Difference between revisions of "Talk:American Historical Association"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
(Created page with 'The OAH is not really a "rival" to the AHA. The former is an organization for historians who work on American history. The latter is for historians working in the USA, regardless...') |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The OAH is not really a "rival" to the AHA. The former is an organization for historians who work on American history. The latter is for historians working in the USA, regardless of their research fields. This difference is reflected in the contents of the respective journals. Many, if not most USA-based historians of the United States belong to both groups AFAIK. [[User:StephenE|StephenE]] 22:25, 9 August 2009 (EDT) | The OAH is not really a "rival" to the AHA. The former is an organization for historians who work on American history. The latter is for historians working in the USA, regardless of their research fields. This difference is reflected in the contents of the respective journals. Many, if not most USA-based historians of the United States belong to both groups AFAIK. [[User:StephenE|StephenE]] 22:25, 9 August 2009 (EDT) | ||
| + | ::they are rivals for members and prestige. (and I belong to both) [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 22:49, 9 August 2009 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 02:49, August 10, 2009
The OAH is not really a "rival" to the AHA. The former is an organization for historians who work on American history. The latter is for historians working in the USA, regardless of their research fields. This difference is reflected in the contents of the respective journals. Many, if not most USA-based historians of the United States belong to both groups AFAIK. StephenE 22:25, 9 August 2009 (EDT)
- they are rivals for members and prestige. (and I belong to both) RJJensen 22:49, 9 August 2009 (EDT)