Homepage

Royal Historical Society Statement on UCU Industrial Action

Members of the University and College Union (UCU) voted earlier this autumn in favour of industrial action, with branches at 60 Universities reaching the 50% support threshold.  Two disputes are at issue: 1) a dispute over changes to the USS pensions scheme (79% of UCU members who voted did so in favour of industrial action on this ballot) and 2) a dispute over pay, equality, casualisation and workloads (74% in favour of strike action).

The strike action is currently scheduled to take place on Monday 25-Friday 29 November (inclusive) and Monday 2-Wednesday 4 December (inclusive). In addition, UCU has asked its members to undertake ‘action short of a strike’.

The Royal Historical Society (RHS) has members on both sides of this dispute, members who work at universities that did not reach the required threshold for industrial action, members who are not unionised or who belong to unions not engaged in this dispute, international members, and members outside higher education.  In this context and as a registered UK charity that is not itself a party to this dispute, the Royal Historical Society does not take a declared position with respect to this industrial action. However, the RHS strongly supports members’ legal and moral right to undertake strike action, and accepts that aspects of our own work – the vast majority of which is undertaken by volunteers – may be delayed or interrupted during this time.

Many members of the RHS Council will be participating in strike action during the period 25 November-4 December 2019.  Our final committee and Council meetings for 2019 as well as the Society’s AGM were initially scheduled for 29 November, during the strike period.  By a strong majority, Council voted to move these meetings to 6 December 2019, after the strike ends.  This decision ensures that the Society meets its legal obligations to the Charity Commission whilst avoiding any necessity for Council members or seconded committee members to cross a picket line.

RHS staff, as employees of a registered charity that is not a university or college, are not eligible for membership in UCU.  The RHS office is however physically located at UCL, one of the 60 universities participating in the UCU strike.  All RHS staff have been offered the option for the duration of the strike to work from home without any prejudice should they wish to do so.  Likewise, RHS staff who choose to attend work at UCL during the dispute can do so without any prejudice. RHS Members wishing to access the RHS office during the dispute are advised that there will be pickets at the UCL entrances, and as is ordinarily the case, they are advised to call or email in advance to check that the office will be open at the time of their intended visit.

Questions from the RHS membership on this matter should be directed to rescommsofficer@royalhistsoc.org.

More information:

More information about the two disputes can be found on the UCU website.

The employers’ (UUK) perspective on the pensions dispute can be found on the UUK website.

The employers’ (UCEA) perspective on the dispute on pay and conditions can be found on the UCEA website.

 

Enlightenment Gallery, British Museum. London. Credit: Derwisz via Flickr. Reproduced under terms of CC BY-SA-NC 2.0 Licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.0/).

RHS Presidential Address to be held on Friday 6 December 2019

Full details of the 2019 RHS Presidential Address are now available.

Professor Margot Finn (UCL)
‘Material Turns in British History: III: Collecting: Colonial Bombay, Basra, Baghdad and the Enlightenment Museum’
Friday 6 December 2019 at 6.00 pm
Venue: JZ Young Lecture Theatre, Anatomy Building, UCL. (Please note that this is not in the usual venue, the Gustave Tuck Lecture Theatre)

 

Full details of the lecture including an abstract and accessibility information for the venue are here.

The lecture will be held in the JZ Young Lecture Theatre in the Anatomy Building, Gower Street, at UCL . The lecture will be followed by a Reception in the UCL North Cloisters, showcasing the Society’s new open access book series, New Historical Perspectives.

The lecture will be preceded by the Royal Historical Society’s AGM. This begins at 5:45pm.  Attendees for both the AGM and Lecture are welcome to enter the JZ Young Lecture Theatre from 5:30pm onwards (including during the business of the AGM).

 

 

Royal Historical Society Publishes Guidance Paper on “Plan S and History Journals”

The Royal Historical Society (RHS) has today (23 October 2019) published its new Guidance Paper on ‘Plan S and the History Journal Landscape’ .

