They mostly pore over esoteric old documents and artifacts to try to construct narratives that are compelling enough to justify continued funding. For example this one professor I had told us about how she thinks that certain cherub-like figures in Roman frescoes are related to earlier Egyptian art. A lot of later historicity is interesting but increasingly is just rehashing old stuff. The days where historians were uncovering lost cities like Troy that completely upend our understanding of history is kind of in the past.
>The days where historians were uncovering lost cities like Troy that completely upend our understanding of history is kind of in the past.
To be fair, there have been some interesting and significant discoveries in recent decades like the Gobekli Tepe and other similar structures.
Well that's prehistory unlike Troy which was at the tail end of the Bronze age and figures in Homeric myth, but point taken. Those discoveries are definitely cool and all but I just feel that without historical context and so many unanswered questions, they always feel annoyingly open-ended. Like, the fact that we still don't know the function and cultural significance of Stonhenge is cool, but also very frustrating. It would definitely be really cool if we found a treasure trove of lost Greek epics or documents from a mystery cult but it seems there's fewer low-hanging fruit every decade.
Not out in the open and not as famous as Troy, which was the ultimate low-hanging fruit (the site was never lost)
But we're still making discoveries by using LIDAR in the jungles of the Americas
From what I understand you need to pick a trendy framework through which to study a particular subject
It needs to be novel and so ends up being very arcane to the point that it's not interesting to those outside of the field
either devote their time to teaching the same shit every year for 30 years or spend the same amount of time shitflinging with other academics over which of their arguments about a topic are correct
This is the non shitposting answer essentially
generally speaking there are four roads to travel, you can >pick a side of an ongoing debate (unless you believe you have some groundbreaking argument to revamp the playing field a la say Kotkin with Russia, usually not done until you're established through one of the other options) >pick a niche field and establish yourself as one of the preeminent experts in your small pond (one needs to maintain some connection to the larger field to justify employment however) >focus on women/ethnic minorities/sexual minorities etc. (no seriously, and it can be interesting research like on women in pre-modern China) >apply meme framework to topic in way not done previously
Make up historical narratives that conveniently align with their patron's goals.
As someone doing a history major, this.
Make up historical narratives that conveniently align with my beliefs.
Make up stuff like dinosaurs and neanderthals (the Earth is only 6000 years old) to lead people astray from God
that's the work of archeologists and paleontologists dumbass
Revisionism
They try to uncover the truth about the past.
That may be bad for your health. Just ask Mister David Cole or Doctor Norm.
They mostly pore over esoteric old documents and artifacts to try to construct narratives that are compelling enough to justify continued funding. For example this one professor I had told us about how she thinks that certain cherub-like figures in Roman frescoes are related to earlier Egyptian art. A lot of later historicity is interesting but increasingly is just rehashing old stuff. The days where historians were uncovering lost cities like Troy that completely upend our understanding of history is kind of in the past.
>The days where historians were uncovering lost cities like Troy that completely upend our understanding of history is kind of in the past.
To be fair, there have been some interesting and significant discoveries in recent decades like the Gobekli Tepe and other similar structures.
Well that's prehistory unlike Troy which was at the tail end of the Bronze age and figures in Homeric myth, but point taken. Those discoveries are definitely cool and all but I just feel that without historical context and so many unanswered questions, they always feel annoyingly open-ended. Like, the fact that we still don't know the function and cultural significance of Stonhenge is cool, but also very frustrating. It would definitely be really cool if we found a treasure trove of lost Greek epics or documents from a mystery cult but it seems there's fewer low-hanging fruit every decade.
Fair points, my friend. The lack of historical context for prehistoric finds can be a bit vexing.
Not out in the open and not as famous as Troy, which was the ultimate low-hanging fruit (the site was never lost)
But we're still making discoveries by using LIDAR in the jungles of the Americas
Browse LULZ
From what I understand you need to pick a trendy framework through which to study a particular subject
It needs to be novel and so ends up being very arcane to the point that it's not interesting to those outside of the field
either devote their time to teaching the same shit every year for 30 years or spend the same amount of time shitflinging with other academics over which of their arguments about a topic are correct
This is the non shitposting answer essentially
generally speaking there are four roads to travel, you can
>pick a side of an ongoing debate (unless you believe you have some groundbreaking argument to revamp the playing field a la say Kotkin with Russia, usually not done until you're established through one of the other options)
>pick a niche field and establish yourself as one of the preeminent experts in your small pond (one needs to maintain some connection to the larger field to justify employment however)
>focus on women/ethnic minorities/sexual minorities etc. (no seriously, and it can be interesting research like on women in pre-modern China)
>apply meme framework to topic in way not done previously
True. For a framework, I chose the ideas of transubstantiation of urine into gas by Asclepiades of Bithynia.
Learn stuff about the past by looking at old things.
Piss off retards who think the world is only 6000 years old.
most historians are women, so they have lots of sex
nothing basically
Read.