Historian

Historians are influenced by countless features of their lives. As a part of any race, gender, religion, nationality, time period, political identity or social class they have a unique world view. These factors may help them see a primary or secondary resource in a new light and gain a fuller understanding of the situation. Their views can also cause historians to overlook important features in resources or fail to recognize a particular side of the issue. Historians can broaden their horizons

Historians utilize primary sources to reconstruct events that have previously occurred in order to create a clearer image of the past. In opposition, human scientists investigate varying aspects of human activity to reveal discoveries that are meant to bring significant changes to the future. This is presented in the assertion that “The historian’s task is to understand the past; the human scientist, by contrast, is looking to change the future.” This appears to be false considering that both the

it is an individual’s narrative that the historian relies on as a record of events. History continues to be a contentious social science. Today, history continues to be widely debated because it is perceived as tendentious. Historical narratives, whether they are primary or secondary sources, tend to present only one point of view. This perspective is often an inclination or one’s own opinion, which can modify the history that is being documented. Historian Leopold von Ranke believes that a historian’s

The essay “Historian as Citizen” by Howard Zinn presents a call to action for historians everywhere. To start, he analyzes the delicate need for balance that comes with studying history, how historians can use patterns of the past to judge contemporary events, but must not overlook the “universe of tricks” outside that realm. Next, he argues we must also transcend the present and act as if we are freer than logic may suggest. Finally, Zinn delves into the negative aspects of society’s long-established

Investigating the Extent to Which Historians Can Be Objective ‘You have reckoned that history ought to judge the past and to instruct the contemporary world as to the future. The present attempt does not yield to that high office. It will merely tell you how it really was’ - Leopold Von Ranke ‘There are no facts, only interpretations’ – Nietzsche Here we encounter two diametrically opposed views concerning objectivity. It can be argued that “true” objectivity cannot

The reason that historians differ on the causes, effects, and who was responsible for “historical events” is because memory is reconstructive and unreliable. Therefore the written history of 9-11 is affected by bias because the writers, children, and adults memories are affected by the schemas of each one’s individual culture. This can change the recollection of 9-11 and other traumatic events. Memories linked to 9-11 differ between different cultures. This is the case because 9-11 has had a significantly

Gaddis wrote, The Landscape of History: How Historians Map the Past, to inform audiences why a historical consciousness should matter to us today. He used knowledge from past historians to portray the method that historical writings represent what cannot replicate. Gaddis worked to describe historical consciousness using visual imagery to express metaphors because science, history, and art all depend on metaphors. The past is something we can never have and through metaphors and representation, Gaddis

to ancient Greece and China, where historians Herodotus and Sima Qian began keeping records of human existence. Although they were not literally the first people to write history, together they are named the first great historians of the Western world and the East because of their individual innovations and extensive work that has long affected history writing up until this day. There is much to debate when it comes to the greatness of these ancient historians, and although some believe they were

Herodotus and Sima Qian: The First Great Historians of Greece and China is a book that provides historical context on both ancient Greece and ancient China written by Thomas R. Martin; Additionally the book provides primary source documents written by ancient historians Herodotus and Sima Qian, who tell the history of their nations through numerous anecdotes. Although the two historians have different motives behind their works since Sima Qian writes the history of ancient China for personal gain

many ways a pool of gray. It is in this realm of ambiguity the historian can be found in her natural habitat. Of course a creature who lives in a world of gray would herself have a rather ambiguous role. Historians have a duty to the past but must live in the present. This places them in a predicament that has plagued the discipline for at least the last century — the conflict between presentism and ‘pure scholarship’. The historian must reconcile her obligation to be fair to the peoples of the past