Many contemporary economists justify their work by referring to what the 
dead economists wrote. The contemporary economists may claim that their 
work carries on the tradition of the deceased. Or they may claim that 
the work offers an alternative. Two examples come to mind although I am 
sure that there are hundreds more. The first is Keynes's 
characterization of the classics. The second is the failure of some 
early Keynesians and some critics of early Keynesians to take account of 
the recognition of crowding out by the pioneers of Keynesian macro policy.

To achieve the goal of keeping them honest, HES could start an 
electronic journal the goal of which is to publish works that (1) 
identify such histories in highly-cited journal articles and books and 
(2) evaluate the historical sections in light of other published works 
on the subject or personal research on the history. Along the same line 
it could initiate a discussion group where scholars interested in making 
this kind of contribution would interact.

A likely result of good articles published in such a journal would be 
that contemporary economics would become subject to greater discipline 
regarding the publishing of old ideas in new packages. Moreover, HESers 
would build a reputation of contributing to contemporary economics 
instead of being regarded as a separate specialization.

Pat Gunning