Why So Serious? The Elitism of History
The Argument between Popular History and Academic History shouldn't be about which stands above the other in a world where access to history is becoming harder.
Politics aside, access to factual information about times before is hard enough.
If you decide you want to become a self-taught historian or begin a journey that will take you into the depths of historical research, you’ll be met with limited access or complete blockades to certain resources you may require for the types of work you’re trying to do.
There seems to be this divide between Academic Historians and "Popular" historians, as if one serves a greater purpose than the other, and the one whose purpose isn’t built upon the foundation of elite academic merit, is somehow bastardizing history.
Do academic history and popular history serve two different purposes? Indeed, I feel that they do. Does academic history serve a greater purpose than popular history? That depends on what you’re looking to get out of it.
My Substack and other social media platforms are built around books that I read, primarily history and nonfiction. Most of those books are written by popular historians.
I understand that simply reading a book on the Crusades by Dan Jones isn’t going to make me a topical expert on the history of the Crusades - the mere thought itself is extremely naive. But does it teach me things about that particular history that I otherwise may not have been introduced to? Indeed, it does.
And I think that’s important.
The more people read books, in this case, history books, the better off our world will be.
Again, politics aside, the world is shifting towards a world where anti-intellectualism is being praised, and I think the more we accept that rhetoric as normal, the more society will become completely unbearable down the line.
This isn’t meant to condemn academic history - it’s extremely important. The point here is to bridge the gap between the elitism of Academic history and the acceptance of popular history and understand that they can coexist without one standing above the other as if it serves a greater purpose.
It serves a different purpose. It serves a different audience, almost entirely.
That’s kind of the point.
History is just information. When put into a book, it’s just timelines, quotes, artifacts, and information dressed up nicely in some form of relative cohesion so that it’s digestible for the end user.
Academic history is meant to be studied, criticized, questioned, discussed, further researched, analyzed, and confirmed. It’s intended to hold primary truths about times that no longer exist, in worlds that are now foreign to those of us living today who choose to go and explore them.
The tonality of academic history is different. It’s often bland and void of flavor. Again, intentionally, because it’s just a collection of information.
Academic history isn’t meant to be displayed on end caps at Barnes & Noble with “HOT RELEASE” stickers or featured in viral TikTok videos on BookTok.
It’s meant to be a source or study material for academics who want to study or confront a particular period of history.
Popular history serves a strong purpose, especially in today’s age of introducing history to a broad audience of curious people.
I was, and still am, one of those curious people.
In June of 2024, it had been easily ten years since I had read a book. Nearly anything and everything I wanted to learn about, I’d sit for hours on YouTube, or listen to podcasts, or scour the internet to understand better.
As of this writing, I have read 22 books year-to-date, talked about those books to tens of thousands of people online, and written about history here on Substack because I found a passion for it.
Because of popular history books.
As I’ve read more books, started writing about history, and crafted a long-form podcast about history, I’ve found the need to dive into academic history to better understand or get more information on the topic I’m reading, writing, or talking about.
When that happens, I don’t simultaneously throw everything I’ve learned from a popular history book out the window, simply because it didn’t come from an Oxford or Ivy League multi-volume work of academic history.
Plenty of popular history writers are well-respected among academics, and rightfully so. I also understand the numerous popular history books that seem to be written for people who know nothing about history.
There’s a common joke about the current state of fiction books and how nearly all titles seem to follow the same titular cadence.
A ____ of ____ and ____.
The same is true about many popular history books that are titled similarly.
____ ____ ____ and the making of the modern world.
I recently came across a Reddit thread that highlights some of the fissures between academic history and popular history, but also isn’t without some well-thought-out arguments on both sides.
There seems to be this notion that popular historians aren’t beholden to the rigors that academic historians are. While there may be some truth to that, I cannot get behind the notion that mass market publishing companies are so hard up for a dollar that they’re willing to hinge their entire reputation on a history book, which is likely nowhere near the top of their sales compared to other genres they market at scale.
That thought process is protectionist, and you see it all over the place regarding history.
If someone decides to post about Medieval armor, there’s always someone online who knows more about that particular niche and will make sure you know about it, and feel small about it all at the same time.
Or, you might enjoy reading about the American Revolution. One of the books you reference is 1776 by David McCullough. In that case, you’re laughed off the internet by armchair historians who cannot fathom that you didn’t make the effort to go to the Library of Congress and read firsthand accounts of the Revolutionary War instead of picking up a $20 book because you found it interesting.
There will always be holier-than-thou elitists who feel what you’re doing to educate yourself, or talk about something, isn’t good enough because you didn’t do it the way they did it.
The moral of this story is that history should be accessible; nobody owns history. It’s one of the most incredible things we have available to us, and more people should find an interest in history, especially as we get further away from important history where no survivors are left.
This is a bit of a prelude and mini announcement, but
and I are working on a co-authored piece on historians you should be reading in 2025 and beyond.Not to steal a ton of thunder from that upcoming piece, but here are some historians I’d recommend you read if you’re either new to reading history or want to read more history.
Christopher Clark, Chris Wickham, Thomas Asbridge, Mary Beard, Emma Southon, Rick Atkinson, Alan Taylor, and HW Brands are some of my favorites. I think they can be great starting points for reading more history.
Even if you don’t have a PhD.
This was undoubtedly more of a rant than a designed work, but that’s okay.
I mentioned in Monday’s History With Your Coffee that I came across an argument online about this topic, and it got my blood boiling, so I’m happy to have let it all out here.
The point I wanted to make with this post, and every post I make, is to read more books, support hard-working creators, and treat history with the respect and curiosity it deserves.
Until then.
I can’t wait to read what you and Josh have planned. That’s exciting!
Great post. I agree with one of the commenters in that reddit thread who sees the divide more as a spectrum with academic journals on one end and something like historical fiction on the other. If both ends make an effort I think that is a great spot to be in for history as a whole. The more we can make rigorous academic history fun and accessible to a larger audience the better. On the flip side, things meant to be fun and fantastical (something like game of thrones or shogun which both clearly respect history), even though they aren’t meant to be rigorous histories, can inspire people to learn more and get into the real historiography more.