HISTORICAL RESEARCH:

A QUALITATIVE RESEARCH METHOD

by Jovita J. Tan (21 April 2015)

1.0 Introduction
There are a number of methodologies that can be used in qualitative researches. This paper
will look specifically at historical research as a methodology for qualitative research. For this
article, an overview of historical research which includes its definition, significance and values,
stages, sources, approaches and reliability and validity will be provided. Its historical roots,
underlying premises, theoretical perspectives, proponents as well as its advantages and
disadvantages will also be discussed. Besides that, some examples of research using historical
research methods will be presented as well.

2.0 Historical Research

Historical research can be defined as the process of investigating past events systematically
to provide an account of happenings in the past (Historical Research, n.d.). It is not simply the
accumulation of dates and facts or even just a description of past happenings but is a flowing and
dynamic explanation or description of past events which include an interpretation of these events in
an effort to recapture implications, personalities and ideas that have influenced these events (ibid).
Berg (2000) stressed that it is crucial to distinguish nostalgia from historical research since the
former is the retelling of comfortable past pleasantries, events or situations that lacks research
vigour while the later attempts to methodically recaptures the complex nuances, people, meanings,
events and even ideas of the past that have impacted and shaped the present (Hamilton, 1993;
Leedy 1999 as cited in Berg, 2000).
The purpose of historical research is to verify and explain history of any area of human
activities, subjects or events by means of scientific processes (Špiláčková, 2012). The important
aims for conducting historical research are (i) to reveal or uncover the unkown; (ii) to answer
questions which have yet been answered; (iii) to search and identity the relationship of past
happenings and their links with the present; (iv) to record and assess past activities and
achievements of individuals, agencies and institutions; and (v) to assist in the understanding of
human culture (Berg, 2001). According to Moore, Monaghan and Hartman (1997), the most time-
honoured justification for doing historical research is that people can learn from the past.
Furthermore, historical research helps to identify individuals as a community since the construction
of links between past and present allow people to be seen as part of a larger drama (Monaghan &
Hartman, 2000). In addition, it also encourages interdisciplinary inquiry and understanding (ibid).
On top of that, it is intellectually enriching and challenging as historical research often ask the
thought-provoking question of ‘why’ (ibid). And finally, historical research is fun because there
are no other disciplines that allow one to poke their noses into the concerns of others and then label
it as serious academic work (ibid).
According to Lundi (2008), there are five stages to undertake in historical researches,
namely (i) the identification of a researchable phenomenon that involves reading relevant literature,
listening to current views about the phenomenon and reflecting on the researcher’s interest before
choosing a specific time period, person, phenomena or era related to the focus of the study; (ii) the
development of hypotheses or research questions and the identification of a theoretical perspective
that will guide the process of data collection and results interpretation besides helping researcher
focus and interpret historical occurrences as recorded; (iii) the data exploration and collection stage
where it can be the most time-consuming and labour-intensive part as the research process is
dependent on the subject of study and the accessibility of data sources; (iv) the checking of facts,
evaluation of the validity and reliability of data, and the analysis of evidence gathered from each
source where the researcher evaluate the data and forms generalizations to accepts or rejects
hypotheses or to answer research questions and forms conclusions; and (v) the writing of the report
in which findings are described along with interpretations and provides detailed supportive
evidence in defence of the conclusions made.
Data sources for historical research can be taken from either primary sources or secondary
sources (Berg, 2001; Lundy, 2008; Moore, Monaghan & Hartman, 1997). Primary sources are
first-person accounts that involve the oral or written testimony of eyewitnesses and these may
include documents, letter, observational notes, photographs, recordings, diaries, journals, life
histories, drawings, mementos and other relics (Berg, 2001; Lundy; 2008). Salkind (1996 as cited
in Berg 2001) stated that primary sources are usually original artefacts, documents and items
related to the direct outcomes of an event or an experience. In general, primary sources are created
at or very near the time of the historical event that is being described (Lundy, 2008). In contrast,
secondary sources are account descriptions of persons who are not eyewitnesses of the event or
who did not personally know the person being studied (ibid). They are from people who are not
immediately present at the time of the event and these are referred to as second-hand or hearsay
accounts of someone, some happenings or some development (Berg, 2001). Secondary sources can
be in form of biographies, scholarly articles, popular books, reference books, textbooks, court
records, lab information, encyclopaedias, newspaper articles and even obituary notices (Berg, 2001;
Lundy; 2008).

