a couple of observations about historians gleaned from the Annual Conference of the American Historical Association:

for a group of people who seem to make a lot of presentations, a surprising number of historians have neglected to cultivate anything that might reasonably be called speaking or oratorical skills. there was at least one likely very interesting paper (about Carolingian hostage taking policies) that was completely torpedoed by its author's inability to make his findings comprehensible or coherent in even the broadest sense of those two words.

military historians are among the most trite and boring people on the face of the earth. let me go on the record as saying that despite what someone might try and tell you, the horse purchasing policies of the Union and Confederate armies during the American Civil War probably have very little to do with the outcome of the war, much less anything else.

also: the activities and employment patterns of Catalán militias during the 11th and 12th centuries in Eastern Iberia (Sharq al-Andalus) and North Africa (the Maghrib) were probably not of any significant interest to anyone not being immediately lanced or clubbed and have certainly gotten no more relevant since then.

on a related note: if you're going to make a presentation involving a large volume of Arabic words it might be worth looking up their pronunciations beforehand, rather than making them up. most of them aren't even that hard. i'm pretty sure that if you had asked someone they could have told you that "Maghrib" is pronounced MA-grib, not ma-GRIB and "Maghribi" is coincidentally MA-grib-ee and not ma-GRIB-ee. i admit, this is sort of nit-picking. but it doesn't take a tenured professor to know that the word Muslim only has two syllables, not three, as in "MOO-sa-lim". sure, lots of people mispronounce lots of words on a daily basis but i find it a little hard to believe that someone with a PhD doesn't know any better.

historians are, by and large, and awkward and badly dressed bunch. although i had recognized cognitively that there are people who will occasionally wear jeans and a blazer, i don't think i'd ever seen someone wearing a pink (pink!) blazer and jeans before. rust and earth-toned sweaters were extremely popular. there were a number of poorly-chosen bow ties in evidence as well.

at this point, you might be thinking to yourself, "boy, Jeff sure is down on the community of historians. it sounds like he had a really discouraging time at that conference he went to." don't get the wrong impression. there were certainly plenty of good panels and speakers and people with whom i would like to work at some point in the future.

but most importantly of all, my greatest nagging doubt about my desired career trajectory has been put to rest. after spending a weekend with some professional historians, i now know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that i can definitely hack it as a historian. hey, and if nothing else works i can always fall back on my charm, good looks, and ability to conduct a normal conversation.