* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Historiography
Postdevelopment theory wikipedia , lookup
Social network (sociolinguistics) wikipedia , lookup
Social Bonding and Nurture Kinship wikipedia , lookup
Neohumanism wikipedia , lookup
Community development wikipedia , lookup
History of social work wikipedia , lookup
Ethnoscience wikipedia , lookup
Historical figure wikipedia , lookup
Social theory wikipedia , lookup
Social psychology wikipedia , lookup
Unilineal evolution wikipedia , lookup
Sociological theory wikipedia , lookup
Political economy in anthropology wikipedia , lookup
State (polity) wikipedia , lookup
Social group wikipedia , lookup
Tribe (Internet) wikipedia , lookup
Historical materialism wikipedia , lookup
Urban history wikipedia , lookup
Origins of society wikipedia , lookup
History of the social sciences wikipedia , lookup
Annales school wikipedia , lookup
Philosophy of history wikipedia , lookup
History and Culture of Canada – Handout 1 Historiography Historiography means literally "history-writing" (Latin: historia, "story"; Greek: γραφειν, (grafān), "to write"). Historiography is the study of how history is recorded and presented. In this recording and presentation, we are faced with the problem of the meaning of the word ‘history’: are past events ‘history’, or is it the description of the events that is ‘history’? Historiography asks questions both on a broad theoretical level, and on a more practical or specific level. Theoretical questions: What is the purpose of writing history? Should an historian interpret or merely report? Is it even possible to report without interpreting? Is bias unavoidable? Is the past too complex to be described adequately? More practical questions: Has history focused unduly on famous men, and their warfare, whilst the actions of un-famous people, collectively, or even individually, may have been more important? What was the style of a particular historian or group of historians? What were their biases? How did they gather data? What were their sources? How did they organize their data? Who were they working for? Defining historiography The modern study of historiography can be traced to E. H. Carr's 1961 work What is History? (ISBN 0333977017). Carr challenged the traditional belief that the study of the methods of historical research and writing were unimportant. His work remains in print to this day, and is common to many postgraduate programs of study in both the United States and in Great Britain. Historiography is often political in nature. For example, much 1960s historiography focused on the exclusion of the roles of women, minorities, and labor from written histories of the USA. According to these historiographers, historians in the 1930s and 1940s had a bias towards well-connected white males. Many historians from that point onward devoted themselves to what they saw as more accurate representations of the past, casting a light on those who had been previously disregarded as non-noteworthy. The study of historiography demands a critical approach that goes beyond the mere examination of historical fact. Historiographical studies consider the source, often by researching the author, his or her position in society, and the type of history being written at the time. Basic issues studied in historiography Some of the common questions of historiography are: Who wrote the source (primary or secondary)? What is the authenticity, authority, bias/interest, and intelligibility of the source? What was the view of history when the source was written? 4/16/12 History and Culture of Canada – Handout 1 Was history supposed to provide moral lessons? What or who was the intended audience? What sources were privileged or ignored in the narrative? By what method was the evidence compiled? In what historical context was the work of history itself written? Issues engaged in so-called critical historiography includes topics such as: What constitutes an historical ‘event’? How does the medium (novel, textbook, film, theatre, comic) through which historical information is conveyed influence its meaning? How does the historian establish their own objectivity or come to terms with their own subjectivity? What is the ‘goal’ of history? What is history? Styles of History-writing Annales School Pioneered by French historians, the Annales school promoted a new form of history, replacing the study of leaders with the lives of ordinary people and replacing examination of politics, diplomacy, and wars with inquiries into climate, demography, agriculture, commerce, technology, transportation, and communication, as well as social groups and mentalities. Big History Big History is looking at the past on all time scales, from the Big Bang to modernity, looking for common themes and patterns. It uses a multidisciplinary approach from the latest findings in biology, astronomy, archeology, anthropology, etc. Big History arose out of desire to go beyond the specialized and self-contained fields that emerged in the 20th century and grasp history as whole looking for common themes across the entire timescale of history. The study of history is typically limited to the written word, yet this only encompasses the past 5000 years or so and leaves out the vast majority of history. Big History examines the links between different fields of study and weaves a common narrative along thematic lines. History from below History from below is a level of historical narrative, which was developed as a result of the Annales School and popularized in the 1960s. This form of social history focuses on the perspectives of ordinary individuals within society as well as individuals and regions that were not previously considered historically important. This includes women and the working class, as well as regions such as India or Africa. Marxist analysis Marxist or historical materialist historiography is an influential school of historiography. The chief tenets of Marxist historiography are the centrality of social class and economic constraints in determining historical outcomes. Political history Political history is what most people refer to simply as history. It is the statement of various historical facts, dates of events, names of rulers, battles, court intrigues, generals, kings, queens, presidents, revolutions, the explanation of these events and people, timelines, etc. It is history with an emphasis on the state. The first ‘scientific’ political history was written by Leopold von Ranke, who helped reify the concept of nation. His methodologies profoundly affected the way historians critically examine sources. 