by Mark Hopkins

Created on: May 08, 2007   Last Updated: May 15, 2007

The trend towards social history among university scholars is regrettable since it risks divorcing one aspect of the human past from its context and thus distorting our understanding. The fragmentation of scholarship is perhaps inevitable given the mushrooming of research that has taken place in the last thirty years of so.

It is now probably impossible for anyone to master all of the evidence relevant to the study of any single civilization or epoch so scholars home in on ever narrower and more specialist issues or periods. In doing this there is great scope for achieving publication and research funding. The ambitious may hope for a 'Chair' in increasingly arcane areas of History. In the end, however, the full value of their scholarship can only be seen when it is set in the context of the 'bigger picture'. Few scholars seem to wish to risk their reputations by producing a general, broad sweep, view of a long span of time or of a broad geographical area. Their academic 'enemies' are just waiting to snipe at any error or oversight!

Additionally, there is a perception that students of History are turned off by too much political history, preferring the 'human story' aspects instead. Social History can only be properly understood against the political and economic background in which any given people were living. That is as true of the past as it is of the present.

Happily, trends seem to come and go, in scholarship as in most other things, so the imbalance may be only temporary. Meanwhile, we should encourage the proper study of History at all levels and resist its dilution into 'Social Studies' courses. Remember, 'Those who do not remember their History are doomed to repeat it'.

Learn more about this author, Mark Hopkins.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.