No, I think anyone who writes a book of historical facts (hence the name “history book”) based on research is a historian. And if I were lost, that’d fall under cartography, not history. See, cartography is the study of making maps. Maps are to cartographers as history books are to historians. Make sense?
Damn, selective reading is a tough diagnosis. Is there a pattern, like you only understand every other word or something, or is it just completely random?
Researching it and writing papers for other historians.
Do you think most historians write popular history books for non-historians?
No, but I do think history books are by definition written by historians.
So, you think anybody who writes a book about history is a historian? No wonder you are so lost.
No, I think anyone who writes a book of historical facts (hence the name “history book”) based on research is a historian. And if I were lost, that’d fall under cartography, not history. See, cartography is the study of making maps. Maps are to cartographers as history books are to historians. Make sense?
So, writing a book makes you a historian. It’s not studying history?
Damn, selective reading is a tough diagnosis. Is there a pattern, like you only understand every other word or something, or is it just completely random?