AustLit

'As we write this editorial and send the latest batch of outstanding research articles and reviews off to the publisher, we do so having had the chance to engage (virtually at least) with many of you at the Annual General Meeting (AGM) of the Australian Historical Association (AHA). As we noted in our first editorial for 2021, ‘From the President’ will now appear annually in the issue after the AGM, which in terms of production timelines means it appears in the final issue of the year. There was, moreover, some good news to celebrate at this meeting. That very morning the Morrison Government announced it would provide funding for the National Archives (NAA) to preserve records in danger of falling off the digital cliff. ‘Dragging their feet’ would be a generous way to describe the response of the Government to the Tune Review, which was only publicly released in March 2021, more than a year after the Government received it. This review confirmed what many historians of Australia already knew; namely, that the archives are woefully understaffed and working through an incredible backlog of requests for researchers. More disturbingly, the Tune Review confirmed that many records were in a perilous state, requiring urgent preservation work if they were not to decay beyond repair. The AHA, both as an organisation formally and from its membership, led the charge on trying to force the Government to revise its initial choice to essentially ignore this crisis; after the May federal budget, a paltry $700,000 was allocated to meet needs. According to the Government this was ‘nothing to be embarrassed about’, even as the Tune Review recommended that over $65 million was required.' (Leigh Boucher, Michelle Arrow and Kate Fuillagar, Editorial introduction)

'The editors look forward to the day when we do not feel compelled to open our editorial with a recent dramatic historical crisis. Today, however, is not that day. We have finalised the details of this issue in the shadow of the insurrection against the United States’ congress building on 6 January 2021. Even those most resistant to listening to historians have been unable to escape their demand to compare this event to key moments in the past – to Kristallnacht, to the Beer Hall Putsch of 1923, to the many coup d’etats of the postwar world, or even to the revolution of 1776 (if racialist minority overthrows of constitutional governments are the comparisons one is after). Politicians, journalists, and punters around the world have been beseeching their advisers, audiences, inner souls, and the fathomless ether to answer their questions about the most appropriate analogy. What should we call this event? How did we get here? What can we do now? And what does it all foretell?' (Editorial introduction)

'We are delighted to bring you our first special issue in over a year, guest-edited by two close friends of the journal. Former book reviews editor Agnieszka Sobocinska (2019–2020) and former editor Melanie Oppenheimer (2016–2018) have worked on this collection since presenting together at a symposium called ‘Cultures and Histories of Humanitarianism and International Development’ at Monash University in 2019. They have selected and edited some of the voices from that event in order to offer here a cohesive anthology of recent trends and topics in the history of foreign aid.' (Kate Fullagar, Michelle Arrow and Leigh Boucher, From the Editors, Introduction)

'2020 has been a year of radical uncertainty. Many of us began the year choked by smoke from the bushfires that devastated wildlife and communities across much of Australia. Such fires had long been anticipated by climate scientists, though they seemed to take our politicians by surprise. If the bushfires were a predictable but horrifying disaster, few could have predicted the Covid-19 pandemic that has overwhelmed the world in the wake of the fire crisis. While epidemiologists have long warned of the threat of another global pandemic, it was nonetheless experienced by most of us as an unprecedented emergency. From panic buying to lockdown and home schooling, everyone felt its impact, and the history profession was no exception. Archives and libraries closed. Teaching moved online. Many casual staff found their employment had dried up overnight. Seminars, conferences and informal markers of collegiality all fell away as we heeded calls to flatten the curve. As if that wasn’t enough to contend with, academics around the country are now reeling in response to government proposals for sweeping changes to the university sector, which, among other things, would see student fees for history degrees increase by 113 per cent. The upheavals seem endless, and the ground is constantly shifting beneath our feet.' (Michelle Arrow , Leigh Boucher & Kate Fullagar, From the Editors : Introduction)