~1~
 There are generally four approaches to historical research and these all utilise primary
sources as their chief database (Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). However, Monaghan and Hartman
(2000) noted that these four approached are not exclusive as researchers use as many of the
approaches as their question, topic and time would allow. This integration is made possible due to
the nature of historical research that cuts across genres of approaches as can be seen in Barry’s
(1992) and Spiker’s (1997) dissertations when they employ all four approaches (ibid). The four
approaches proposed by Monaghan and Hartman (2000) are (i) qualitative approach (also known as
history by quotation) where the search for a story construed from a range of printed or written
evidence and the resultant history is arranged chronologically and presented as a factual tale and the
sources range from manuscripts (such as account books, school records, marginalia, letters, diaries
and memoirs) to imprints (such as textbooks, journals, children’s books and other books of the
period under consideration); (ii) quantitative approach where researchers intentionally look for
evidence that lends itself to be quantifiable and is thus presumed to have superior validity and
generalizability with the assumption that broader questions can then be addressed more
authoritatively; (iii) content analysis where the text itself is the object of scrutiny that uses
published works as its data and subjects them to careful analyses that ordinarily include both the
qualitative and quantitative aspects; and (iv) oral history which focuses on living memory where
researchers gather personal recollections of events from living individuals via audio and video
recording that gives respondents a natural and effective environment to provide a reciprocal
interchange between them and the researchers.
The validity of historical research can be established through external criticism while its
reliability is determined via internal criticism (Lundy, 2008; Berg, 2001). External and internal
criticisms are essential to ascertain the quality of the data that will in turn affect the quality of the
depth of interpretations and analyses since the rigorous examinations of the internal and external
value of the data will ensure valid and reliable information as well as viable historical analyses
(Berg, 2001). The primary concern of external criticism is the genuineness of resource materials
(ibid). It is extremely crucial for researchers to evaluate their sources with great care, or even get
verification from experts, to ensure that sources are authentic to avoid frauds, hoaxes and forgeries
as these are not uncommon and can prove to be problematic (Lundy, 2008; Berg, 2001). On the
other hand, for researchers to determine the reliability of a source using internal criticism, the
trustworthiness of the source is questioned, such as the author’s perceptions and biases of the
phenomena, and whether the author is reporting from intimate knowledge or from other’s
description of the event (Lundy, 2008). Lundy (2008) cautioned researchers to be vigilant in
including both positive and negative criticism of all data sources which includes missing accounts,
lack of relevant viewpoints and the persons involved in the event.
~2~
2.1 Historical Roots
Historical research first took on some forms of analytic detachment with the Jews of
Ancient Israel whose accounts in the books of the Old Testament exhibits a capability for bringing
together information from vast sources and making accurate appraisals even though they were more
shaped by religious experience as compared to other types of analytic inquiry (Momigliano, 1990
as cited in Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). The Greeks were the earliest to move towards an analytic
approach that looked into facts to determine accuracy (Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). They did this
by verifying information against participants and eyewitnesses accounts, consulting archived
documents and deliberating cautiously about motivations and causations (Grant, 1970 as cited in
Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). Later on, with the influence of the Greeks, analytical practices for
historical researches were further developed by the Romans (Monaghan & Hartman, 2000).
However, a Christian view of history took hold within the Roman Empire, causing the blending of
religious and analytic historical practices (ibid). The most prominent statement of the Christian
interpretation of history can be seen in The City of God, a work by St. Augustine (Barker, 1982, as
cited in Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). According to Dahmus (1982 as cited in Monaghan &
Hartman, 2000), St. Augustine’s method of using analytical tools within the religious framework
has been closely followed by medieval historians for ten centuries.
From the 14th century through to the 19th century, historical research methods brought about
a transformation from supernatural explanations towards more secular approaches (Breisach, 1994).
By the early 20th century, historical methods have become totally secularized and it was from this
time onwards that historical knowledge itself came under public attack (Monaghan & Hartman,
2000). And, since the late 1950s, historians have moved through major reconceptualizations of
their expertises and skills –– from the new social history of the 1960s and 1970s, through the
intersections among history, language and thought of the 1970s and 1980s, to the postmodernism of
the 1990s where culture, that was once held by the supernatural, was elevated to a level of
importance (ibid). In response to the shift in the field of historical research, Appleby (1998)
strongly encouraged historians of the new histories to act as cultural translator by interpreting the
past for consumers of history with new questions that lead to new answers through the mediating
filter of culture.

