Report of the AHA Nominating Committee, 1986

On behalf of the Nominating Com­mittee, I am pleased to report the following results of the election. (Elected candidates are indicated with an asterisk.)

President (one-year term)

*Natalie Zemon Davis, Princeton University (European)—2366

President-elect (one-year term)

*Akira Iriye, University of Chicago (diplomatic)—1481
Jonathan D. Spence,  Yale University (Chinese)—1244

Vice-President, Professional Division (three-year term)

*John J. TePaske, Duke University (Latin American)—1446
William M. Tuttle, Jr., University of Kansas (United States)—1128

Council Member (three-year terms)

Place 1

*John F. Benton, California Institute of Technology (medieval)—1278
Nikki R. Keddie, University of California, Los Angeles (Near Eastern)—1276

Place 2

Richard G. Hewlett, History Associates, Inc. (technology)—1083
*Richard H. Kohn, Office of Air Force History (military)—1255

Divisional Committee Members (three-year terms)

Profession

*Albert Camarillo, Stanford University (American)—1204
William H. Harris, Paine College (American)—1169

Research

Walter A. Goffart, University of Toronto (medieval)—935
*Joseph C. Miller, University of Virginia (African)—1450

Teaching

William F. Sater, California State University, Long Beach (Latin American)—1128
*Philip B. Scranton, Rutgers University, Camden (American)—1191

Committee on Committees (three-year terms)

*Ingrid Winthur Scobie, Texas Woman’s University (American)—1472
Morton Keller, Brandeis University (American)—1076

Nominating Committee (three­ year terms)

Place 1

*Darlene Clark Hine, Purdue University (Afro-American)—1302
Waldo E. Martin, University of Virginia (Afro-American)—1133

Place 2

Michael J. Devine, Illinois State Historical Society (American)—1013
*Suellen Hoy, North Carolina Division of Archives & History (American)—1409

Place 3

Gene A. Brucker, University of California, Berkeley (European)—1027
*Giles Constable, Institute for Advanced Study (medieval)—1432

 

The total number of ballots cast was 2893, a noticeable decline from last year when 3224 ballots were cast, down from around 3800 cast in the two previous years. It is hard not to draw the conclu­sion that the money-saving plan—and I understand that it saves quite a bit—0f the past two years of including the ballot in Perspectives is not working and that despite the expense, with the present decline of more than 900 ballots, when our membership, if anything, is slightly increasing, is too serious to be allowed to continue. The Nominating Committee did not, as best I remember, discuss this problem, and this year’s committee, meeting in February, should. But, with reluctance, my personal recommenda­tion would be to return to the separate mailing of ballots.

The votes were counted again this year by optical scanner. It was amazing, but perhaps not surprising, that we are little better than our students in follow­ing instructions and there were quite a few ballots that were not marked with a No. 2 pencil, as instructed, or with the circle not fully filled in, which in the future should be indicated as necessary on the ballot. Educational Data Systems, Inc. of San Jose, California efficiently counted the ballots and it only cost $90.86 extra to “hand bubble” the bal­lots that had light or incorrect markings. Thirty-five ballots arrived after the bal­lots had been delivered for counting but were postmarked November l or be­fore. They were hand counted. The ballots seemed to have some sticky sub­stance on part of one edge which caused some problems in opening the enve­lopes.

The Nominating Committee met this year in Washington on Thursday, Feb­ruary 6, 1986 and concluded all of its work, except for contacting less than a handful of difficult-to-reach prospective candidates, by mid-morning on Satur­day, February 8.

As always, the Nominating Commit­tee attempted to achieve, as best it could, full representation of the profes­sion, but there are always constituencies that are not well served. Officers and others of specialized historical organiza­tions might make more of an effort to bring their members suitable for nomi­nation to the attention of the Nominat­ing Committee. Very few take advan­tage of the invitation to make nomina­tions. By scanning the fields of the members of the Nominating Commit­tee, it is easy to deduce what historical areas they are likely to know least well. The chair of the committee or any of its members would be most grateful to hear of likely candidates before the Nominating Committee meeting.

Various factors come into play in the Committee’s work. It frequently hap­pens that the perfect candidate in terms of reputation, geographical area, and field is not a member of the Association and hence is not eligible for nomination. Last year, the chair noted the Commit­ tee’s failure to nominate medieval or ancient historians; this year there were three medievalists. Only one person asked declined to run, and for the legiti­mate reason that she served on a paral­lel committee in the Organization of American Historians. For nomination for President, the Committee followed the informal pattern recently established of American, European, Ameri­can, European, other.

In addition to nominating the slate of candidates for office, the Committee for the second year proposed to the Council three possible candidates for the new award for distinguished senior scholars. The Council selects one or more from this list.

As always, Eileen Gaylard, the execu­tive assistant of the Association, looked after all the needs of the Committee with exemplary skill. To her, I extend the Committee’s thanks. May I also ex­tend my own thanks to those at Stanford who helped me cope with the ballots, to my fellow members of the Committee, and to Eileen Gaylard who made the three days spent in Washington, for the past three years, a time of enjoyment as well as, in my opinion, constructive for the Association.

To the candidates, many thanks for consenting to run, congratulations to the winners and losers for having had, what I trust the losers too will consider, the honor of standing for office. And let me conclude by saying that I hope that those who won will enjoy their positions and find it worthwhile to help in doing the work of the Association.