4/16/12 History and Culture of Canada – Handout 1 Social history Social history is an area of historical study considered by some to be a social science that attempts to view historical evidence from the point of view of developing social trends. In this view, it may include areas of economic history, legal history and the analysis of other aspects of civil society that show the evolution of social norms, behaviors and mores. It is distinguished from political history, military history and the so-called history of great men. Social history can be considered ‘Grass- roots history’ because it deals with the everyday people, the masses and how they shape history rather than the leaders. While proponents of history from below and the French Annales school of historians have considered themselves part of social history, it is seen as a much broader movement among historians in the development of historiography. Unlike other approaches, it tries to see itself as a synthetic form of history not limited to the statement of so-called historical fact but willing to analyze historical data in a more systematic manner. A question in social history is whether the masses follow the leaders or whether it is the other way around. An example of social history can be seen in the American Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Typical history would focus on the who, what, when and where; whereas social history focuses on the causes of the movement itself. Social historians would pose such questions as, “Why did the movement come about when it did?”, and “What specific elements fostered the growth?” “What elements hindered the development?” This approach is favored by scholars because it allows for a full discussion on the sometimes less studied aspects. By understanding the past, we can begin to understand who we are now. Universal History Basic ideas of universal history are so prevalent that they are difficult to separate from basic Western assumptions of how the world is or should be. Outside some intellectuals, such ideas continue to predominate as core assumptions. The teleological aspects of universal history remain entrenched. Many people believe that the events of our world, and more specifically, the events within the human community, are directed toward an end or tending toward an end of some sort. ‘Linear’ pre-suppositions of the theory are no less prevalent. Most people living in Western cultures conceive of time, and therefore of history, as a line or an arrow, that is proceeding from past to future, toward some end. The idea that time may be cyclical, or that there is no fundamental “end” to the human struggle, is unfamiliar. World History World History is a field of historical study that originated in the 1980s. It examines history from a global perspective. Unlike history writing of the 19th and most of the 20th centuries, which focused on narratives of individuals, national and ethnic perspectives, World History looks for common patterns that emerge across all cultures. World historians use a thematic approach, with two major focal points: integration (how the processes of world history have drawn peoples of the world together) and difference (how the patterns of world history reveal the diversity of the human experience). The study of world history is in some ways a product of the current period of accelerated globalization. This period is tending to both integrate various cultures and to highlight their differences. Questions for discussion in the next class: Read the transcript of Dr. Ritter’s lecture: History is Dangerous. Which events in history have been interpreted by historians in different ways? 4/16/12 History and Culture of Canada – Handout 1 1. What do you think about the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Some suggest it was an inhuman and cruel event that killed ordinary people not soldiers. Others insist that the bombing saved lives because if the US had invaded Japan, millions would have died. Imagine you are a historian. What do you write about this event? 2. Two years ago, some people suggested that Japan should not participate in the Beijing Olympics because of China’s attitude toward Tibet. What do you know about the history of Tibet? Use Google and Wikipedia. What do you find out? Be aware of your sources. 3. The first technological civilizations developed in the Near East and China but didn’t in Africa and America. Why? Is it because Eurasians are smarter than Africans or Americans, or is there some other explanation. Some interesting and controversial answers to this question can be found in the book, Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies by Jared Diamond. Diamond, J. (March 1997). Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies. W.W. Norton & Company. ISBN 0-393-03891-2. Read this book or a review of this book in English or Japanese. What conclusions does Dr. Diamond draw? 4/16/12