2.2 Underlying Premises

According to McCullagh (1984), in order to justify historical descriptions as true in a
correspondence sense, there are four assumptions that need to be considered, namely: (i) the world
exist and has existed independent of any beliefs about it; (ii) perceptions give an accurate
~3~
impression of reality under certain conditions; (iii) reality is structured according to most of the
concepts by which it is described; and (iv) people’s rule of inference are reliable means of arriving
at new truths about reality (Neely, 1988). McCullagh (1984) holds that these premises cannot be
proven beyond the possibility of doubt even if they were accepted (ibid). The goal, however, is to
show that historical descriptions can be shown to be probably true on these assumptions (ibid). He
further states that if the strength and scope of an explanation is very great that it explains a variety
and vast number of facts more than any competing explanation, then it is likely to be true.

2.3 Theoretical Perspectives and Proponents

The major theoretical approaches in historical research are Marxism, Annales, post-
structuralism and feminism (Historical Research Methods, n.d.). Before Marxist interpretation of
history came into focus, there was Hegel’s philosophy of history (Breisach, 1994). Hegel’s
idealistic views on complete unity of the whole course of the world became a precursor for
Marxism when the currents of intellectual development shifted in the nineteenth century (ibid).
From the ruins of Hegel’s philosophy of history, rises Marxist interpretation of history (Breisach,
1994). Based on Marxist theory, history is the story of struggles between social classes where
those in power control wealth and resources while the powerless struggle to survive (Cassell, 2014).
However, this economic deterministic historical theory became more and more out of tune with
Western thought, such that after 1988, the Eastern European countries and the Soviet Union
rejected their Marxist regimes and hence the viability of Marxism as an encompassing historical
theory was put into doubt (Breisach, 1994). The twentieth century also saw the founders of the
Annales school, Lucien Febvre and Marc Bloch calling for a total history, that would stress on
social and economic phenomena, which is well suited to the quantitative approach (ibid). The
founders felt that human activities from different domains (economic, political, scientific,
geographic, cultural, demographic and etcetera) need to be synthesized to understand history as a
whole (Hall, 2007; Campbell, 1998). The school stresses on social history and rejects Marxism and
deals basically with the pre-modern world before the French Revolution of the 1970s
(Padmanabhan & Gafoor, 2011). It was influenced by structuralism, a strong contemporary French
philosophical and literary movement, as historical research of the Annales school could be seen as
the exploration of a number of structural interpretations (Berg, 2001). In the 1960s, post-
structuralism emerged as an antinomian movement critiquing structuralism (Padmanabhan &
Gafoor, 2011). It argues that the founding of knowledge on pure experience (phenomenology) or
systematic structures (structuralism) was impossible and is a cause for celebration and liberation
instead of failure and loss (ibid). Feminism too emerged in the 1960s when women began to
question their treatment as independent individuals in a male-dominated society (Tzanelli, 2010).
~4~
Feminism affects historical research by rediscovering lost voices, challenging dominant codes of
discourse, challenging the content of established periodicizations and challenging thematic
considerations (ibid).

2.4 Strengths and Weaknesses

One of the strengths of historical research is that it provides people with possible instead of
probable understandings and the ability to take precautions rather than control possible future
because direct applications of the past to the present can distort events and lead to erroneous
conclusions (Monaghan & Hartman, 2000). The unobtrusive nature of historical research can also
be viewed as an advantage since the research enterprise itself cannot affect its subject matter
(Deflem & Dove, 2013).
As oppose to the advantages, the main limitation of historical research is that the past can
only be revealed inasmuch as the manner in which it is still present today, causing important
problems of validity (Deflem & Dove, 2013). This is because researchers’ primary interests in the
testing of their theories, rather than in the analysis of crucial social events, will lead them to favour
other methodologies whereby data can be generated (ibid). Besides that, primary sources are more
difficult to identify as the material title may not correspond with its content and may be unavailable
since it may be impossible to localise the sources or they may not have been registered and stated in
the inventory list yet (Špiláčková, 2012). Often, it is also impossible to triangulate findings
because the contemporary witnesses are no longer living and there are no other sources of
information to the given issue (ibid).

