Many European scholars
are referred to as experts of African history.
However, it is highly unlikely that
an African scholar is considered an expert in European history
So my question is what constitutes an individual to be regarded
expert of any kind of history and by whom?
So first, I would like to say that there are many different of expertise
and many different forms of doing history.
I assume here that by expert you mean the definitions
provided by our current academic system.
And this is a system that has its own rules and conventions
of what constitutes an expert.
Usually that involves doing research and training for many years
following specific principles that are shared by the scientific community.
Academic degrees, like a master or a PhD,
or publications
serve as proof of this expertise.
Now, these rules and conventions are by no means neutral
They are historically grown and they carry their own biases.
In view of your question,
one of the major biases that accounts for the lopsidedness
that you describe is, in my view, resources.
It takes years of traveling, of doing research
to gain a PhD in history, and someone has to pay for that.
And for reasons that are deep roots in the colonial past,
but also in a recurrent economic system, these resources are much more
readily available to researchers in the global north.
I do want to mention, however,
that many Africans are, in fact, experts in European history.
I find students here in Ghana, for instance,
much more knowledgeable about European history than vice and versa.