If you're talking about majoring in history in undergrad with the intention of going to grad school and becoming a historian/professor, my advice is simple: don't.

I'm not trying to be flippant or rude, but seriously, don't. There are very few jobs available for historians right now. If you want to major in history in undergrad before going on to do something else, like getting a law or business degree, then that's fine, but don't get a history degree with the intention of getting a Ph.D. and following the traditional academic career path in history, because it doesn't exist anymore.

Universities simply aren't hiring many tenure-track professors; when tenured professors retire, those classes get pawned off on adjuncts and grad students rather than being filled with new hires. There aren't very many museum/archival/curatorial/library jobs either, and those jobs require specialized training beyond the scope of a normal history degree; many institutions have also faced hiring freezes due to the pandemic.

Studying history is rewarding and enriching, but it's just not a good career choice. As much as I love being a historian and hate seeing the profession wither on the vine, I can't lie to you and say there's a real job market out there for historians right now, because there isn't. I hope this didn't come across as mean or cynical, but it's the reality right now, and anyone thinking about what they want to study in college needs to have a realistic assessment of what career options will (or, in this case, won't) be available to them.

I did an undergrad double major in history and archaeology. Started with history because that's what I loved the most, but I realized what the top comment here talked about midway through: no job market to speak of. I decided to split the difference and pick up the archaeology major as well, because there were actually contract archaeology jobs available ("shovel bumming", for those unfamiliar). Not for a lot of money, but I figured working at a job that still involved some history was better than nothing.

After a few years shovel bumming, I went to grad school for professional archaeology and have been steadily employed for the past decade, first with a contract firm and for the past three years with a Native American tribe.

Again, I kind of fell into it backwards, as a "might as well" option when I was in my early twenties. It's not pure history as I originally envisioned for myself, but I do specialize in historical archaeology, which involves a lot of the same types of research. I've had the opportunity to pursue my own projects on occasion and present the results at conferences. I'm not rich, but it's enough to support a career.

That said, though, I've been lucky as well. As much as I'd like to wholeheartedly recommend archaeology as a tangentially-related field, the jobs are pretty thin on the ground over here as well. This is another field in which you should absolutely not pursue an academic path. Even on the contract side of things, you have to move where the jobs are, not pick a place you'd like to live first. All in all, it's worth a try if you want something history-related (a bachelor's in a related field is enough to qualify for most contract jobs), but don't aim for it as your sole choice.

Read this by /u/SunAgainstGold from a few years back: Why You Should Not Get a History PhD. Learn it. Memorize it. Adopt it. There are functionally no jobs in the traditional path of academic historian, and there’s tens of thousands of highly qualified candidate for the tiny few that come available.

By all means get a bachelors (or minor) in history. But get your graduate degree in something else, and set yourself up for a career elsewhere. There is some demand for teaching history in high school, but that’s probably about as close as attainable as “history job” gets these days.