Things one tweets when one has no understanding, like absolutely none, like a howling black hole of the opposite of understanding, of what historians do; and also a raging volcano's worth of misplaced confidence about your ability to make pronouncements about what historians do. 
Tell me you've never had an actual conversation with a historian about what they do or read the most basic methodological texts used in introductory theory and methods course without actually telling me that.
The anti-intellectual "public intellectual" is, IMO, not a great look.
The concepts of "contingency" and "agency" are foundational to the entire enterprise of writing history FFS. Any first year graduate student could write Yascha a 15-page paper on it.
This paragraph appears on page 4 of Sarah Maza's excellent, 2017 book on historical methodology called "Thinking about History."
In case anyone who's not a historian wants to actually learn something about what the modern historical profession aspires to do, this book is a great place to start. google.com/books/edition/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
