we ~ Bish 4 = The Nature and Scope of History as a Social Science By Rowena Reyes-Boquiren, Ph.D. Division of Social Sciences, UP College Baguio INTRODUCTION The objective of the presentation is to familiarize you with the nature of history as a social science ciscipline: to understand the elements of historical research, distinguish the different levels and sub-disciplines of historical research, and the range of techniques and tools of a historian. |, DEFINITION OF HISTORY As the historian EH. Carr puts it in his basic work entitled What Is History (1961), history is generally defined in two ways: as a process and as a field of inquiry. As a process, “history” Includes the past as it had happened, and which is being created. Hence you hear such phrases as “early history,” contemporary history,” “the making of history," or “history in the making.” History is @ process which happens whether human beings are aware of it or not, and whether records about it are consciously made oF not. For example, tse evolution of man inte Homosapiens is a t storical process which happened over thous inds.of years. In brief, history as a process pertains to the origin, growth and developmunt of social institutions, events, social movements, and other things concerning man. This, indeed, covers a very large ground. What has to be kept in mind is that historians are interested in explaining Progress and change in historical processes The second definition of history is a “social science.” It is the study on the inquiry that the historian makes about these broad social Processes in their cultural, temporal, and spatich Context. As a field of learning, history evolved from the tradition of societies that had use for it, Therefore, its significance and practice varied from place to place. We must add to this definition the notion of history as a systematic study, “history being a social science.” It subscribes to a systematic method of forming conclusions based on verified or “tested” evidence. This is the counterpart of hypothesis, testing in history, although history uses qualitative more than quantitative analytical techniques. Most of the social sciences focus on man in stables systems, as in social structure {sociology}, use and allocation of scarce resources (economics) or of power or authority (political science). History differs from other social science disciplines because it deals with the evolution or the progress and change in those specific concerns through time. Because the subject (society) is the same, the tools for data gathering in history are also similar to those used by the other social sciences. Other than consisting of historical narratives significant to a particular people, history is therefore also viewed as a discipline with a defined methodology. Yet, it was only in the 19" century when history as a discipline in Europe started to assume a much-debated methodology from data gathering to analysis and interpretation, as in the other disciplines, Today, even in the Philippinas, historians think of history as already a branch of human. knowledge that has a distinct methodology. THE NATURE OF HISTORY AS A SOCIAL SCIENCE DISCIPLINE The historian conducts research guided by ¢ynamic and continuous exchange happens between a historical problem he or she is interested in answering and the sources of data that ure employed to answer such problem. As the topical focus of the historian’s research, the historical problem (or idea) is derived from a need to derive any of the following: (a) knowledge of a topic not yet previously studied, or (b) additional insights to, if not reinterpretations of, previously formed conclusions articulated in available sources, Scanned with CamScannerwhether based on the same data or new findings and even new techniques. ‘The historian decides on the historical problem based on a review of gaps in what Is already known in terms of the following; (2) geographic scope (will your study cover a province, a town, or just a small portion of @ particular area?) {b) substantive focus (will the historical investigation tackle socizl movements, or the impact of colonial policies, or the evolution of decision making in the political structure, or the formation of settlemen 5?) (c) time frame (will the study cover the prehistoric period, or hree decades, or @ very short and specific peric d?) (a) size of population to be covered (will the study include the entire population of a town, or just the peasants, or women?) Indeed, what is interesting and feasible as a research problem in history can be defined according to one's assessment of existing sources, of what has not yet been studied, or what needs to be reinterpreted. Sources can help the historian identify a topic worth studying Now, what are sources of history? These are the sources of evidence, whether they are primary or secondary in origin, printed or orally transmitted, or are material evidences of cultural life. Just as historical sources help determine a research problem, the choice of a historical problem also influences the range of sources utilized by the historian, as well as the techniques and tools to be adopted, With a historical problem and a set of sources