History Qualifications?

[CountArach]

I'm just wondering what qualifications everyone here has in the field of history. I have recently started an Arts degree this year, majoring in Ancient History and probably Latin.

So what about you guys?

[Geoffrey S]

Oh, none. I just read books.

[Martok]

Oh, none. I just read books.

Ditto that. I'm just an enthusiastic amateur, nothing more.

[seireikhaan]

Third(ed). Nothing more than what I pick up here and there in perusings.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I'm going to work on a history degree eventually.

[Furious Mental]

I did a BA and studied about half medieval Europe and half modern Europe and Asia.

[Gaius Scribonius Curio]

Oh, none. I just read books.

Agreed, although I did get the history award in year 12. Australian history is boring as all hell though.

Would love to do an Arts degree (focusing on Ancient history/ classics) but am too busy with my Engineering degree at the minute, lol.

[CountArach]

Agreed, although I did get the history award in year 12. Australian history is boring as all hell though.

Haha, yeah. Our history really isn't even remotely interesting

[Furious Mental]

Oh god tell me about it. I did ancient history in the last two years of high school to avoid having to do Australian history for the enth year in a row.

[seireikhaan]

Oh god tell me about it. I did ancient history in the last two years of high school to avoid having to do Australian history for the enth year in a row.

What's there to study...? I mean, it aint like there's much of anything to study...

[KarlXII]

Haha, yeah. Our history really isn't even remotely interesting

"Uh, we fought Turks in the Great War!"

I believe only Greeks would appreciate that.

[Furious Mental]

On the whole I am glad our history is so boring. Countries with interesting history behind them also tend to be hung up on stupid vendettas or constantly harping on about some battle that no one else cares about, Greece and Turkey being a perfect example. But it does make history classes a drag.

* Admittedly we do harp on about Gallipoli, but not because we hate Turks.

[King Jan III Sobieski]

B.A. in History, M.A. in Liberal Studies (with a concentration in History/Public History), plus multiple conference and random lecture attendances....and I'm still a meaningless clerical worker.

[Decker]

Alright, after thinking a little more about what I'd like to do here it is.
I plan on transferring from my junior college (or JC) to San Jose State University in California. I hope to study to be an archivist while minoring in Military History. Then if possible, go to grad school or whatever the next step is in England and hopefully find a job at one of their museums or whatever else. It's tentative but that's the general outline.

[Knight of the Rose]

As to qualifications, I hold a MA from Lancs in Historical Research, as well as a "cand.mag" (2-year master level) in general history from Copenhagen Uni. My thesis was on statebuilding in the renaissance with special emphasis on colonial companies.

As for amateur vs. professional I believe that: Knowing something about a period / topic is something everybody can do by reading books and watching TV. I'm sure that *many* people knows more facts about history than I do. But actually writing history is something for the professionals, as it is a craft just like carpenting or engineering. It just seems, for the unaware, as a simple procedure of collecting facts and putting them together, but there is much more to it.

Does that make me a better person, or make my posts more intelligent? I must confess the answer is "no" i both cases But I will claim to be more trained in answering questions about "why" something happened, as that is my profession. Amateurs will be excellent in answering questions about "who", "where" and "when", and there is a time and a place for that as well.

/KotR