The report is designed to assist History and broader Humanities & Social Sciences stakeholders to understand and navigate the current policy frontiers of open access publishing for peer reviewed scholarly journals.

In particular, it is timed to contribute to the two public consultations on open access publication mandates, due to be launched shortly by United Kingdom Research & Innovation (UKRI), the funding body that includes the seven UK research councils as well as Research England.  This consultation process reflects UKRI’s membership of cOAlition S, a consortium of international funders established in 2018 which has articulated a new ‘Plan S’ mandate for open access publication.

The RHS report explains what cOAlition S and Plan S are, and why they matter to Humanities and Social Science researchers, journal editors and learned societies—among other stakeholders.  The report uses granular evidence of peer reviewed History journal publication to examine the potential impacts of Plan S implementation by UKRI.  The report is based on a summer 2019 RHS survey that attracted responses from 107 UK and international History learned society and proprietary journals.  Respondents included both self-publishing journals and journals published by 26 different university and commercial presses.  Additionally, the report uses data from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) to explore open access journal publication in History.

In the context of the forthcoming UKRI consultation, the report offers specific recommendations for:

  • History researchers (including early career historians)
  • journal editors and editorial boards
  • learned societies
  • research organisations
  • funders     

Find out more and download the full report here.

 

New Historical Perspectives: First Volume Out Now!

The RHS is delighted to announce that today marks the release of the first volume in New Historical Perspectives, an Open Access books series for early career scholars commissioned by the Royal Historical Society and published as an imprint of the Institute of Historical Research by University of London Press.

The first book in the series is Ed Owens’ The Family Firm: Monarchy, Mass Media and the British Public, 1932-53.

The Family Firm presents the first major historical analysis of the transformation of the royal household’s public relations strategy in the period 1932-1953. Beginning with King George V’s first Christmas broadcast, Buckingham Palace worked with the Church of England and the media to initiate a new phase in the House of Windsor’s approach to publicity. The book also focuses on audience reception by exploring how British readers, listeners, and viewers made sense of royalty’s new media image. It argues that the monarchy’s deliberate elevation of a more informal and vulnerable family-centred image strengthened the emotional connections that members of the public forged with the royals, and that the tightening of these bonds had a unifying effect on national life in the unstable years during and either side of the Second World War. Crucially, The Family Firm also contends that the royal household’s media strategy after 1936 helped to restore public confidence in a Crown that was severely shaken by the abdication of King Edward VIII.

Download and buy copies of The Family Firm here.

All titles in New Historical Perspectives are published in print (hard- and paperback) and as Open Access (OA) from first publication, with no fees charged to the author or the author’s institution. Monograph authors receive a workshop with invited specialists to discuss their work before its final submission, and guidance from members of the NHP’s academic editorial board who also oversee a careful peer-review process.

Find out more about the New Historical Perspectives book series, including how to make a proposal, here.

 

New Members and Fellows – July 2019

At its meeting in July 2019 RHS Council elected 45 Fellows, 15 Members, and 20 Postgraduate Members, a total of 80 in all. These new members were formally welcomed to the Society at Professor Penny Roberts’ RHS Lecture on Friday 20 September 2019.

We are pleased to report that over half of the new Fellows elected were women, and that equal numbers of men and women were elected to the Membership and Postgraduate Membership. In terms of geographical distribution, our new members come from around the UK, as well as Australia, Belgium, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan and the USA. While the majority of the new Fellows hold academic appointments at universities, specializing in a very wide range of fields, this is by no means the case for all. Fellows elected on this occasion include archivists, educational and heritage consultants, and the director of a policy centre. This diversity of interests, reflects the Society’s aim of recognising the vital contribution to historical scholarship made by those in other professions.

The new Members also have a wide variety of historical interests. All those newly elected to the Fellowship, Membership and Postgraduate Membership bring a valuable range of expertise and experience that will enrich the Society and help it to fulfil its objective of representing the diverse body of scholars engaged in historical scholarship.

Our next deadline for Society Fellowship and Membership is 7 October. Additional information can be found here.

