Coronation in 800ADWell the mechanics might be generally agreed upon, but we could spend years discussing the real meaning of the event.  It is the same for many seminal events in history.  Take one that almost everyone agrees upon--the outbreak of WWII.  A bit closer to our time than 800 AD and lots of research material available.  The British call it Hitler's War so you know where they are coming from-BUT__it is not really that simple.Here is a short list of various historians who have different views of the subject and whose use of narrative vs. factually based prose is evident.Langer and GleasonNuremburg Tribunal documentsCharles TansillHenry L. RobertsL,B. NamierHerman Mau and Helmut KrausnickMaurice BaumontAJP TaylorHR Trevor-RoperAdolph HitlerWarning:  Reading these guys may lead to headaches, nausea, sleeplessness and itching as they all havediffering points of view, they all have varying abilities as writers, some suffer from poor translation andothers just seem to be nasty people.

Quote from: DonaldBaker on Yesterday at 08:25:11 PMQuoteHow would one describe the coronation of Charlemagne in 800?After a brief summary of the actual ceremony, one would then begin to describe the significance of the event and how it reshaped the political and ecclesiastical boundaries of Western Europe.At which point the reader falls asleep and drools on their book.  Don, I have said it before and will say it again, it is possible to write good rigorous history without making the readers heart stop through the boring way it is presented.  You are a minority in that you apparently enjoy dry books, 80-90% of the rest of the world does not and that is why students hate history class.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxThere is a new study out--unhappily I caught it quickly and cannot cite the source--which concludedthat the key ingredient in the making of good "teachers" was akin to voodoo!  If i recall, it seemedto suggest that there was an X factor wherein some people have it and others do not.  Disturbingly, italso allowed that this cannot be taught!  Great teachers can make even dull books sing and weavea mesmerizing story from dull and dusty facts.  I was lucky enough to have some and perhaps you did too--my first was Amelia Adolph--sophomore year--"wonder woman and Circe combined".Think of it as an ability to dance well or Calvin's concept of "the elect".  If you run across the articleplease let me know as I have mentally scourged myself for not tarrying to make a note.

Look guys, I like to read well written History just like you, but when you are talking about eponymous historical markers in ancient Greece, Gnosticism, bureaucratic practices in the Confederacy, or similar topics, it's going to be "dry."  Much of historical research is mundane, monotonous, and technical.  It just is.  Now if you are dealing with the Battle of the Bulge or Custer's Last Stand, then you are probably going to get a little better prose because the characters and events are exciting by nature.

I have a problem defining a “professional” historian.Is it someone who teaches at a University in the History Department?Is it someone who makes his living writing History books, but not teaching?Is it someone who has a Ph.D. in History, but neither teaches or writes--merely researches?Is it someone who writes historical books for money, but does not make enough to pay all the bills?Is it someone dead who perhaps wrote one seminal  book  (Gibbon)?Is it someone who neither writes nor teaches and has no degree at all--just reads History all the timeand knows a lot of stuff and deems it important and of interest to his friends--like the date of the battle of Rocroi?  I assume he has friends.Please advise as to your opinion.