Posted on 05/02/2002 6:53:11 AM PDT by billorites
The National Endowment for the Humanities has taken the unusual step of demanding a review of a federally funded fellowship awarded to Emory University history Professor Michael Bellesiles.
"The NEH request is unprecedented," said James Grossman, vice president for research and education at the Newberry Library in Chicago, which gave Bellesiles $30,000 for a project to research American gun laws. "They're asking questions that they're entitled to ask, and we're answering them as best we can."
Bellesiles' acclaimed 2000 book, "Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture," drew widespread criticism for its contention that guns were more rare in early America than previously thought and did not become commonplace until the Civil War.
Critics claim that Bellesiles' research and interpretation of historical information were flawed and biased.
His accusers initially were gun-rights advocates, but over the past year academic experts in American history and government records have joined the fray.
While Bellesiles has acknowledged some errors, he has said he stands by his book's overall conclusion.
The Newberry Library selected Bellesiles for the 2001-02 fellowship more than a year ago through a competitive, peer-reviewed process. It is funded through a $270,000 grant from NEH to cover 12 fellowships over three years.
Deputy NEH Chairman Lynne Munson sent a letter to Grossman April 18 asking for reports on the administration of the fellowship and "any plans . . . to investigate and adjudicate the serious charges that have been made against Michael Bellesiles' scholarship."
"It really comes down to a concern about Professor Bellesiles' alleged misconduct," said Jim Turner, NEH spokesman.
"There is this public controversy, and NEH wants to just get clear with our grantee, the Newberry Library, exactly what their procedure is for complying with the requirements of the grant."
The library has provided a point-by-point response, but considers it confidential and will not release it, Grossman said.
According to Munson's letter, the agency is prepared to remove the NEH name from Bellesiles' fellowship if agency officials are not satisfied. NEH is still reviewing the Newberry Library's response.
The library's general position is that the controversy arose --- in academic circles, at least --- after the fellowship was awarded and that it is up to Emory to address questions about Bellesiles' earlier work, Grossman said.
After completing an internal inquiry into research misconduct, Emory officials recently announced the case had been turned over to a committee of outside scholars for a formal investigation.
In its 37-year history, the National Endowment for the Humanities has revoked its backing of a project only once, Turner said.
I've read his defenses of his work -- he's using the Clinton-defense to the hilt. (He says, basically, "I'm just trying to do my job for truth, and I'm being attacked by lots of right-wing haters who want to find some small faults to destroy me personally.")
It worked for Clinton, but other people have more trouble using the same techniques to defend themselves.
It's true that Emory University did not formally act on the growing body of public information for quite some time--and perhaps rightly so--but the scandal began to grow public many months earlier, and it's hard to believe that the committee chosen by the Newberry Library to judge the applicants was unaware of the brewing situation and the considerable likelihood that Bellesiles had fudged his evidence (to use clinton's term for outright lies).
You're right about that -- otherwise a whole lotta people would be in trouble!
From what I've read so far about this Bellesiles character, he's guilty of outright fraud -- of knowingly being wrong, of making up sources, and of changing the sources he does use.
I'm glad he's being called to account.
By the time Bellesiles was chosen, the problems with his research were well known.
I wonder if "more than a year ago" means while Clinton was still president.
Seriously, the whole concept of "fraud" is merely an artificial construction foisted on academics by a paternalistic system of administrators, big-oil executives and European Jews in an effort to disenfranchise the powerless, people of color and...
Oops. Nursey says it's time for my pill.
BRB
Translation:
"We're happy with Bellesiles' trashing of the history of firearms in America, so we can overlook the inconvenient fraud required to reach his conclusions."
Translation:
"We couldn't figure out how to whitewash this, so we've found someone else who can."
NEH pulls support for author at Newberry Library
Disputed study of guns is cited
By Ron Grossman
Tribune staff reporter
May 22, 2002
The controversy swirling around Michael Bellesiles, the historian accused of faking data for his prizewinning book "Arming of America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture," has blown into Chicago.
This week the National Endowment for the Humanities ordered Newberry Library officials to remove the NEH name from a grant the library awarded to Bellesiles, who is doing research at the Near North Side facility. The NEH, a federal agency, funds research grants at scholarly institutions.
"The issue of truth and trust is at the heart of our decision to require the Newberry Library to remove the NEH name from Professor Michael Bellesiles' fellowship," endowment chairman Bruce Cole said in a statement Tuesday.
Newberry officials said they have fulfilled the unusual request. "We consider the NEH residence fellowship a partnership between the NEH and us," Newberry Vice President James Grossman said. Bellesiles is on leave from Emory University in Atlanta, which has appointed a committee of outside academics to evaluate charges the history professor fabricated statistics cited in support of his claim that guns were rare in early U.S. history. In previously published reports, Bellesiles has defended his book as fundamentally sound while acknowledging some minor errors.
NEH officials said their action would not affect the stipend associated with the grant, and Bellesiles will continue to hold a fellowship at the Newberry.
"We consider the appropriate venue for judging the criticisms of Bellesiles' book to be Emory University," Grossman said.
The book's conclusion that America's love affair with guns is an acquired taste created an intellectual firestorm that spread far beyond the ivory tower. Published in 2000, the book won the Bancroft Prize, the most coveted award in the field of U.S. history, and was hailed by liberal commentators and gun-control advocates.
Other academics, though, found problems with Bellesiles' research, including the claim that he used 19th Century San Francisco court records--which were destroyed in that city's 1906 earthquake.
NEH officials charge that the Newberry should have known about those criticisms of Bellesiles' scholarship when it chose him from among other academics in competition for the library's fellowship.
"We found that numerous scholars had raised serious questions about the quality, indeed the veracity, of Professor Bellesiles' findings well before the Newberry awarded him an NEH-supported fellowship on Feb. 21, 2001," Lynne Munson, NEH deputy chairman, wrote.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.