REVISITING RHS'S ‘RACE, ETHNICITY & EQUALITY IN UK HISTORY: A REPORT AND RESOURCE FOR CHANGE’

Abstract

This paper considers the Royal Historical Society (RHS)'s ‘Race, Ethnicity & Equality in UK History’ report published in 2018. The report contained the findings of a survey sent to staff and students working or studying in History higher education in the United Kingdom. In this paper, I reflect on the various findings of the report related to staff and student numbers, the attainment gap between white and Black and Ethnic Minority students, the curriculum, and racial harassment in History within universities. The RHS report emerged out of the work done by a number of organisations championing race and equality in the sector over decades. By connecting the work of RHS to these earlier initiatives it is possible to map a broader societal change in the historical sector to address historic inequalities, racialised disadvantage and structural exclusion. The RHS and institutions such as Runnymede Trust, the Institute of Historical Research, and Leading Routes are championing greater racial and ethnic equality which reflects broader political, economic and cultural transformations taking place in Britain. In this paper, I show how the RHS is part of an important conversation in foregrounding racial and ethnic equality in the historical profession to the inevitable benefit of History higher education.

Historical Argumentation: Watching Historians and Teaching Youth

“…In addition, historically, what counts as evidence has been highly interpretive. For instance, societies without written records have received little attention in historical inquiry until relatively recently (Atkinson et al, 2018;Thomson, 2007). This neglect is not because these societies lack historical evidence, but because the type of evidence they have produced, such as oral histories, has not been recognized by many historians as legitimate-an interpretive value judgment.…”

“…Historical argumentation from Graff et al's (2015) perspective is therefore a social process, as historians collectively attempt to construct and share increasingly accurate, inclusive, and comprehensive narratives of the past (Atkinson et al, 2018;Thomson, 2007;Woyshner, 2002). To be sure, there are times that historians' argumentation takes on the more colloquial definition of an argument, including angry exchanges (Schuessler, 2020).…”

Imperiumin kiistelty kotiinpaluu 2020-luvun alun Britanniassa

“…Linstrum, Ward, Ogle, Nasar & Gopal 2022, 274-303. On historian ironiaa, kuten Linstrum toteaa, että jo 1920-luvulla lanseerattu dekolonisaation käsite oli alun perin tarkoitettu konservatiiviseen ja nationalistiseen käyttöön: se oli käyttökelpoinen esimerkiksi esitettäessä toisen maailmansodan jälkeen Ranskan ja Britannian imperiumien hajoaminen välttämättömänä prosessina, ei tappiona. 18 Atkinson et al 2018. Identiteetiltään mustien brittien osuus väestöstä on arviolta 3-4% 2020-luvulle tultaessa.…”