Third LOR dilemma (History PhD)

[academianut]

Hi, all. I've been reading posts here for a few weeks, but this is my first post. Since there's so much useful info here, I thought maybe you'd be able to weigh in on this issue. I'm applying to History PhD programs and am trying to make a jump from Cultural Studies (my previous degrees were in CS). 

 

I have requested one letter from a sociology professor with whom I've recently worked on a research project (I know this will be a very strong one), and a second from a professor with whom I took three CS courses at the MA level and who knows my work very well (this will also be a strong one, as he has said so to me in the past and again now when I contacted him).

 

I'm in a bit of a dilemma about the third recommendation. I could ask another professor who taught me CS at the MA level, with whom I also took three courses and did well. However, my MA was 6 years ago, so I don't know how well he'll recall me and whether the letter might be a bit vague and/or lukewarm.

 

Or I could ask a former employer, who is a trained historian working in archiving. I'm a little anxious about asking him, as he is erratic in behaviour and opinions (as I know from working with him). While he's expressed enthusiasm and support for my plans, he might also put in negative points about my work ethic and personality (it's a long story, but he was such a poor manager and never communicated expectations clearly, so that the stress built up until I actually had a major depressive episode that led to my quitting that job -- something he's unfortunately aware of). However, he can speak to some skills and strengths, not in doing serious research, but in allied areas (TA, archiving, doing preliminary research, etc.) -- I did some very good work with him. So it's a toss up -- if he decides to be on my side entirely, he'll write a great letter. If he decides to be completely honest, it will be a problem letter. 

 

What would you do?

Edited October 11, 2013 by academianut