![im in ur base killin ur d00dz im in ur base killin ur d00dz](https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.13303633.3163/ssrco,slim_fit_t_shirt,womens,353d77:4d8b4ffd91,front,square_product,600x600.u4.jpg)
But sometimes it's classic comics history at best and at worst an exercise in creative hypothesizing where, instead of doing a few minutes of historical research, people speculate about what might have happened at X moment in the past and then build their arguments on the history they just invented. And sometimes it can be very well done and effective. History is hardly circumscribed in law schools historical stuff turns up in most law school courses one way and another. If nothing else, we could try to reach out a bit more to our colleagues in law and in history to try to persuade them to pay a bit more attention to each other’s crafts. I’m not sure I added that legal history wasn’t dead, all history had become legal history, but that’s certainly what I meant to imply.
![im in ur base killin ur d00dz im in ur base killin ur d00dz](https://i.imgur.com/46vj4QH.jpg)
So far as I was concerned, that was all legal or constitutional history. So instead I pointed out that of the people in the room with us, any number worked with cases or statutes some read regulations for their research, others read treaties, and another group studied things like citizenship, public spheres, administrative systems or the State. It probably would have been prudent to have broken something as a distraction or otherwise tried to change the subject, since I didn’t have tenure at the time and the colleague who was trying to provoke me did. When I sputtered “What?” he asked me if I didn’t agree that legal and constitutional history were going the way of the dodo. A couple of years later, I was sitting in a conference room at UF waiting for a department meeting to start when one of my colleagues in history turned and asked me what I thought about the fact that I taught in a dying field.