I was struck by Kevin's astute observation: "The older consensus,
which viewed study of history as preparation for civic engagement in
the present, collapsed in the 1970s (if not earlier) and has not been
replaced by anything to which most concerned parties in the
conversation can agree." Some of our very greatest scholars have
raised this issue. Conservative and liberal historians alike shrink
from what recent historical study has wrought.  In place of reliable
verities, recent scholarship offers up uncertainties and
contradictions that leave us "looking into the abyss," as Gertrude
Himmelfarb writes. Gordon Wood writes that "the consequences of not
being able to make distinctions between truth and falsehood can be
terrifying." Directly addressing Kevin's point, Joyce Appleby writes
that digging too deeply into our past "raises very fully the
disturbing possibility that the study of history does not strengthen
an attachment to one's country. Indeed, the reverse might be true,
i.e., that open-ended investigation of the nation's past could weaken
the ties of citizenship by raising critical issues about the
distribution of power and respect."

Henry Wiencek

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html