A former colleague of mine wrote an article on the website of The Atlantic a few weeks ago on the Smyth Report, the first history of the atomic bomb. This week I published something of a "reply" to that article, engaging with, and arguing against, its thesis. The basic argument of the original article, boiled down to its essence, is that the first official history of the atomic bomb, the Smyth Report, was written in such a way to distract against potential analogies between the atomic bomb and chemical warfare. As one of the few people in the world who has studied the genesis of the Smyth Report very carefully (there are probably three or four people total who have looked at it very closely, and I have basically a whole chapter in my dissertation on this topic), I felt the need to make clear (to any future Googlers or readers, much less scholars who aren't as in the weeds on this topic as I am), that I thought this was quite a stretch of an argument (we have lots of evidence for why they wrote it the way they did, and chemical weapons doesn't come into it). Anyway, you can read my overly long (in part because I felt the need to really cover the other work done on this topic) discussion here: The Smyth Report: A chemical weapon coverup?.

It has been a bit of kerfuffle on Facebook, because the author of the original article has not, let us say, been exceptionally eager to have someone criticize her thesis, but also not been very willing to engage with it (which I find baffling, personally, because what is the point of publishing a controversial thesis in a prominent location if you are not interested in having it engaged with by experts, and possibly debated?). There is some additional back story (as with all things), but ultimately it has been a more anxious and unpleasant experience that I am used to dealing with when dealing with other professionals (I have been told via e-mail by another scholar that it is problematic that I, a white guy, am writing an article critical of the work of a woman of color... I think this is a bonkers way to think about the role of scholars and scholarship, but OK — I cannot imagine this is a common sentiment).

Anyway, I offer it up, and would love feedback if you wanted to give it.

Stumbled upon this new history podcast.

https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/episode-1-sex/id1231766332?i=1000384914984

It's from 2 medieval historians at Kings College who answer a medieval history question every other week.

Based on the first episode "Did they know about other kinds of sex?” This seems to basically be a 30 minute audio version of a super high quality answer to a question you might see on askhistorians.

Is there a good place to get news about interesting new papers, books, or archeological finds?

To what lengths do you go searching, before declaring a source non existent?

Had another article published regarding hockey in Asia, all on the same, reputable online magazine of current affairs. This one dealt with the preparations of South Korea and China for their national teams in the leadup to the 2018 and 2022 Winter Olympics, respectively, and how the former nationalised a bunch of Canadians and Americans without any Korean heritage, and that the latter could do the same, but has the option to find Canadians of Chinese heritage. It worked for Korea finally, as they won promotion to next years World Championship, the first time they'll ever play at that level, and comes in their last international tournament before the Olympics. This was my third article on Asian hockey (the first two dealt with the expansion of the KHL into China last year), so I feel I can start to refer to myself as an authority on the subject.

I am writing my senior thesis and have run into a problem with sources. Thus far, I am the first person to write about this specific topic (the closing and environmental remediation of a bomb factory and chemical testing facility). I have found several former employees of the facility, people who worked at the multi-million dollar housing development that went up on the land, several professors who work with the DTSC and military contractors, even the reporter who covered the closure for a decade, but NONE of them will let me release their names. I have a ton of information for my paper, but it feels dubious to read a paper full of footnotes explaining that the source of this information is confidential. Some of it is legitimately scandalous and would paint both the DTSC and Aerojet and some people from the city in a poor light. Granted, this is an undergraduate thesis that a max of three people (and that's generous) will read. I'm not necessarily sure how to proceed. Leaving their information out is an option but it really cuts out the most interesting part of the paper. Including it leaves a bunch of anonymous and thus questionable sources for some very poor accusations​ (and possibly out some people).

Does anyone have any recommendations for historical fiction, emphasis on historical over fiction?

Here's what I have so far from asking a couple professors

Blindspot by Jill Lepore - Colonial America

Mason & Dixon by Thomas Pynchon - Colonial America

The Baroque Cycle by Neal Stephenson - 17th century everywhere

Flashman by George MacDonald Frasier - British Empire

Thought y'all might be interested: Timothy Snyder is doing an AMA on /r/politics on May 8, 11 AM est!

I am currently looking for a .pdf copy of the House of Commons Parliamentary Papers 1837-8 (215) vol. 48, more specifically I need the British Parliamentary Return regarding compensation awarded under the 1833 Abolition Act for the island of Antigua. I know it is available in ProQuest, but my University doesn't have access to that particular database.

I'm currently working with a letter documenting the inheritance of a slave plantation in Antigua, and subsequent sale of a portion of the slaves in the estate. I have since located the earlier slave returns which list them by name and age, which is absolutely fantastic, but am trying to trace what the final disposition of the estate was following the Abolition Act being passed. Having that final return would help tremendously and proving or disproving that the plantation was still being actively used by then.

If anyone can help me out, feel free to reply or PM me.

What do you good people think of the idea that the Scots created the modern world? I know there's a popular book on it, but I haven't gotten my hands on it and I wouldn't know how to evaluate it anyway.

I only ask because I've never heard of this before, partly ignorance and partly the fact that I'm Asian and we don't focus so closely on Scottish history of all places. Can anyone give me their two cents on this?