'We write this introduction in changed and challenging circumstances, with an acute awareness of how unevenly the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic have been distributed among the AHA membership and wider readership of History Australia, even as narratives of this crisis suggest that ‘we’ are all experiencing this ‘together in lockdown’. At the same time, the Australian Historical Association, this journal and its diverse membership are working to nourish our disciplinary community in a period when our connections with each other can no longer be embodied in the physical space of departments, conferences, seminars, museums and libraries. We are, for the moment, a community enacted almost entirely through virtual and other mediums, and these are meagre substitutes. Our weekly editorial meetings, once treasured moments of connection, laughter and collegiality around a table, now take place on Zoom, with words and phrases sometimes garbled or lost in their translation from sound, to data and back to sound again. Many of us are having to learn how to work together without being together. The loss is acute. We hope that the arrival of issue 17.2 reminds our members, authors and readers of their membership in a community of historians in, of or from Australia.' (Leigh Boucher, Michelle Arrow, Kate Fullagar, From the Editors, introduction)

'Our first issue of 2020 kicks off with some powerfully pertinent items. The president’s report acknowledges the urgency of our discipline’s work while the country struggles to comprehend the scale of the fire disaster and to forge an adequate public response. As Prof. Damousi points out, historians are critical to both tasks, and this will be underscored especially at the next Australian Historical Association (AHA) annual conference at Deakin University, entitled ‘Urgent Histories’.' (Kate Fullagar , Michelle Arrow  & Leigh Boucher  : Editorial introduction)

'The annual AHA conference took place between 8 and 12 July 2019 in Toowoomba under the auspices of the University of Southern Queensland. The theme of the conference was the timely and pertinent concept of ‘Local Communities, Global Networks’. Across many time frames, places and spaces, this connection was explored, contested and interrogated across the week of keynotes, round tables, plenaries and sessions that collectively illuminated the complexities and intersections between the local and the global.' (Editorial introduction)

'The AHA has in recent times engaged with three reviews that will be vital in shaping future historical research. These are: the ‘Function and Efficiency’ Tune Review of the National Archives of Australia (NAA); the Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classifications Review (ANZSRCR); and the Future Humanities Workforce Project (FHWP) run through the Australian Academy of Humanities (AAH). These reviews are pertinent for all historians working in Australia and cover different aspects of our work. I wish to discuss them briefly in turn and the implications of each for how we undertake historical research.' (Joy Damousi: From the President)

'Our second issue still benefits from the hard work of our predecessors, the Flinders editorial team. We were delighted to delve into the eight articles accepted for this issue and discuss with the authors the best ways to highlight their contributions. We are especially thrilled to lead off the issue with Paul Sendziuk and Martin Crotty’s report on their investigation into history curricula in Australian and New Zealand universities. In response to the grandiose claims made recently by the Institute of Public Affairs that our universities teach fragmented and parochial history, Sendziuk and Crotty found instead that comprehensive surveys are alive and well. Read further to find out the details of what we actually teach in history lecture theatres across the Tasman world.' (Editorial introduction)

'The events of the last three months of 2018 regarding the vetoing of Australian Research Council (ARC) grants by the former Minister of Education, Simon Birmingham, has dominated academic news. The response from the Australian research sector to Birmingham’s actions have been unanimous, uncompromising and strident. Professional associations, Vice-Chancellors, all four Learned academies, leading scholars and researchers across the academic spectrum have joined in the outcry. The vetoes were revealed only when the CEO of the ARC, Professor Sue Thomas, was questioned by the Shadow Minister for Innovation, Industry, Science and Research, Kim Carr in Senate estimates. They pointed to a serious undermining of the world-renowned peer-assessment process of the ARC. In total, 11 ARC grants – all from the Humanities – which were recommended for funding were vetoed by the Minister without explanation, let alone any reasons advanced on scholarly grounds. While the Minister acted within his right to do so, it signals a dangerous action which challenges the independent means of determining the allocation of grants.'   (Editorial introduction)

'History, it seems, remains a discipline under siege in Australia. Politically unloved and not immediately convertible into an agile start up, recent revelations of political interference in the Australian Research Council (ARC) grants process have confirmed the impression that what we do as a discipline is widely misunderstood and frequently undervalued. All too often our work is seen as esoteric and far removed from the hurly burly of what is misleadingly termed the ‘real world’. The current mood is that historians need to be disciplined, enjoined to write in ways that serve the ‘national interest’, cajoled into accepting politically laden centres that devalue the importance of scholarly independence and measured against university-level metrics that view external research funding as an infinitely attainable output and not an increasingly scarce input.' (Matthew P. Fitzpatrick, Catherine Kevin & Melanie Oppenheimer : Editorial introduction)