2.5 Examples of Research using Historical Research Method

The examples of research using the various approaches of historical methods are (i) the
work of Gallegos (1992) on the links between literacy and society in early New Mexico that
employed both qualitative and quantitative approaches; (ii) the history of the Canadian ‘Dick and
Jane’ experience by Luke (1988) used the content analysis approach; and (iii) Clegg’s (1997) study
in oral histories of teachers and students (Monaghan & Hartman, 2000).

3.0 Conclusion
In conclusion, historical research is a methodology for studying past events, phenomena or
occurrences. On a side note, it should be noted that with the advancement of technology today, the
use of internet for the correspondence of both primary and secondary sources have increased
greatly since more and more information are been stored electronically. As such, the future of

~5~
historical research will change as more correspondence and eyewitnesses accounts are recorded
over the internet and become available as new data sources for historical researches (Lundy, 2008).

~6~
4.0 References
Appleby, J. (1998). The Power of History. The American Historical Review , 103 (1), 1-14.
Berg, B. L. (2001). Historiography and Oral Traditions. In Qualitative Research Methods for the
Sosial Sciences (4th ed., pp. 210-224). MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Breisach, E. (1994). Historiography: Ancient, Medieval and Modern (2nd ed.). Chicago: University
of Chichago Press.
Campbell, P. R. (1998). The New History: The Annales School of History and Modern
Historiography. In W. Lamont (Ed.), Historians and Historical Controversy (pp. 189-200).
New York: UCL Press.
Cassell. (2014, August 27). Theories of History. Retrieved April 8, 2015, from Newton South High
School Library: http://nshslibrary.newton.k12.ma.us/CassellTheories
Deflem, M., & Dove, A. L. (2013). Historical Research and Social Movements. In D. A. Snow, D.
D. Porta, B. Klandermans, & D. McAdam (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell Encyclopedia of
Social and Political Movements (pp. 560-563). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hall, J. R. (2007). Historicity and Sociohistorical Research. In W. Outhwaite, & S. P. Turner (Eds.),
The SAGE Handbook of Social Science Methodology (pp. 82-99). Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications.
Historical Research Methods. (n.d.). Retrieved April 16, 2015, from University of Kent:
http://www.kent.ac.uk/courses/modulecatalogue/modules/SO648
Historical Research. (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from University of South Alabama:
http://www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/lectures/lec13.pdf
Historical Research. (n.d.). Retrieved April 15, 2015, from University of Mumbai:
http://www.mu.ac.in/myweb_test/Research%20Methadology-Paper-3/Chapter-6.pdf
Lundy, K. S. (2008). Historical Research. In L. M. Given (Ed.), The SAGE Encyclopedia of
Qualitative Research Methods: Volumes 1 & 2 (pp. 395-399). Thousand Oaks: SAGE
Publications.
Monaghan, E. J., & Hartman, D. K. (2000). Undertaking Historical Research in Literacy. In M. L.
Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr, Handbook of Reading Research: Volume
III (pp. 109-122). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Moore, D. W., Monaghan, E. J., & Hartman, D. K. (1997). Conversations: Values of Literacy
History. Reading Research Quarterly , 32 (1), 90-102.
Neely, W. (1988). Justifying Historical Descriptions by C. Behan McCullagh. Cambridge
University Press, 1984. x + 252 Pages. Noûs , 22 (4), 639-641.

~7~
Padmanabhan, N., & Gafoor, P. A. (2011). Methodology of History. Retrieved April 16, 2015, from
University of Calicut:
http://www.universityofcalicut.info/syl/METHODOLOGYOFHISTORY.pdf
Špiláčková, M. (2012). Historical Research in Social Work - Theory and Practice. ERIS Web
Journal , 3 (2), 22-33.
Tzanelli, R. (2010, November 23). Feminism in Historiography. Retrieved April 16, 2015, from
Rodanthi Tzanelli's Teaching:
https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxyb2Rh
bnRoaXR6YW5lbGxpc3RlYWNoaW5nfGd4OjFlOWJkYmRiOGY1ZTVjYTc

~8~