« They're no fun | Main | Strip down »
March 13, 2006
They aren't historians either
CNN.com - 'Da Vinci' author 'astounded' at allegations - Mar 13, 2006
I make no judgment in this case, except that they're all full of shit and should burn in hell, but Leigh and Baigent aren't historians. Why is anyone allowed to just go around saying that they're an historian? You couldn't just go around saying that you're a doctor or a lawyer or a dentist.
Posted by Mac Thomason at March 13, 2006 08:34 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.bravesbeat.com/mt-tb.cgi/10668
Comments
You just like saying "an historian."
Posted by: Susan at March 13, 2006 08:39 AM
I myself am an expert on _________ (bullshit artist) and will be appearing on CNN sometime in the very near future, with uninformed, unqualified opinions on __________.
Straight outta Monty Python...
Posted by: Jeff (no, the other one) at March 13, 2006 10:24 AM
What are the official qualifications for an historian? Is a bullshit occupation to begin with for the most part. "History" is largely based on the accounts provided by those in power ("history is written by the winners"). Archaeology and anthropology are sciences that can provide reasonably well-supported accounts of the past; history is a story told by those who have access to the seats of power. I don't have a problem with people using the term to describe themselves, even when they operate outside the realms of approved historians. After all, there's a lot of knowledge outside the realms of "official" and accepted histories.
Posted by: aznemesis at March 14, 2006 02:45 PM