'Regionalism and internationalism are themes that emerge strongly in this issue. Intersecting with these is evidence of the ever-expanding scholarship on the experiences, consequences and representations of war. These themes are not only subjects of research, but also frame much of the teaching done by historians in our universities.' (Editors introduction)

'Each year, History Australia offers a prize for the best article from the previous calendar year. The editors are delighted to announce that Ben Silverstein’s article, ‘“Possibly They Did Not Know Themselves”: The Ambivalent Government of Sex and Work in the Northern Territory Aboriginals Ordinance 1918’ from issue 14(3) won the prize for 2017. In crisp prose, Silverstein’s article wove a theoretically informed line of argument around new empirical material to explore the regulation of Indigenous life in the service of the health of the settler population. Demonstrating ‘the malleability of racial categorisations’, it is an innovative article that will push the field forward in coming years.' (Matthew P. Fitzpatrick , Catherine Kevin & Melanie Oppenheimer From the Editors introduction)

'We are delighted to bring you a bumper issue of History Australia, the fourth and final one for 2017. In it you will find acknowledgements of the contributions of two of our finest historians, Emeritus Professor Ken Inglis and the late Professor Emerita Jill Roe, as well as a suite of research articles from established and early career historians that collectively demonstrates the enormous diversity of historical research in Australia today. This plurality of methodologies and subject matter also reflects the diversity of approaches to history as it is taught in our universities, reminding us just how far off the mark the recent and widely criticised Institute of Public Affairs report was. Alarmingly titled ‘The End of History…in Australian Universities’ this report was highly critical of what it referred to as the dominance of ‘identity politics’ in the current History curriculum. Our colleagues and AHA executive members, Associate Professors Martin Crotty and Paul Sendiuk have written an informed and intelligent response based on a 2017 survey of History courses in Australian universities, soundly debunking the myths proffered by the IPA. We would urge everyone to read it.' (Editorial)

'We put the final touches on issue 14.3 in the wake of the Newcastle Australian Historical Association (AHA) conference, happily exhausted by a programme jam-packed with stimulating papers, book launches and the other gatherings described in Lynette Russell’s President’s Report. An exciting aspect of this year’s AHA was the vibrant presence of so many postgraduate and early career researchers, whose contributions enriched a great number of panels. Beyond presenting their scholarship, these well-organised researchers displayed plenty of initiative, seeking opportunities for publication, and stimulating discussion of their careers and the profession more broadly. Several examples of their involvement are worth highlighting here, including the work of the Early Career Research Network, which hosted a number of events on publishing and grant writing, displaying the strategic thinking, generosity and sense of community that is emerging among this newest generation of historians. From our perspective as editors of History Australia, we were particularly pleased to take part in a roundtable session for postgraduates on getting their work published, chaired by Alana Piper and organised by Daniel May. Alongside this, the postgraduate CAL Bursary recipients, currently working with their AHA-appointed mentors to turn their conference papers into journal submissions, presented extremely promising research on gender, colonialism, migration and other forms of mobility. Congratulations to AHA ECR representatives Margaret Hutchison and Carolyn Holbrook who recently won a grant from the Copyright Agency Cultural Fund to launch a similar mentoring scheme for ECRs. We look forward in future years to CAL Bursary postgraduates being joined by those taking advantage of this new scheme.' (Editorial introduction)

'The editorial team of History Australia are very happy to present this special issue of the journal, entitled ‘Peace and Patriotism in Twentieth-Century Australia’. We are particularly proud that this special issue, edited by Kyle Harvey and Nick Irving, showcases new work from both early career researchers as well as established scholars, underlining once again History Australia’s determination to publish work from a broad cross-section of historians.' (Introduction)

'One of the main efforts of the current and past editorial teams of History Australiahas been to globalise the scope and content of the journal. In the spirit of this endeavour, and within a section called‘Historical Practice’, we begin this issue with a short article commissioned by our predecessors from leading scholar Professor G. Balachandran (Geneva Institute of International and Development Studies,Switzerland).' (From the editors)