Fellowship

Gemma Allen
Dayna Barnes
Tobias Becker
Matthew Bingham
Luke Blaxill
Hilary Carey
Jeng-Guo Chen
Rebekah Clements
Pamela Clemit
Guillemette Crouzet
Judith Curthoys
Johanna Dale
Jennifer Davey
Coleman Dennehy
Karey Draper
Hugo Drochon
Katherine East
Margaret Ezell
Anna Greenwood
Ryan Hanley
Katherine Harloe
Catherine Hindson
Natasha Hodgson
Tom Hulme
David Jordan
Louise Kettle
Miles Larmer
Grace Lees-Maffei
Victoria Leonard
Michael Maddison
Kirsten McKenzie
Dwayne Menezes
Emily Michelson
Cai Parry-Jones
Stephen Sandford
Sally Sheard
John Slight
Diana Spencer
Michael Talbot
Clare Taylor
Seth Thevoz
Boris Volodarsky
Rob Waters
Keira Williams
Man Kong Wong

Membership

Rosamaria Alibrandi
Matteo Bonifacio
David Brazendale
Timothy Causer
Bettina De Cosnac
Esther Freeman
Marion Gibson
Alexander Hutton
Caroline Laske
Neil Murphy
Edward Reid-Smith
Lucy Santos
Uttara Shahani
Swati Shastri
Shutaro Takeda

Postgraduate Membership

Jordan Beavis
Hillary Burlock
Jane Campbell
Rodney Curtis
Steven Driver
Helen Esfandiary
Catherine Freeman
Meira Gold
Nathan Hazlehurst
Tyler Herber
Otis Illert
Kate Lawton
Peter Morgan-Barnes
JC Niala
Mary Ononokpono
Oliver Parken
Beatrice Pestarino
Edwin Rose
Dilara Scholz
Fabio Simonetti

 

Image: New Fellows at the RHS, 20 Sept 2019 (Credit: Grace Lees-Maffei / Oleg Benesch)

 

Interim Working Paper – History Journals and Plan S

On 29 July the RHS released an Interim Working Paper offering a preliminary mapping of current preparedness for Plan S open access implementation among UK and international ‘hybrid’ History journals.

Aimed primarily at scholarly editors and editorial boards, History learned societies, publishers of Humanities journals, and funding bodies, this working paper is based on a preliminary analysis of survey responses provided by 50 UK and international History journals.

Since then, we have continued to elicit further evidence, feedback and corrections. With more than a hundred responses to our survey now in, we intend to publish a more comprehensive analysis in early October.

A key aim of the report will be to inform contributions to the forthcoming UKRI Open Access Review.

If you are an editor of a History journal, based anywhere in the world, and have not yet completed the survey, please download the RHS Survey of Journal Editors (July 2019) and return it to rescommsofficer@royalhistsoc.org by 10 September 2019.

Please download the Interim Working Paper, and send any feedback or corrections to rescommsofficer@royalhistsoc.org.

 

Prothero Lecture Podcast Available Now

We are delighted to make publicly available a podcast of Dr Sujit Sivasundaram’s Prothero Lecture for 2019, which he gave to a packed audience at the Royal Historical Society on Friday 5 July.

You can now listen to “Waves Across the South: Monarchs, Travellers and Empire in the Pacific” in full, accompanied by Dr Sivasundaram’s presentation slides, here.

 

 

RHS Awards 2019, New Fellows and Members

On Friday 5 July, the Royal Historical Society welcomed a full lecture theatre to hear Dr Sujit Sivasundaram give the 2019 Prothero Lecture, entitled “Waves Across the South: Monarchs, Travellers and Empire in the Pacific”.

At a Reception following the Lecture, the President and Officers of the Royal Historical Society were delighted to announce the winners of the 2019 RHS Publication, Fellowship and Teaching Awards, and to welcome new Fellows and Members to the Society.

The full lists of award winners, new Fellows and Members admitted to the Society are:

 

Whitfield Prize 2019

For a first solely-written book on a subject within a field of British history published in the UK.

