Large portions of museums and bookstore shelves seem to be filled with military paraphernalia, and catalogues of historical weaponry seem to be disproportionately popular compared to other pieces of material culture. Some of the first books I ever had as a child were books handed down to me by my cousins about Cold War materiel, and I have many memories of visiting the IWM with older family members. The various ways of stabbing, shooting and blowing each other up that we have devised seem to be an "acceptable" interest, while, say, the history of textiles or of gardens would be niche or eccentric. The more I think about it, though, the more bizarre this focus on historical warfare is for a global society that nowadays prides itself on peace. Why is this the case, and how do academics feel about it and work around it?
Regarding the view of military historians Why do so many Academic Historians look down on Military History? written by u/commiespaceinvader u/Iphikrates u/CrossyNZ u/AshkenazeeYankee (their reply to follow up briefly tackles the "why so popular" question) and others.