Q: Is the Society for T.E. Lawrence Studies separate from the current T.E. Lawrence Society and, if so, why?

The reason why requires some explanation.

The T.E. Lawrence Studies website, discussion list and online journal continue the thinking of the short-lived T.E. Lawrence Studies printed journal which I founded in 1976 with Phil O'Brien and Lilith Friedman.

The T.E. Lawrence Society was founded nine years later, in 1985. It was set up as a social organisation for the benefit of its members, not a learned society serving the wider community. In the words of its first constitution, it aimed "to enable individuals to meet and enjoy a common interest in T.E. Lawrence and to further their knowledge as well as preserving for the Society any items of interest."

After a few years, however, the society's management saw financial benefits in becoming a registered charity. For that to be possible, the UK Charity Commission required that the society should have a more outward-looking educational objective. This took a standard form: "to advance the education of the public in the life and works of T. E. Lawrence and to promote research (and to publish the useful results thereof) into his life and works."

Aiming to fulfil this new objective, the T.E. Lawrence Society committee decided in 1990 to hold the society's first symposium. Then in the autumn of 1990 I was elected chairman with the specific mission of launching a new journal. In essence, the Journal of the T.E. Lawrence Society started life as a continuation of my 1976 T.E. Lawrence Studies, but under a different name.

In 1994 I retired from the chair of the society. I didn't believe in breathing down the necks of my successors, so I left it to its own devices. It flourished.

For my part, in 1996-7 I began building what became the T.E. Lawrence Studies website. That was entirely my initiative. I was interested in the web and foresaw its potential. As Lawrence's authorised biographer I had no need to consult the society before building a biographical website. In those days the society had no website at all.

The T.E. Lawrence Studies website and discussion list and the new online journal have remained completely independent of the T.E. Lawrence Society. In 2004-5 there was briefly a scheme for the society to host my telawrence.net project; but by the time the site was built I was no longer a member.

As things have turned out, T.E. Lawrence Studies now does far more than the T.E. Lawrence Society to "advance the education of the public in the life and works of T. E. Lawrence". In return for a substantial subscription, about 600 members of the T.E. Lawrence Society in some 20 countries receive its journal. By contrast, access to the T.E. Lawrence Studies website, journal and discussion list is free. In 2007 our web servers logged 686,206 unique visits from people in at least 89 countries.

Let's not forget, however, that for most of the 1990s the T.E. Lawrence Society with its printed journal performed a really valuable role. But then the Internet came along, offering an educational channel with far lower costs than print and a far wider reach. To make good use of that channel you need a large amount of content. As Lawrence's authorised biographer, I had plenty.

So T.E. Lawrence Studies - the product of a huge amount of unpaid time - has never owed anything to the T.E. Lawrence Society. The question is, would it now be sensible to entrust its future to the society?

To answer that, you need to take a close look at the T.E. Lawrence Society.  I am well placed to do so, having served as its chairman or acting chairman for a total of five years (longer than anyone else has done) and on its committee for even longer. I was the founder and first editor of its journal, I arranged speakers for several of its symposia and set up its current website. Here are my conclusions.

Despite the overall educational objective required by the Charity Commission, the constitution of the T.E. Lawrence Society provides no guidance at all about how this objective should be achieved. Specifically, it contains no commitment to good scholarship or high quality.

Since 1990, the society has earned credit for its symposia and journal. But these have been the work of a tiny handful of qualified individuals, working in the society's name but to their own standards. Likewise, standards achieved in future will probably depend on the people who take on these roles.

From long experience I know that, in addition to members attracted since 1990 by the society's "learned" activities, there are others (particularly in the UK) who value the society mainly for its social side. These are the people for whom it was originally intended. The objective in the first constitution expresses what they want from the society far better than the Charity Commission substitute. Some of them strongly oppose what they see as a drift away from the society's real purpose. Members' views printed in a recent newsletter include comments such as "Too much academia" and "Journal articles are sometimes 'too dry'".

That judgment was confirmed in 2005-6, when I served for a year as acting chairman, then chairman.  I had hoped to clarify and strengthen the society's commitment to its educational aims, but there was determined opposition. The easiest conclusion was to change nothing and hope that what had worked in the past would go on working in future.

So be it. For my part, I see the need for a learned society which provides a more tangible public benefit. I also hope that the Society for T.E. Lawrence Studies, particularly through its open-access journal, will act as a dedicated focal point for people seriously interested in the life of T.E. Lawrence.

I am a creative person. By nature I look ahead. In history, few institutions have remained relevant for long. You have to analyse the current need - and do something that responds to it.