leave out?”
Micro-history allows historians to look a little bit closer and keep a little
more of the story.
[1] Keating, Christopher.
"Reaction Paper Week 10." JMU
Class Hist 671 (November 2015): 1-2.
Bibliography
for works mentioned:
Ginzburg, Carlo. The Cheese and the Worms: The Cosmos of a
Sixteenth-Century Miller. Trans. John and Anne Tedeschi. Middlesex,
England: Penguin Books, 1985.
Ulrich, Laurel Thatcher. A Midwife’s Tale: The Life of Martha
Ballard, Based on Her Diary 1785-1812. New York: Vintage Books, 1990.
One of the most irksome
issues in the world of history is the dreaded “uncited fact!” (dun dun dun dun!)
This issue is usually made manifest in freshman history papers that use a quote
or discuss an event that one knows one has read but can’t remember where, so
one just adds it to your paper and hopes for the best. 
