I've been skiving off work a bit too much, so I can't quite delve in right now, but I commend to your attention this previous thread on a similar question, ably answered by u/restricteddata with me for the assist.

I should also point out that there's a distinction between academic history (which I, the layman with some expertise, can't even begin to contribute to) and public history (which is what we do here on the subreddit, where I the layman with some expertise can contribute in my area) that you may not be seeing.

as good as a professional historian

I understand the persistence of the perspective here – that professional historians belong to a community, all having like training and expertise, but my experience, that is far from the case. Professional historians don’t live on the top of a mountain looking down on others who can’t hope to rise to their level.

In addition, I understand the inclination to look to the question of professional training and recognizing that advanced degrees convey a certain level of sophistication and ability to contribute, but honestly, I have met too many fools (and little published fools at that) with Ph.Ds. to be very impressed. And I have known a great many enthusiasts who have made real contributions with little or no training.

It is possible to make a real contribution. And given what seems to be a decline in academia and the rise of internet resources, I suspect the future increases the possibility of making important contributions without training, working as an “amateur.” I spent my career as a public historian and sometimes academic anarchist, demonstrating that anyone can swim in the historical pool and make contributions.

When I assembled the writers for my edited volume, Comstock Women: The Making of a Mining Community (1998), I sought out a range of people who I knew were experts in various aspects of the topic. Not all had degrees, and many did not have advanced degrees. But they had enthusiasm and they each developed an expertise in their own subject area – an expertise that was typically unmatched elsewhere and that certainly could not be found at any university. Some of the authors required a bit of coaxing and editing – they were not created equally* – but with the final product, they each made a lasting contribution. (edit: *easily the most challenging of the authors, the one who required the most editing, was a university history professor.)

Key here was becoming an expert on a subject. Anyone can do that, and it is even easier these days with the internet. A lot of focus and hard work can bring a formidable understanding of a specific topic into one’s grasp. I have known many park rangers and smalltown enthusiasts who are the experts of their domain. I went to them for insight into their topic much more quickly than I would have called anyone at the university. What they often lacked was an ability to provide context for topic, but again, I have known professors teaching history at universities who knew nothing of context. Knowing nineteenth-century French health care or sixteenth-century German court astronomy can be impressive, but these professorial experts were not much better than the park ranger who spent her life considering the resource at her fingertips.

Everyone who publishes in history has limitations and good writing historians consider how best to deal with their own limits of expertise. That is a challenge for everyone. A good writing historian “reads a lot and gains access to historical sources (now widely available on the internet).” That writer then tries to implement a “good grasp of methods of historical research,” but then the peer review process quickly demonstrates where that grasp can be improved: we all need help when we write or when we “do” history. Although doing history seems solitary, the process is a team effort. After all, we have /r/AskHistorians!!!!

You can, therefore, make a meaningful contribution as a historian. It is, simply, a lot of work.

I am currently working with a retired public school math teacher who has made it her obsession to learn everything about a local house museum that has national significance. She is the unquestioned expert on this subject. She knows more about it than anyone ever has – or is likely to know for several decades to come. She has self-published a booklet on the subject, but she recognized that what she knows about the mansion would be best memorialized in something more substantial. The local university press was interested, but thought some sort of process was needed to assist with the effort. The manuscript acquisitions editor called on me.

I am editing her chapters, contributing suggestions along the way (which she eagerly consumes). I will then write a larger context of the subject, placing it in a regional and national perspective. I have also enlisted the services of a talented (but little-published) architectural historian who will write a context about the building from that discipline’s perspective. This collaborative effort will make a real contribution to the field of history - and I will make certain that our retired math teacher has the lead name of authorship because she deserves it! It all started with someone with no degree in history, but with a huge among of enthusiasm and a willingness to give it endless effort. When this project is finished, this retired math teacher will be deserving of the title of “historian” as much as anyone else I know.

You can do this too.

edit: Thanks for the silver; one of my favorite precious metals!