Who cares about history

There is nothing novel about apologias for History. Since the emergence in the nineteenth century of what we regard as scholarly, evidential History, most eminent historians at some point have justified their trade, in effect their lives. Few of these apologies have enjoyed much intellectual impact because, in the main, they have been addressed to the converted. 'History is bunk' might strike a response in semi-literates dimly recalling the tedium of high school History courses; logicians might worry about questions of disciplinary validity, about questions of historical explanation. In general, though, historians and their students have pursued their self-set goals without challenge. Indeed, the common justifications by now have almost a ritualistic ring about them: historical scholarship, gives pleasure to the writer and to the reader; historical research and reportage provide a useful, intellectually refining discipline; historical knowledge is materially useful in the practice of some professions; History provides knowledge about Man and men, it is assumed, ought to be self-conscious; historical reading provides vicarious experience.