Overview of Historiography

As a budding historian, it is significant to learn the history… of history. Historiography has taught me to look beyond words on a page. Equally as significant as a historian’s work is information about the historian him (or her) self. Do they have bias? Were they commissioned to write this work? Did they love who they were writing about? Did they hate them? What period of time did they write in? What happened during their lives? There are so many questions we should ask ourselves when writing history to make sure we can fully understand what we are reading.

Historiography teaches us to be thorough  (however tedious it may feel). We cannot simply pass over one piece of information to reach another. We must embrace  the unknown of each new work of history we pick up. We must search beyond the most famous and peer into avenues less traveled. Without a knowledge of historiography we lose the HOW and the WHY and are left with the WHEN, WHERE, WHO and WHAT.

The budding world of digital technologies and resources before us open up a bright future for historians to access information and connect with other historians on an international level. But, in a landscape of historical misnomers and inaccuracies, historiography has taught me to not judge history based on its legend and look deeply into its foundations. Stories that have been passed down can prove to be fiction and written history that has been held as definitive can be as false as a bards tale. To understand history, we must know what to look for, and we must put in the time to prove its value.  

Historiography that brings me joy: Lectures that inform. Readings which supplement. Presentations for enrichment. Discussions to ignite thoughts and ideas. Digital resources for the expansion of our knowledge. 

History as a Social Science

Mathematics, Physics, Biology, Chemistry…. History? The emergence of an evolved, more scientific history in the late 19th century and into the early 20th century changed the way that history is taught and studied. Through evidence, evaluation of fact, and specific organization, history took on a new character. Like any science experiment, many studies in history can be broken down using the scientific process. Though this type of scientific approach to history may be possible, it yields different results than a traditional science experiment. Take for instance the scientific method. Used in its most primitive forms by Aristotle, Ptolemy, and Descartes, the scientific method was used for traditional “hard” sciences, as well as more lofty social sciences like philosophy and even history. Does the scientific method work in a historical context?

The first step is to ask a question, like: Was the American Civil War a Total War?

Next, we must make a hypothesis: Yes or No. The American Civil War WAS a total war, or the American Civil War WAS NOT a total war. 

After taking a stance, we must make a statement, or prediction about our findings. In history this would be something like: A total war includes ______. The American Civil war had ______ and _______. I believe that there will be evidence to back up my claim that the American Civil war was/was not a total war. 

Next comes the hard part, research. For scientists, this step is composed of testing the experiment over and over again, hoping to achieve the same results. For historians, this means reading primary and secondary sources, researching, and writing about a specific topic. 

Once all of your facts are in line, its time for analysis. This could mean writing a research report or article, giving a lecture, or writing a full book about your findings. Historians are constantly contributing to the field of history with their findings based on research and analysis. 

Finally, and what i think is the most unique part of history’s take on the scientific method, is the replication or external review process. For historians, this is where the scientific method diverges into its own category of the Social Sciences. In general, historians do not tend to agree with each other. As a historian, we each want to have our own idea of what happened. True, we sometimes agree, but up until recently, discrediting and breaking down another historians work was part of the field. History has taken many turns in its existence, and it has a lot more room for growth!

Modern Historical Divisionism – A Coat of Many Colors

Military. Economics. Society. Culture. Politics. Religion. Environment. Gender. Drawn and quartered, modern historians divide history into subject areas to focus their study. Does this modern form of historical division benefit the study of history or hinder it?

Unbeknownst to me, Karl Marx was a historian. Only recently was this brought to my attention. Known most for his theories regarding Socialism and his most well known writing, The Communist Manifesto, historian was the last title i would have attributed to Marx. In fact, I am now convinced that he was essential to the growth of modern history. As a great communicator of ideas, he built upon the foundations on the idealism of German philosopher Hegel, gained passion from Rousseau’s political philosophies, continued French social theorist Saint-Simon’s ideals, and developed his unique historical perspective based off of Adam Smith’s economic studies.

In his studies, Marx described history as a function of economics. For Marx, economic history was history. Labor and production was the force that pushed the world in an endless cycle of growth through four stages of development, which would eventually end in a communist world society where history no longer needed to exist. His ideas incited revolution, sparked economic and social change, and gave rise to modern historical divisionism. The influence of his works on society ultimately made it so that his Utopian future would not take hold, but his ideas still hold significance to this day, both in history and in society.

The next generation of historians of the early 20th century took their cue from Marx’s tendency to write as a proto-economic historian. Now, history not only became its own field of study, but was divided into multiple subdivisions. Marx’s influence on history may have diverged from his original intentions, but became extremely influential nonetheless.

Remember, Revise, Rewrite – How History is Remembered

As a young history student in elementary school, I remember learning about the history of the United States. We were taught that Christopher Columbus discovered America when he “Sailed the ocean blue in 1492”  in the Nina, Pinta, and the Santa Maria and that the Boston Massacre was an act of unprovoked brutality by British soldiers. The more history I learned, the more it began to shift. There were less catchphrases and events became riddled with background information that diluted the significance of these monumental events.

Columbus’ ships weren’t named the Nina, Pinta, and the Santa Maria. He didn’t even set foot in North America, rather he landed in the Bahamas and traveled up and down the South American coast. The Boston Massacre only resulted in 5 deaths (not worthy of the title of massacre if you ask me) and the British soldiers defending themselves and were heavily provoked by a dissatisfied America mob which pelted them with rocks and snowballs full of rocks. Important histories have been told many times, in many different ways.

For historians during the European Enlightenment of the 17th and 18th centuries, rediscovery of truth in history became a fundamental aspect of Enlightenment culture. The focus on reality and individualism in a movement away from tradition brought about a change in historical writing. Texts were reanalyzed and the Church was a prime target for any discrepancies that historical writing had. The movement away from traditional stories as legitimate sources of history was obvious during the Enlightenment.

For me, the Enlightenment reminds me of my experiences learning history throughout my life. When we are learning about history at a young age, we are taught history through traditional, and sometimes inaccurate, stories. As we grow up, in high school and college, we are able to question the truth in these stories and learn the real history behind these events. Much like this trend of learning history from youth to adult, in the timeline of the world, the Enlightenment brought about the intellectual community’s ability to question tradition.