Public history is history as it is experienced by and interpreted for the
public. It is history in films, on websites, in historical fiction, in museums,
in popular books and magazines. It is a street corner commemorative plaque and a
Steven Spielberg blockbuster. It is Canada: A People’s History, Ken
Burns, Pierre Berton, the Bata Shoe Museum, genealogy, the National Archives,
and your junior high Social Studies teacher. And it is the name given to the
study of all these. The discipline of public history sprang up in the United States in the 1970s.
Some academic historians noticed that the public was getting most of its notions
about the past from popular history books, films, and museums, rather than from
university courses and university textbooks. These historians also noticed that
there were more and more people just like themselves—people from the same
schools, with the same degrees—doing the same quality historical work as
themselves, but outside of universities. With their well-developed sense of
intellectual curiosity (and perhaps dashes of suspicion and envy), academic
historians began to study history in the public sphere—public history. The term “public history” is an admittedly awkward one. Public practitioners
of history do not tend to call their work by the name (especially in Canada).
And why does history need such differentiation anyway?—there is no “Public
Chemistry” or “Public Anthropology.” It could be said, though, that the
awkwardness of the name is appropriate: it signals how alienated the worlds of
academic and “public” history have become from one another. Public history programs in American universities have thrived since the
1970s, serving something of an ambassadorial role between history departments
and the outside world. They have taught students the skills needed for doing
historical work outside academia. They have shown students how and why to bring
their work to a broader audience. They have assisted in strengthening historical
scholarship in the public sphere itself. And, by studying such matters as
authenticity, historical significance, memory, and interpretation, they have
helped all practitioners of history better understand how we communicate
history, and how we might do better. Public history has had a quieter life in Canada
than in the U.S. But that is changing. Documentaries such as The Valour and
the Horror, books such as Who Killed Canadian History?, and issues
such as the building of the new Canadian War Museum have had Canadians debating
about what history is and what it should be telling. Academic historians have
taken notice: some of the most important Canadian scholarly work of the past
decade—books like HV Nelles’ The Art of Nation-building, Jonathan
Vance’s Death So Noble, and Ian McKay’s Quest of the Folk—have
concerned commemoration, memory, and the presentation of the past for tourism
purposes. Public history is on the rise. -Alan MacEachern, Director of the Network in Canadian History and the EnvironmentWhat is Public History?