Awarded to: Ryan Hanley for a volume Beyond Slavery and Abolition: Black British Writing, c.1770-1830 (Cambridge University Press: 2018).

Judges’ citation: This year’s submissions for the Whitfield Award featured rigorous and innovative works of historical research, many of which will endure among classic studies in their fields. That said, Ryan Hanley’s superb study, Beyond Slavery and Abolition: Black British Writing, c.1770-1830, stands apart for its audacious engagement with debates on the cultural positioning of black participants in British literary, political, and intellectual culture during a transitional period in British domestic and imperial history. Hanley’s rich and lively examination shows that black authors engaged in a comprehensive range of topics, from legal debates, the nature of celebrity, religious controversy, spiritual memoir, radical politics, to epistemology – extending far beyond the abolitionist paradigm that historians have long assumed and thus have tended to impose. Like their fellow intellectuals, black authors disagreed with each other, they led debate, cultivated their style, and courted new readers. We have Hanley to thank for drawing renewed attention to these voices, and for showing us why these authors mattered then and matter now.

 

Gladstone Prize 2019

For a first solely-written book on a historical subject not primarily related to British History published in the UK.

Awarded to: Duncan Hardy for a volume Associative Political Culture in the Holy Roman Empire: Upper Germany, 1346-1521 (Oxford University Press: 2018).

Judges’ citation: This is an outstanding first book and it deserves the highest of praise. Hardy builds an ambitious and convincing thesis about the structure and workings of the Holy Roman Empire in the late medieval period, arguing that it is best understood in terms of various forms of political association. This is a significant and original contribution to the historiography of the period and region. It encourages scholars to consider sixteenth-century Germany not only through the lens of the Reformation but in terms of underlying late-medieval political structures and practices. The writing is clear and precise throughout, and the author reveals a deep knowledge of the archival sources. The organisation of the book allows its argument to build steadily, and the high quality of the writing and analysis is sustained from start to finish (it also has a gorgeous front cover). Associative political culture fills a gap in the existing literature and deserves to be very widely read.

Alexander Prize 2019

For the best published scholarly journal article or an essay in a collective volume based upon original historical research.

Awarded to: Jake Richards for an article ‘Anti-Slave-Trade Law, “Liberated Africans” and the State in the South Atlantic World, c. 1839-1852’, Past and Present, 241 (2018), 170-219.

Judges’ citation: This rich and thoughtful article follows the experiences of ‘liberated Africans’ after the formal abolition of the slave trade, as the seizure of ‘prize negroes’ from slave ships opened a complicated chapter in the establishment of their rights and status. Based on detailed and wide-ranging research, tracking histories between Britain, South Africa and Brazil, the article reaches beyond existing debates to consider the experience of those who were liberated by the anti-slave patrols in the Atlantic ocean: the ways in which they understood and negotiated a way through the legal processes that faced them, and their claims to what Richards refers to as ‘unguaranteed entitlements’ in their transition from enslavement. Achieving a satisfying balance between specific cases and more general reflections, the article makes an important contribution to research, offering fresh ways of thinking about the topic and exploring the fascinating context of the port cities of Salvador da Bahia and Cape Town as testing grounds for the impact of abolition and the future prospects of the ‘liberated Africans’.

 

Proxime accesit: Stephanie Wright for an article ‘Glorious Brothers, Unsuitable Lovers: Moroccan Veterans, Spanish Women, and the Mechanisms of Francoist Paternalism’, Journal of Contemporary History (2018), 1-23.

Judges’ citation: With a rich base in archival work, this article explores the position of Moroccan military veterans in Spanish policy under Franco. Wright demonstrates that certain categories of disabled Moroccan veterans actually received higher levels of state support than their Spanish counterparts, but that this reflected attitudes towards them shaped by paternalism and distinctive understandings of their masculinity. Ideas about race and gender also contributed to anxieties about relationships between Moroccans and Spaniards in the period after the Civil War, which Spanish bureaucrats even tried to sabotage on occasion. Wright argues that the treatment of Moroccan veterans can be read as part of Francoist heightening of the status of Spanish masculinity, and also as a part of its management of the Moroccan protectorate. The article is well written and grounded in detailed research, offering an original and well-articulated contribution to scholarship on modern Spain, gender, race and disability.

