Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio
With only a bachelor's degree, he cannot really be a historian, can he? In the US, historians actually have the full doctorate, which I am working towards.... but obviously Charles has studied extensively in many subjects, so I'm not trying to say he isn't educated. Far from it. He would give many, including me, a run for the money, certainly.... He's brilliant. I just mean, I think he is not a formal historian, unless the term in Britain is used more loosely.
|
Hm... I think we can conclude that Charles is able to work intellectually towards information if he wants it. He has had some formal training on coping with historical sources (at least this should have been included in his studies at university). He has undoubtedly the best access to all kind of sources about British history if he chose to have it( including the most secret state archives). Plus he could call the best experts to aide him.
Thus I think we can call him a full-fledged historian, even if he doesn't fit the formal accademic definition of it (which is something I don't know about at the moment).