The Chronicle: Colloquy: The question

THE QUESTION

A year ago, historians were singing the praises of Michael A. Bellesiles's Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture, which won awards and received glowing reviews in leading publications -- even as supporters of the right to bear arms immediately criticized the book's evidence as faulty. More recently, others have raised questions about the book, especially about portions asserting that far fewer people in colonial America owned guns or cared about them than had been commonly believed. Mr. Bellesiles has conceded that the book contains some errors, but he says that its overall points remain accurate and that the personal and bombastic nature of some of the criticism has prevented him and others from having a rational discussion about the book. But critics -- some from the right, but others from a variety of ideological perspectives -- worry that the errors in the book are serious. And some think that historians were too quick to embrace the book because it seemed to back a political view they agreed with (gun control) and because they disliked its main critics (people affiliated with the National Rifle Association). How adequately have historians responded to the controversy over Arming America: The Origins of a National Gun Culture and allegations that some of the information in the book is incorrect? What is the significance of the controversy?

For further information, see this background article:

Did the Shootouts Over 'Arming America' Divert Attention From the Real Issues? (2/1/2002)

: 226 RESPONSES (New 6/6)

Note: This discussion is now closed.

JOIN THE DEBATE

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments

STEP 3: Submit!

Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored.

The Chronicle maintains Colloquy as an open forum where readers can comment on issues. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity, but editing is kept to a minimum. We correct errors in spelling, punctuation, etc. In addition, we remove statements that have the potential to be libelous or to slander someone. In cases in which people make claims that could be libelous, we will remove the names of institutions and departments. But in those cases, we will not alter the ideas contained in the submissions.

Please read our privacy policy or our Colloquy help page if you have questions.

Check this box only if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.