 

David Berry Prize 2019

For the best published scholarly journal article or essay on a subject dealing with Scottish history.

Awarded to: Philip Loft for an article ‘Litigation, the Anglo-Scottish Union, and the House of Lords as the High Court, 1660-1875’, Historical Journal, 61 (2018), 943-967.

Judges’ citation: The judges thought that this was a very accomplished treatment of an ambitious topic, marked by a maturity of approach. It deftly analyses a substantial source base to advance new arguments about not only eighteenth-century legal history but, above all, the nature of the composite British state after the Union of 1707. The article investigates Scottish cases brought before parliament, as part of a wider body of 8,500 appeals over the period, a sample of which is analysed here. The analysis demonstrates that the number of Scottish appeals grew after 1745, and that from the 1760s Scots increasingly lobbied for legislation to promote their fisheries and linen industries. Appeals were often used as a way of forcing compromise on parties that ensured that Westminster affected only the localities and individuals involved in a case. The author convincingly argues that local interests co-opted the state in defence of their interests, thereby keeping their autonomy, as often in England too, and also briefly draws comparisons with appellate courts elsewhere in Europe, notably Castile.

 

Rees Davies Prize 2019

For the best dissertation submitted as part of a one-year full-time (or two-year part-time) postgraduate Master’s degree in any United Kingdom institution of Higher Education.

Awarded to: Robert Fitt for a dissertation ‘Texan textbooks: Cranks, Conservatives and the Contest for America in High School History, 1976-1986’.

Judges’ citation: This piece is beautifully written, and the prose shows real verve. In a well-argued way, it makes a significant historiographical intervention based upon the analysis activism around school textbooks. This allows the author to argue for a more germinal understanding of ideology, looking at the ways in which cultural shift occurs and redefining the scope of peripheral actors to influence that shift. There is a strong archival source base and the argument is strongly supported throughout. The dissertation features interesting discussions around the use of history, and the ways in which the shaping of narratives can influence conceptions of political norms and shape broader consensus. At times, I felt there could have been a little more agency shown for those who read the textbooks, though the focus was clearly on the authors and activists who altered the text. This was outstanding work and a real pleasure to read

Proxime accesit:   Leanne Smith for a dissertation ‘“In the Revolution of Times, the Changes will run their round out, and then the Lord will come to Reign” John Rogers: A Fifth Monarchy Man’s Commonwealth of Saints’.

Judges’ citation: This was a very strong and meticulously detailed intervention into debates around republicanism in early-modern England. The dissertation shows an excellent command of the historiography and seeks to offer a more nuanced understanding of how religious thoughts influenced and intertwined with discussions of radical political change. Through close engagement with Rogers’ output, the dissertation explores the reflexive influence of millenarian beliefs on the febrile political climate of the seventeenth century and also the lingering influence of classical political philosophy.

 

Jinty Nelson Award for Inspirational Teaching & Supervision in History 2019

Awarded to: Professor Julia Crick (King’s College London)

Judges’ citation: Professor Julia Crick receives the Jinty Nelson Award in recognition of her superlative contribution to the teaching and mentoring of younger generations of historians. Palaeography is challenging but integral to the subject of history. It underpins so much else in the field, and manuscripts in particular are windows onto much that would otherwise be inaccessible. Professor Crick has spent a life time advocating the importance of Palaeography to the global academic community and has demonstrated this specifically through her teaching and mentoring. Throughout her career (including appointments at the universities of Cambridge and Exeter, and in her current position at King’s College London), Professor Crick has been a wonderful teacher, not just of Palaeography, but also in training students of any level to think critically, to ask questions, and to build historical arguments based on visual and physical evidence. Professor Crick’s classes at the undergraduate and graduate levels bring history and palaeography to life and she mentors research students in the same way, whether they are at King’s or elsewhere, in History or in another discipline. Crick treats her students more like peers than pupils, which creates a sense that the work can be valued and taken seriously even from a very early stage. Crick’s commitment to the transfer of knowledge from generation to generation is especially evident in her establishment of networks and events that highlight postgraduate research. She has frequently organised seminars, symposia and conferences which include equal space for early career researchers. Over the course of her career, Professor Crick has demonstrated a wide-ranging and sustained commitment to inspiring and training new generations of historians to excel.

