Historical Works By Amateurs and Professionals

In chapters 3 (Searching for the General Reader: Professional Historians, Amateurs, and Nonacademic Audiences, 1890-1939) and 4 (The Crusade against Pedantry and Its Aftermath: Allan Nevins and Friends, 1930s-1950s) of Ian Tyrrel's book Historians in Public, Tyrrel discuses how the most popular historical works read by non-academic audiences were those not written by professional historians. On cause of the elaborate and often tedious writing style of many professional historians compared to that of many authors with backgrounds in professional writing or journalism, as well as the failure of professional historians to assess the needs and desires of the non-academic audiences, this trend of amateur historians writing the history read by the public continues to present. Fortunately for a time, professional historians did spend time publishing reviews of popular amateur works, so that the public had a strong idea about which sources were accurate.

Today there is a greater struggle for while there is a plethora of interesting and popular amateur writings on historical topics (New York Times Bestseller Lists: Hardcover Nonfiction and Paperback Nonfiction) it is not always clear how trustworthy the source may be. There are obvious things to look for of course, like the author's background and motivation for writing, along with the sources he or she cited. Unfortunately, there are many works out today that may pass a quick assessment for inaccuracy, but may indeed be extremely problematic. This begs the question of the best ways to discern an accurate and interesting historical text from an interesting and questionable one.

Personally, as a future teacher I really struggle with the question of discernment of non-academic texts. As a teacher, I will need to continue to be learning about all different areas of history. I have always believed that one of the most effective ways of keeping material interesting and fresh for students is to always be making a concerted effort to always be learning more about the material oneself. In addition, students need more than a text book and lectures to get a wide perspective of history: they also need supplementary material in the form of primary and secondary sources. Depending on the level of students, it may be unreasonable to ask them to read the latest academic article on any given subject from a journal such as JSTOR. What they may really need is additional information on specific subjects that is both readable and accurate to help them to expand their historical knowledge. Towards the endeavor of finding these sources, I do not know of any excellent resources that review main-stream histories for historical accuracy or of any efficient way of sorting through numerous books and articles to figure out which ones are reliable.