“I enjoy listening to other legal historians present their scholarship in progress. But I must confess that I find some presentations difficult to follow. The papers I most enjoy are explicit about the argument being made and what the paper adds to (or how the paper differs from) the existing scholarship. I may agree, or not, with the author’s argument, but the argument is there, up front …” (more)
[Thomas P Gallanis, Legal History Blog, 9 August]