 

Royal Historical Society Innovation in Teaching Award 2019

Awarded to:  Dr Sharon Webb and Dr James Baker (University of Sussex)

Judges’ citation: Over the last four years Drs Webb and Baker have delivered a series of first-year digital history workshop/lectures taken by all undergraduates at the University of Sussex in either History or Art History. These radically update the notion of the ‘historian’s craft’ to include the skills and practices required to engage critically with online sources (both inherited and born digital). The programme is a unique response to the challenges posed by the changes in historical research and debate, designed to turn history undergraduates into digitally savvy, expert navigators of this new landscape of knowledge. What sets the series apart is the self-conscious way in which it seeks to intervene in the history curriculum more generally. By building a skills/apprenticeship model into first-year teaching, it lays the foundations for the development of advanced approaches in the second and third year. The guiding narrative is to move gradually from ‘Doing History in the Digital Age’ to ‘Doing Digital History’ – taking students from referencing, search, and using online databases to compiling datasets, digitisation, and making data visualisations. It is this accumulation of skills, and layering of multiple approaches, that creates a comprehensive and sophisticated understanding. Second-year students move on to modules on the analysis of historical networks and the technologies of print, and then in the third year to a co-taught module on digital archiving. These same skills are also re-enforced in teaching by colleagues across the degree. The first full cohort of students introduced to these skills in their first year have now graduated. Standards of research and practice have improved across the board.

 

The Royal Historical Society jointly with the Institute of Historical Research has awarded the following research Fellowships:

 

RHS Marshall Fellowship 2019

Awarded to: Purba Hossain (University of Leeds)

For research on: ‘Situating the Coolie Question: Indentured Labour and Mid-Nineteenth-Century Calcutta’

 

RHS Centenary Fellowship 2019

Awarded to: Jack Newman (University of Kent)

For research on: ‘Corruption, Entropy and Conflict: Institutional Adaptation in Pre-Black Death England c.1307-1348’

 

Institute of Historical Research Awards

The Pollard Prize

Awarded to Helen Esfandiary (King’s College London) for her paper, given at the Life Cycles seminar, on Maternal Obligations and Knowledge of Smallpox Inoculation in Eighteenth-Century Elite Society. 

The Pollard Prize is awarded annually by the Institute of Historicla Research for the best paper presented at an Institute of Historical Research seminar by a postgraduate student or by a researcher within one year of completing the PhD.

 

The Sir John Neale Prize

Awarded to Sarah Johanesen (King’s College London) for her essay ‘That silken Priest: Catholic disguise and anti-popery on the English Mission (1569-1640)’. 

The Neale Prize is awarded annually by the Institute of Historical Research to a historian in the early stages of their career for an essay of up to 8,000 words on a theme related to the history of early modern Britain.

 

 

