Ron Grossman’s recent article on Stephen Ambrose “History through non-politically correct eyes: Stephen Ambrose searches for heroes” (Tempo, Dec. 9) was a simplistic and unjustified attack on the historical profession.
While some historians, Thucydides among them, have always used their position to advance a political agenda, most history professors devote their lives to sharing a passionate curiosity about the past with their students. Furthermore, many of these students are just as eagerly interested in the history of women and ethnic minorities as a young Stephen Ambrose was in military history.
As for the historical profession’s often-minute specialization, it is dishonest to compare the American Historical Review, an industry publication intended for an audience of academic historians, with Mr. Ambrose’s more popularly marketed books. At their upper reaches, all branches of knowledge are esoteric and unlikely to appeal to non-specialists. Would Mr. Grossman discredit all biologists because the Journal of Paleontology is not as “blood-stirring” as Stephen Jay Gould’s latest work?
