A while ago I ran across a 43-year old issue of the “American Historical Review” (AHR), the most important scholarly journal for historians in the US. Dated October, 1970, this compilation of the best, and most famous, American historians offers a revealing glimpse at the structure of the history profession, and more generally at the whole American academy.
The title page lists some of
the most prestigious historians of the time, who served as the Editor and on
the Board of Editors. They were all white men, 10 of them. A few women are also
listed on the title page, all assistants in the editorial process.
The AHR’s purpose is to
publish the best research articles and review the best books about any historical
subject. Six articles were published in that issue, all written by men. 117
books were reviewed: among the authors were 119 men and 11 women, about half of
whom were co-authors with their husbands. Each issue of the AHR also carried
advertisements by publishers for their latest books. I examined about
one-quarter of them closely: books by 80 male authors and 6 female authors were
displayed.
In 1970 women rarely appeared
as historians. They showed up even more rarely as subjects for historians: of
the 117 books reviewed, only one had a woman’s name in the title, and none of
the titles included the words “women”, “gender”, or “family”. Men’s names
appeared in about one-third of the titles. Other significant historical
subjects were also absent: although there were many books about war, no books
about slavery or Native Americans were reviewed and only one book concerned
race, a volume about South Africa. The only book about an African American was
an early biography of Martin Luther King, Jr., who had been murdered two years
before.
This 400-page volume is not
just a snapshot of the American historical profession near the end of the civil
rights era, but also a study of what history was. History as written about,
taught in universities and schools, and understood by the public was the study
of great men, writings about war and politics and diplomacy, analyses of male
thinkers and doers by other men. Except for books about other parts of the
world, history was white.
Since 1970, much has changed.
The unquestioned dominance of white men in America is long gone, in our
national life as a whole and in the history profession in particular. After
over 100 years of male Presidents of the American Historical Association, the
primary organization for historians which publishes the AHR, the first woman
was elected in 1987. Since 1996, half of the Presidents have been female. The
most recent issue of the AHR was produced by a very different group of
historians: the Editor is male, but the Board of Editors has 7 men and 6 women.
Three of 5 articles were written by women, one about family in colonial
America. Most books being reviewed are written by men, but the ratio is 2:1
instead of 10:1. Advertisements for books show a similar ratio.
Those data show that complete
equality between men and women in the history profession is approaching, but
has not been achieved. The proportion of women among those who earned a PhD in history has increased gradually and
steadily from about 25% in the late 1970s to 45% in 2010. Once they went on the
job market, however, women appear to have had equal success
with men. About half of each gender had a job lined up when they received their
degree. Women were as likely as men to land jobs at 4-year institutions. Promotions
from assistant to associate to full professor, and the job security of tenure,
were equally likely
for men and women.
Historians are more diverse
than ever before. The dominance of the sons of well-established families of
northern and western European background has given way to greater ethnic
variety: many more historians are the
first in their families to have attended college, come from families who
immigrated to the US from all over the world, are openly homosexual. The
proportion of history PhD’s earned by minorities
has risen from under 10% in the 1980s to 19% in 2010.
Just as historians are
different, so is history itself. There are still many books about politics,
war, and great men, but also many about great women or which analyze gender,
both female and male. Native Americans and African Americans, and the racial
issues behind their unequal treatment by white America, are no longer uncommon
subjects.
These remarkable shifts in my
profession are one example of the larger processes which have transformed
American society over the past few decades. The data point to further movement
in the future toward even more equality, in gender, in race and ethnicity, in
sexual orientation. Perhaps paradoxically, the more equality within the history
profession, the more our history of inequality will be discussed and written
about. Both changes make some old white men uncomfortable. But they’ll have to
learn to live with them.
Steve Hochstadt
Jacksonville IL
Published in the Jacksonville
Journal-Courier, December 10, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment