Professional and Amateur..??

�Prompted by some recent posts on these boards, I would like to see what other members feel about the question over �professional� and �amateur� historians�.in particular, when does an individual become a �professional� historian and what criteria, if any, do you think this entails?�I don�t think there is a definitive answer as most of us are aware of �bad� professionals and very good �amateurs�...however, some thoughts and feelings about the topic might be interesting to explore�

..personally, I am not really sure about the distinctions available and I have not attempted to set out some solid �definitions��I think it is ripe for discussion�obviously, there is a great deal of difference between a young or older person who has a passion for a subject and a high degree of subject knowledge and a Professor of history with many years of experience and maybe even some publications behind them�.however, criticism could be made of this statement �many �amateurs� I have known, manage to bring to the historical table a vast amount of knowledge and understanding without ever having been near an educational establishment, and more often, are employed in a completely different field�.my doctor for example, while attending a first appointment many years ago, it came out in conversation that I was studying history and that my doctor always wanted to be a �historian�, but his parents felt that he should study the medical profession�..however, once he had become a doctor, he went on to explore his own natural inclination for history, in particular, the crusades and medieval history�I put my foot in it slightly, when I remarked that it must be good to be a doctor and be an �amateur� history buff which was met by the well meant rebuff �my dear lad, I would consider myself a little bit more than an amateur��

�so�

..to be a professional, does someone have to attend a university for example? Is a History degree necessary? What about publications? Could it be considered that someone is professional if they have published articles/books/journals etc?..is someone really only professional when they have reached a doctorate level or have even become a professor?�.What about employment? Can someone only be a professional when they are actually being paid for a job connected to the exploration of history?�.

...I remember at university, that by the third year, our tutors would actively refer to us not just as �students� but as �historians� in the recognition that once we had (successfully) graduated, we would indeed be �historian� material�..now while this was very flattering, I felt very much way off the mark when it came to comparisons with my tutors�at no point whatsoever, did I feel any �equal� standing with such people�..I did, and I still do, maintain a huge level of respect for my tutors�I admired their gift for discourse, their level of knowledge, their analytical skills etc etc�and I felt that I could not ever be considered to be a �proper� historian� until, at the very least, I had attained some degree of my tutors experience and knowledge�Do you consider yourself a �Professional Historian�?�

Well, lots of questions, but any comments and thoughts would be warmly welcome�

Ta ta for now�

AoO