Friends,
I am a redheaded stepchild. Not
literally, of course. No, I am a military historian by virtue of my graduate
training and my personal interests. Technically, I am also a redheaded
stepchild because I am a lowly adjunct professor considered by many to not be a
“real” professor. They are just jealous. I’m a better teacher than they are.
But that particular topic will have to wait for another day. Military history
has fallen out of favor among professional historians and instead it is the
purview of the “amateur” historian or the “popular” historian. I loathe such
terms as they were invented by the “professionals” to make themselves feel more
important and superior to the lowly minions. After all, only a person with a
PhD can know anything, right?
So why do the academics often look with
disdain on military history as a discipline? To be honest, I don’t know. I have
some hunches, but that is all. First, there is a tendency to think that people
who specialize in military history are somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun
on the political spectrum which puts them at odds with the predominantly left
wing college faculty of today. That stereotype is not necessarily true. I know
other military historians who lean to the left, or like me, to the middle. None
that I know are right wing warmongers. Second, some think that to study war is
to glorify war. Only a moron would glorify war. Getting shot at isn't really
fun. At least not the times I've experienced it. Third, in this age wherein if
you do not specialize in race, class, or gender you will not get a job, much
less tenure, some argue that military history has no place in our more
“enlightened” narrative of the past. I call bullshit on that for the reasons
contained below. Consider it my defense of military history as a discipline.
I cannot address the first two points as
they are just false. I think Jefferson might say that their absurdity is “self
evident.” I can, however, speak to the third point. The historian John Keegan
said “The written history of the world is largely a history of warfare.”
Perhaps he was being hyperbolic, but I do think he had a point. Humans learned
to kill each other long before we learned how to read, write, or probably even
speak. If you are a Bible reader, examine the Old Testament. It is one
bloodbath after another. And it just got worse. First we used our hands, then
rocks, then bronze, steel, guns, tanks, planes, and now unmanned drones. Given
the fact that at just about any point in the panorama of world history there
was a war going on somewhere, leaving it out of the broader historical
narrative is ridiculous.
Since the modern day academic historian
focuses on race, class, and gender, I think it is important to note that those
subjects also fit within military history. Consider the brave African-American
soldiers who fought for their own people’s freedom during the Civil War. Or the
Buffalo Soldiers who served gallantly on the frontier. What about the Tuskegee
Airmen during World War Two? Or the Code Talkers? Or any other minority who
fought for a country that discriminated against them and then came home and
fought for equality. How can you talk about women’s history without discussing
their contribution to the war effort on the home front? Rosie the Riveter,
anyone? Class matters too. How many wars have been a rich man’s war and a poor
man’s fight? Most probably.
While the military recognizes the
importance of the study of the history of warfare, and for good reason, those
outside of it often cannot grasp why anyone
would want to study weapons, tactics, and warfare. Wars don’t solve anything?
Do they? Even an avowed pacifist would have to admit that it is a good thing
that we fought against Hitler. Clausewitz said that war is a continuation of
politics by other means. It is what countries or people do when negotiations
break down. Sometimes, they don’t even bother to try and negotiate first and
just attack. Why this happens is important. We have to understand what draws
countries into a war if we ever hope to be able to prevent it.
The Great Man school of history fell out
of favor a long time ago. That said, I think that looking at great figures from
the past still has some relevance, so long as we also talk about “the little
guy”. How can you teach about the French Revolution and not mention Napoleon?
Conflict is where you see what people and countries are made of. Warfare brings
out the best in people/countries and also the worst. Countries pull together or
the break apart. We have heroes and villains. We see great leadership and we
see tyrants. The full range of emotions that make up the human soul are laid
bare for us to examine. Perhaps some don’t like what that tells us about the
human condition. Nations and causes need leaders. Warfare is the crucible of
leadership. Anyone can be a leader when times are good but when things turn
south, we find out what leaders are really made of. Sure, the study of military
history does run the risk of devolving into jingoistic nationalism, but not if
it is taught or studied correctly. Frankly, I can think of no better subject
than history to honor those who have sacrificed so much on our behalf because
we, as historians, can put those sacrifices in the proper context.
I’m not advocating every teacher talking
about nothing but warfare in their courses. That would be just as insane as not
mentioning warfare at all. I’m a military historian, but I still touch on
matters of race, class, and yes, even gender! But I do so within the broader
context of conflict and how it has shaped us as a country and a world. We
should all teach to our strengths. But we also must recognize that military
history has a place in academia and those of us who specialize in it should not
be considered redheaded stepchildren but rather professionals with just as much
to contribute to our national discourse as anyone else.
My name is Lee Hutch and I am a Half A$$ Military Historian. And a lover of redheads as
well. Or at least the one I married to, that is. I would like to wish a Happy
Veterans Day to all the men and women who are or have served our nation and
also to the police officers, firefighters, and EMS workers who keep us safe
here on the home front. As Rudyard Kipling would say “I have eaten your bread and salt. I have drunk your water and wine. In
deaths ye died I have watched beside. And the lives ye led were mine.”
No comments:
Post a Comment