The Paragraph :
Having repudiated the basic commitments to nationalism and the ideal of scholarly detachment that had always sustained historical writing in the United States, professional historians found themselves—not surprisingly, one might add—cut off from their cultural environment. That this situation is markedly different from the formative period of historical scholarship can be seen in centennial numbers of the American Historical Review, the most recent expression of the profession‘s reflective tendency, which have explored the nature of historical thinking at the time of the association‘s founding a century ago.
Above paragraph is the part of this full version
It is very hard to understand as I read it like 4-5 times and still unable to paraphrase it with my own words.Can anyone help me out with more layman interpretation?
Ok so I have had difficulty in understanding the bold part, especially make right inference out of phrases like "basic commitment to nationalism", "cut off from culture","scholarly detachment" etc.
But i feel it should not be declared as off topic. This is a Tough Paragraph even for a Native English Person. Mapping scholarly detachment with impartiality, cut off from their cultural environment (this was ambiguous to me) to not being true Americans (it can also mean nobody reads what they write anymore), is not an easy deduction to make (especially when you have exam-limited time to do that!). I am thankful to deadrats for clarifying the role of the paragraph to me.
Non-bold part immediately make sense ones you understood the bold part with right mappings.