Chapter one starts off with the topic question, “What do Historians Do?”, which John Fea slowly starts to answer for the readers. First, he tells what a historian is and what their job is. He explains that a historian must be good at bringing stories from the past to life. Some people are easily bored by a history book, but “in the hands of a skillful historian-writer, can be a page-turner” (Fea 5-6). Fea also mentions that a good historian will not only tell about the event that took place, but that he or she will also review the causes and effects of that event. He or she should lay out different perspectives of the story in order to avoid a biased presentation of information. Building on the idea that there are unique perspectives to a story,
I would use a morally just ethical standard. The president and the U.S. government needed to push the issue to intervene as quickly as they could. They needed to have a meeting and working every issue out even if it took three days straight. Their top priory should have been stopping this work of evil.
(An analysis of how the authors Hughes, Clifton and McElroy and how they use history in their works.)
She carries the audience through her argument in a logical sequence. First, she makes her claim that student do not know history and explains her reasons (250). She then elaborates on what history students are taught and what exactly is wrong with the methods by which they learn (251). After this, she explains the job of a historian to the reader – how historians confront primary sources to “make some sense of what once happened” (252). To end the article, Simon describes how students can better learn history through exploring primary sources (253). This structuring and organization helps the reader to understand and to believe Simon’s
Historians produce knowledge for us to learn from in the form of written documentation showing what people have done in the
A historian is able to scrutinize two dissimilar documents from a point of history and compare them adequately. My professor presented the opportunity for my peers and I to become historians by writing a paper on imperial history. I was provided with the letter from the emperor Qianlong of China to King George III and I compared it to the letter from Christopher Columbus to Luis De Sant Angel. Both letters are from imperial history and they can be associated with the process of trading. Each letter can be analyzed by evaluating what is essential for both authors and the society they are depicting.
Writing this paper was quite the challenge but one that I have learned a lot from. I have always had a strong interest in history and how historians dig up and put together their information. From our class discussions and my experience piecing together Jaymi’s history, being a historian is not just about giving people information about the past. It is about reconstructing the past. Historians must look at all angles of their study—they are like the detectives of the past. With this project, that is exactly what I had to do.
History is story we tell ourselves as Khalil Gibran Muhamad defined it , or Story we tell ourselves about how past explains our present and the way story is told is shaped by contemporary needs as Aurora Levnis Morales nicely put it. Likewise it could be stated that we become stories we tell ourselves. Thus, history has role in construction of our identity. Given the importance of the story for us, could it be different story then the one we are told in mainstream media and thought in schools? The one that empowers us instead of enslaving us?
Chavez uses the “Latino Threat Narrative” to compare the Hispanics to the “German language threat, the Catholic threat, the Chinese and Japanese language threat, and the southern and eastern European threats.” He suggests that “each was pervasive and defined “truths” about the threat posed by immigrants that, in hindsight, were unjustified or never materialized in the long run of history.” Chavez was trying to explain that the Hispanic would pattern these other threats by upsetting the America people. He states that “… the Latino Threat Narrative is part of a grand tradition of alarmist discourse about immigrants and their perceived negative impacts on society.”
• the historical events of the time and the person’s experience of those; and so forth.
Many historians build up historical profiles on a certain person, place, idea, or event. Once they have their research done they look at the work of other historians
In terms of self-reflection Eley addresses what motivates the historian to do what they have done
History and our background greatly influence who we are as an individual and therefore impacts society. However, society also critically influences the choices we make, our values and the kind of person we become. For example, at one point in our history, the majority of the people believed that the role of a women is to bare children and keep the household running smoothly while the men role is to provide for his family. However, over the years in some societies this view has changed. Understanding how history, biography connects within society helps us better understand where we stand in society and what we can do to prevail within that period.
To know the past is to know the future. In his essay Knowing History and Knowing Who We Are, David McCullough argues about the importance of studying and teaching history. In his essay, he explains that there are three main points about history: character and its effect upon destiny, our failure of teaching the future generation, and the importance of learning and listening to history. David McCullough strongly advocates that audience should start to listen to and teach about the past in order to learn about the way a person’s character can affect their destiny.
“The Headstrong Historian”, a short story among a collection of stories written by Chimamanda Adichie in the novel, The Thing Around Your Neck talks about a woman who gives her only son, who was born after several miscarriages, off to foreigners to train him in the English language in order to be a better public speaker, so he could win a property acquisition case against her in-laws in court, following her husband’s death, but instead, he gets completely transformed by the statutes of the white man and she has no choice but to accept him even when he tries to impose the white man’s practices on her. In this paper, I’m going to be using the concepts of Ambivalence and Hegemony, and Bechdel Test and Gender
If historians from today open documents from back then what would happen? They will probably have difficulty understanding it. Reason why is because the world has been changing for awhile now. People changed the way they talk, dress, and more. Just like how some one that doesn't understanding sign language, that person would have to find a way to understand them.