Fellowship

Kristine Alexander
Paul Ayris
Marco Barducci
Joshua Bennett
Zoltan Biedermann
Gilly Carr
Megan Cassidy-Welch
Hannah Cornwell
Pamela Cox
Katherine Cross
Tom Cutterham
Giuseppe De Luca
Bruno De Nicola
Donald Dickson
Catherine Flinn
Stella Ghervas
Helen Glew
Tim Grady
Jane Hamlett
Christopher Hill
Andrew Hobbs
Mike Horswell
Robert Johnson
Emily Jones
Marjo Kaartinen
Barbara Keys
Samia Khatun
Dip Chi Kon Lai
Katell Laveant
Daryl Leeworthy
Marcella Lorenzini
Andrew Macdonald
Kirsteen Mackenzie
Susan Major
George K W Mak
Erik Mathisen
Alexander Mcauley
Christopher McCreery
Joseph Moretz
Rachel Moss
John Newman
Joanna Norman
Onyeka Nubia
Daphna Oren-Magidor
Matthew Parker
Sarah Pedersen
Sarah Peverley
Kavita Puri
Sara Read
Matthias Reiss
Anna Ross
Tobias Rupprecht
Raffaella Santi
Otto Saumarez-Smith
Elizabeth Savage
Uditi Sen
Caroline Sharples
Jane Shaw
Malcolm Shifrin
Gajendra Singh
Jonathan Smyth
Malcolm Spencer
Charles Tieszen
Dora Vargha
Geraldine Vaughan
Jan Vermeiren
Matthew Walker
Neil Younger
David Zersen

 

Membership

Ann-Marie Akehurst
Darinee Alagirisamy
Rosamaria Alibrandi
Gordon Barrett
Nicholas Blake
Natalie Butler
Chun Kei Chow
Sajed Chowdury
Juliana Coulton
Michael Davies
Steven Dieter
Misha Ewen
Boris Gorshkov
Amanda Harvey
Stephanie Howard-Smith
Omer Khan
Christopher Fear
David Lees
Judith Loades
Mihaela Martin
Emma McCauley-Tinniswood
Barbara Mellor
Erin Moody
Eric Morier-Genoud
Hannah-Rose Murray
Carole O’Reilly
Hannah Parker
Peter Pincemin-Johnstone
Meredith Riedel
Ilaria Scaglia
Alexander Scott
Gregory Slysz
Chrissie Twigg
Joseph Viscomi
Marilla Walker
James Wearn
Katherine Wilson
Andrew Winrow

 

Postgraduate Membership

Hardy Acosta-Cuellar
Maria Bastiao
Lacey Bonar
Sarah Boote-Powell
Gregory Buchanan
Patcharaviral Charoenpacharaporn
Jennifer Chochinov
John Cooney
Sonia Cuesta-Maniar
Stephen Dickens
Koma Donworth
Olivia Durand
Jack Edmunds
Tzilla Eshel
James Fortuna
John Freeman
Christophe Gillian
Beth Griffiths
Hugh Hanley
Ben Hodges
Yijie Huang
Soundararajan Jagdish
Pheeraphone Jampee
Cosmin Koszor
Nicholas Leah
Sundeep Lidher
Vanessa Lim
Andrea Mancini
Mario Maritan
Shaun McGuiness
Daniel McKay
Brandon Munda
Jack Newman
Thom Pritchard
Xiaoping Qi
Roseanna Ramsden
Claire Rioult
Jayne Shaw
Johanna Sinclair
Stuart Smedley
Stuart Smith
Therese Sunga
Travis Weinger
Shamara Wettimuny
Amanda Williams
Tom Zago

 

 

 

Launch of the RHS LGBT+ Survey 2019 Today

 

The Royal Historical Society today launches its LGBT+ Survey 2019. The survey continues the Society’s very successful reports on Gender and on Race, Ethnicity and Equality; now the Working Group on LGBT+ Histories and Historians aims to find out more about the research, teaching and dissemination of LGBT+ histories, as well as the experience of LGBT+ historians.

We encourage all historians to complete the survey, which can be accessed directly here.

If you would like to publicise the Survey at an event, or within your department, you can download a poster and/or Powerpoint slide here

 

Update from the LGBT+ Working Group

The RHS values the diversity of the historical community in all its forms and over the past several years has invested serious resources in projects that promote equality and inclusion. We believe that valuing diversity means listening to the voices, and respecting the experiences, of people whose lives and identities may be different to our own. This includes trans and non-binary people.

In advance of the release of our latest survey, which will explore the research, teaching and dissemination of LGBT+ histories, as well as the experience of LGBT+ historians, read the full update from our LGBT+ Working Group on the Historical Transactions blog here.