Question on scholarly reliability of certain publications

[jason_corlew]

long time no chat with you folks here. I've been away for months. Anyway hope all is well with you people here and to the new ones.

If there are any ph.d recipients here or college level teachers I would greatly appreciate your input on this but as always others are more than welcome to give me feedback.

ok here is the question: Magazines such as Civil War Times Illustrated are real fun to read. I have about 20 from when i was a kid and recently found them in a box and have been reading every word of every article of them all weekend long. Now that I'm working towards my own higher degree in history, I was curious as to whether or not articles from CWTI could be cited in a paper or article of my own and still carry the same scholarly weight as an article from CWH or Journal of American History. Does anybody know for sure? I was thinking of renewing my subscription and at school our library has every single issue. I've been reading alot of the older ones. The reason I became curious is a lot of the articles contain quotes and no citations ever. I guess its the obsessive student in me but I want to know its accurate. So how could one know for sure? One small tidbit in one of the magazines I recently found talked of correspondence between Forrest and Sherman after the war when Sherman was part of the national govt. I found that really interesting but where is the citation? If anyone can calm my nerves I'd appreciate it. If any professors would like to email me with your ideas on the issue id appreciate or post here for all to see.

[kat1121]

Jason - I'm home playing hooky from work so I can finish writing the conclusion on my dissertation -- does that qualify me? And my significant other teaches history at the local university, so that's something anyway!

I don't have my copy of Writer's Market handy, but I seem to recall that CWTI requests authors to submit their references separately from the article. You might visit the magazine's website and look for their guidelines for submissions to check this. CWTI walks the fine line in presenting history -- if you footnote everything and include sources, you become a scholarly journal like the William & Mary Quarterly and then lose your mainstream market. Which is where the money is. By staying mainstream, you have to present your material in a user-friendly manner, which isn't always the most scholarly way to present.

Having myself written articles for various publications where I used direct quotes but was not required to give sources, I know that this is a standard procedure and an acceptable ones for some publications. Even when not requested, I always provide a footnoted copy along with the "popular culture" version of whatever it is just to back myself up.

Using these quotes as source material, however, is another story. Your best bet, if you can't find where the original came out of, is to do something like: "In his article in CWTI, historian John Smith relates that in a meeting after the war, Forrest told Sherman that........" And then cite John Smith, Article Title, Civil War Times Illustrated in the footnote.

The other thing you might do, if you really, really need to find the source, is to contact the magazine. You could try contacting the author as well, although a word of caution here: as you may or may not have discovered, historians, like everyone else, can be terribly jealous folks and will carefully guard sources rather than spreading the wealth around. (i.e., If you ever look into Mexican history, you will find most of the sources in Spanish which eliminates a certain portion of the population from ever finding out what is contained in them.) Asking a historian for a source can be a touchy subject.

As to using CWTI as a source, I don't see any harm as long as you are using other sources. Don't rely entirely on CWTI. Generally, you are going to need to cite 3-5 sources per page and professors like to see a nice mix of primary and secondary sources, with secondary sources including books, articles, speeches, etc.

Parenthetic to this, wait until you start using Internet sources. We are finding that most academic-types detest seeing Internet sources and some even direct students to not use any at all. There seems to be some thought that if it is printed on paper, you can accept it as fact but if it is off the Internet, it is fabricated. Personally, I would have been lost without them having found some spectacular primary source documents for my paper that I otherwise would not have know about. If you get to citing Internet sources, I have the MLA style guidelines for footnoting -- they can be tricky!

Hope this is of some help! Better get back to my paper....

Kat

Kat,
Please forgive my ignorance. What are MLA guidelines? Also, I was under the impression that certain internet sources were honored as sacrosanct nowadays. I can understand Professors having reluctance to accept online but I would also as a student want to have ready access. Not to mention the fact online is much more cost effective. As a student that would be my guiding light.

YMOS
tommy

[kat1121]

Tommy, Sorry! MLA is the Modern Language Association; they are a sort of "trade group" overseeing language usage and how things are cited. The MLA's own format uses in-line citations rather than footnotes. They provide guidelines for how sources are cited in bibliographies and I've found that alot of people are confused over how to cite Internet sources as it is so new.

I agree with you that internet sources are more readily accessible as well as cost effective.

I think that the reasons against the Internet are many and varied, starting with not being able to teach old dogs new tricks. The older professors, many of whom are still having trouble with email, just don't like it. Plus, there are too many younger students who do things like download papers from paper mills, use homepages as sources, etc. In the bachelor's history program, 100 and 200 level classes forbid internet sources; they are allowed for 300 and 400 level, but within reason (meaning: not your whole paper). Graduate students and those in the 5-year program have more leeway.

It took me awhile to prove my own proficiency with internet research and in tapping into some truly wonderful source material. But, that said: I can read the Journal of the Senate proceedings for the 1860s online at the Library of Congress, or on microfiche at our State Library which is an hour's drive away. I get a better response from the teaching staff if I turn up with a print out from the microfiche than a print out from the computer. Yet, it is the same material.

Go figure! My argument is that it is quicker and easier to visit the Library of Congress at 3:00 in the morning on any given day than to drive to Trenton only on Saturdays. Maybe professors are jealous that things are easier for us than it was for them? Another one of the mysteries of academia!

Kat

Kat,

Thank you so very much. I confess when I am reading a book I prefer footnotes in line or bottom of the page rather than end of chapter or back of the book. Although the difference in a paper and a book are enormous. If I was doing a paper for a grade I'd truly loathe having to do it in line or bottom page.

As to profressors and why they hesitate etc. I recall recently the big to-do on the issue of online papers for sale and the systems being attempted to curb the usage of "cheat material." It seems to be an uphill battle.


Personally I have questioned CWTI information at times and in a couple of cases found it to be less than factual at times. Or at least up for debate. I fully understand it is written for drama more than for purely historical aspects though. It is just the prose tends to put emphasis on things that are not documented.

Once again, Thank you so very much

YMOS
tommy

[tamaroa]

There is a Journal called Civil War History published by Kent State University. It is unlike anything you have ever seen unless of course you already know about it. Think of the old used to be Columbiad series and ratchet it up a notch or two.

Being a university publication, they do not talk down to you. It is not a 7th grade reading level which many of the magazines we all patronize use. This month's issue is about 100 pages and the following subjects are covered:
1) Who were the Bushwhackers? a study of the demographics of Confederate bushwhackers in Virginia/West Virginia.
2) McClellan and Halleck at War, struggle for control of the Union War Effort November 1861, March 1862.
3) Research Note - New Access to a Civil war Resource (courts-martial)
4) Robert E. Lee and perspective over time.

I have subscribed to it for awhile. It is not the kind of publication you want if all you care about is battles, photos and maps. And, it can be dry at times. But it is well researched and documented with footnotes at the bottom of every page.

It is 35 dollars a year and its a quarterly journal. It is worth it in my opinion.

Regards,

Bill