This essay addresses the question of the relevance of the work of educational historians and the ways in which they, historically, have positioned their work as meaningful. In asking what the relevance of the history of education was or could be, the author arrived at the following questions: (1) How do we, as educational historians, understand the relevance and potential impact of our own work?; and (2) What kinds of claims do we make to convince each other that our work is worthy of our own time, worthy of publication, and worthy of others' attention? For this study, Kelley King examined the journals of Midwest History of Education Society (MHES) and the Organization of Educational Historians (OEH) from the birth of the organization to the present. The "Journal of the Midwest History of Education Society" was published as the "papers and proceedings of the annual meetings" of the MHES. Time constraints and the difficulty of obtaining copies of some volumes limited the scope to those published approximately every five years, beginning with the 1972 proceedings (published in 1973). 139 articles over the thirty-five year period were examined to identify the author's stated rationale for each article. The analysis found twelve categories of rationale, which was then reduced to eleven categories of rationale that made the case for history for its own sake or for history in the service of the present. This essay presents each rationale, discusses it, then explores the broader picture.