Historiography
This is an excerpt from the paper...
Every piece of historical description actually describes for the reader two different sets of history. Each historical text discloses to the reader something of what happened during the era under discussion. But it also reveals at least as much about the era in which the history was written. What is considered significant enough to mention, what events are seen as causative rather than incidental, who are the true villains - all of these things may change from one generation's historical account to that of the next, and not because new facts have come to light.Rather, people seek to understand the past in some measure to shed light on the present, and as the needs and particularities of the present change so the historian looks at the past differently. This is not a question of political or other form of bias (although certainly different biases also shape the writing of history, as they do everything else). Rather, this is simply a truth about the practice of history. This truth is encompassed in the word "historiography", which is the at least partially self-consciousness task of writing - which is to say creating - history. The historiography - the way that history is written - about a particular event changes as historians change. One of the most striking evolutions in historiography involves the history of the period of Reconstruction that followed the American Civil War. Reconstruction, as envisioned by Lincoln and many others both inside and outside of the governme
. . .
trongly suggest the fallacy of many previous assumptions. No longer should any historian blithely accept the traditional concept of a universal preoccupation with the sectional issue.6
Both Nichols's examination7 of the Kansas-Nebraska Act and Wolff's (in Swierenga) discussion of this same issue are perfect examples of Silbey-inspired scholarship in that they take great pains to consider nuances of both ethnicity and religion in their analyses.
Foner elaborated on Silbey's arguments, also urging historians to avoid overly simplistic and therefore in essential ways false and misleading depictions of American history. As a way of avoiding overly simplistic and therefore in essential ways false and misleading depictions of American history. Foner urged his colleagues to borrow from the quasi-scientific arsenal of the psychologist and other social scientists.8 Foner was, it should be noted, in some ways at least properly cautious about the problems of applying such methods to the slippery, qualitative facts if history, warning his colleagues both not to mistake correlation for causation (and so to avoid that great bete-noir of both sociology and psychology). Foner also called on historians not to magnify beyond its true importance
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Civil War, War Reconstruction, Wolff's Swierenga, , United Swierenga, Reconstruction Brock, Reconstruction Franklin's, Lincoln Reconstruction, Rights Movement, Silbey Foner, civil war, civil rights, rights movement, civil war reconstruction, civil rights movement, war reconstruction, causes civil war, kansas-nebraska act, war era, causes civil, reconstruction history, reconstruction historiography, american history, historical review 43, valley historical review,
Approximate Word count = 2423
Approximate Pages = 10 (250 words per page)
|