Women's History

To the Editors of the Crimson:

In the March 8 article on Women's History Week, I was incorrectly quoted as saying that the History Department has made absolutely no commitment to bringing in a woman's historian. Professor Angeliki Laiou, chair of the History Department, was quite correct in pointing out, in her letter to The Crimson of March 11, that the History Department has indeed appointed Professor Olwen Hufton, a historian of European women. As Professor Laiou noted, I am certainly aware of the appointment, since Professor Hufton is also chair of the Committee of Degree's on Women's Studies, the program in which I serve as head tutor.

To set the record straight, what I did tell The Crimson reporter was that Harvard is distinguished by being the only Ivy League university, and, indeed, one of the few major universities anywhere in the United States, to have no tenured professor of American women's history; nor has the history department made any commitment to dedicating any of its junior positions to this field on a permanent basis.

The gap in American women's history at Harvard-Radcliffe is disturbing for several reasons. First, and most obvious, for the past decade women's history has been among the most active, innovative and productive fields in American history, its practitioners appearing prominently at major conferences and in all of the mainstream journals and garnering dozens of prestigious grants, fellowships and prizes. Everywhere but at Harvard, history departments have recognized that many of the finest graduate students in American history are studying women in this field, often appointing not just one but several American women's historians to reflect the breadth and variety of the field.

Second, and perhaps more immediately relevant to students and faculty at Harvard-Radcliffe, the lack of permanent faculty in this field creates hardships for those wishing to study American women's history at either the undergraduate or graduate level. As head tutor in Women's Studies, I am particularly concerned because our program depends on the offerings of the regular departments, and I find it difficult to advise students attempting to develop a plan of study that requires not only introductory but also advanced courses in American women's history. As anyone who has attempted to find a thesis adviser in this field knows, there are few graduate students who are qualified to help them, for they too, are hampered by the dearth of courses. Consequently, our program has had to recruit tutors from outside Harvard to fulfill this need.

Finally, and tragically, the history department's lack of commitment means that Harvard students cannot take full advantage of one of the finest resources for research in American women's history which is housed right here at Radcliffe--the Schlesinger Library. Without courses to direct them to its treasures, the Library remains underutilized by our own community.

Professor Laiou pointed out that the History Department has always co-sponsored Women's History Week. It should be noted that Women's Studies, Radcliffe, and the Radcliffe Union of Students are also major sponsors of this event. The planners of Women's History Week, who are over-whelmingly graduate and undergraduate students, are not ungrateful for the Department's financial support. Yet as dozens of outstanding scholars come to campus each year, their brief but illuminating presence makes more apparent than ever the intransigence of the History Department when it comes to making senior and junior appointments.

Historians must, of course, dwell on the past, but this should not prevent the Harvard History Department from also looking to the future of the discipline, which certainly lies at least in part in the study of gender. Sonya Michel   Head Tutor and Lecturer on Women's Studies