In answer to your first bit, the whole of the recording of human history and knowledge is contained within books, apart from the last few years, which is recorded digitally, and it's therefore harder to ind the good bits amongst the trash.
And of course I didn't say any such thing as you are suggesting in your last sentence. I observed that the funding levels were different, and until I googled I didn't realise how vastly different.
In my daughter's case, although her degree was in history, her special studies overlapped very considerably with social anthropology, which is definitely a science (she was studying the effect of conquistadors' religion on the Peruvian tribes, something which has considerable parallels in modern middle-eastern politics). I'd suggest that, at risk of going wildly off topic, that we distinguish too rigidly between science and arts subjects. There's an awful lot of book reading in degrees like that.
