http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/ Failing better at understanding the past Sat, 06 Sep 2008 23:06:50 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4135 Gavin Robinson Fri, 18 May 2007 18:19:39 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4135 I think I've got an interesting perspective on this because I'm an academic historian of the English Civil War but an amateur historian of the First World War. I think I’ve got an interesting perspective on this because I’m an academic historian of the English Civil War but an amateur historian of the First World War.

]]> http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4130 Jarod Thu, 17 May 2007 19:28:36 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4130 Interesting post. Thanks, Gavin. Interesting post. Thanks, Gavin.

]]> http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4128 Gavin Robinson Wed, 16 May 2007 18:56:31 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4128 Thanks Dan. This post was much more spontaneous than usual. I didn't really know where it was going when I started it! Thanks Dan. This post was much more spontaneous than usual. I didn’t really know where it was going when I started it!

]]> http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4127 Dan Wed, 16 May 2007 14:09:44 +0000 http://www.investigations.4-lom.com/2007/05/14/egypt/#comment-4127 What an excellent post. It seems to me that in some ways this filters back into the discussion we've been having about academic bloggers, in the sense that this is about linkages and specialisms. What marks out the academic from the antiquarian is the ability to connect the very specialised to the bigger picture, both historically and historiographically. Inevitably, with almost any aspect of history, but particularly with regard to modern total wars, researchers get defeated by scale: mastering every aspect is impossible. They either end up focussing on their own little bit of expertise to the exclusion of all else or making statements which are generally correct, but overlook exceptions or need further clarification. It seems to me that one way in which blogging might function is to put those researchers into contact with each other so both can benefit. One of the remarkable features of Great War scholarship in Britain in particular is the degree to which academics are able - indeed, have - to rely on research going on outside the academy. Good luck in the interview, wherever it is. What an excellent post. It seems to me that in some ways this filters back into the discussion we’ve been having about academic bloggers, in the sense that this is about linkages and specialisms. What marks out the academic from the antiquarian is the ability to connect the very specialised to the bigger picture, both historically and historiographically. Inevitably, with almost any aspect of history, but particularly with regard to modern total wars, researchers get defeated by scale: mastering every aspect is impossible. They either end up focussing on their own little bit of expertise to the exclusion of all else or making statements which are generally correct, but overlook exceptions or need further clarification. It seems to me that one way in which blogging might function is to put those researchers into contact with each other so both can benefit. One of the remarkable features of Great War scholarship in Britain in particular is the degree to which academics are able - indeed, have - to rely on research going on outside the academy. Good luck in the interview, wherever it is.

]]>