of evidence to study, the historian proceeds to work in a manner informed by a procedure, a set of knowledge and a particular theory of history. These three elements constitute the methodology of history, as illustrated in Fig, 2. HISTORICAL , tn sou! PROBLEM. Rees core elements of historical methodology: ‘ Mmstoricat ANSTORICAL, PHILOSOPHY METHOD KNOWLEDGE, OF HISTORY Heuristic phase Historical criticism Hermeneutic phase Fig. 2. The Nature of History as a Social Science Discipline The concepts as listed in Sig, 2 which are associated with history as a social sclence allows us to understand the work of a historian. Let us explain each of these concepts. Scanned with CamScanner[A THE HISTORIAN AS LINK TO THE HISTORICAL PROBLEM AND SOURCES OF HISTORY > TheHlistorian | It is the historian who defines a historical problem worth studying, and looks for sources of evidence that will answer the problem. The historian is, therefore the link between the historical problem and he sources of history. In a similar way, itis the historian who links the present (a historical pr sblem meaningful to the present period) and the past (the events which happened before, as recorded in the past in the form of sources still available in the present). The historian is not someone who simply picks up a pen and starts to reconstruct an event that catches his/her interest, because the event is a controversial one, or because it illumines another controversial happening, or can make or unmake another person’s effort toward gaining public recognition. What makes one a historian (and a historian is a social scientist) is the particular training he or she goes through in using the scientific method and forming research insights. The historical investigation follows certain principles and stages of social science inquiry. During the research stage, the historian collects data methodically, anclyzes these systematically, and tests the sources and data for authenticity and credibility. During the stage of analysis and interpretation the historian looks for an inner logic in the gathered data (evidence), and subjects these to a rigorous procedure of testing to determine whether his “hypothesis” ‘and generalizations (his explanation of the historical events) should be accepted or rejected. The results of historical inquiry are then related in 2 coherent and meaningful narrative, contributing to knowledge and the verification of historical evidence, Someone who simply documents in event, or who gathers data on practices, beliefs, and the c, i5 not a historian but an ethnographer. The historian does not only tell us what happened in the past. He must alsc be able to explain and interpret those past events. Historians are trained to reconstruct AND interpret the past, cor explain the present through a study of its past, according to 2 systematic method, and for 2 purpose. The objective is to understand the origin and process of growth as well as the development of societal aspects related to man, ‘and his environment (human and non-human), Some historical writing may contain a large bulk of descriptive (ethnographic) text, but when analysis and interpretation is involved, the historian must follow the rigor of scientific reasoning, as in the other social sciences, Creativity and imaginativeness are important elements in historical reconstruction or historiography, but they do not constitute history the way they form the basic ingredients of literary writing. History is not creative writing alone, It is also not enough that events are explained merely for their uniqueness, without being related to general knowledge. The methodology of history observes scientific tenets and procedures like the methodology of ‘other social sciences although the character of historical analysis is more qualitative than quantitative Levels and sub-disciplines of history Because of the generalist nature of history as a field of study, its study is approached in a hierarchy of geographic or physical settings (even population) as well as with a focus on the more specific uspects of social life, This is Pursued by the historian using his or her own disciplinal training in collaboration with techniques and approaches developed by other social :cience disciplines. The levels of historical writing and its different sub-fields or areas are illustrated in Fig. 3. Local history refers to the history of a specific place, such as a village or a town or a province. Regional and national histories, meanwhile, would refer to. larger territorial or Scanned with CamScanneradministrative units, according to how a people define their geographic hierarchies. As Fig. 3 summarizes, local history constitute the core of historical writing; is on its foundation that historical writing at che higher levels can effectively proceed. There can be no national histories without local histories. It is also important to outline the ontent of focus of the different sub-disciptines ° H OF fields of history, although it must be stressed that disciplinal approach is only a conceptual too, 19 reality, people do not perceive of their historical experiences in a way that separates the politica from the social or economic or the cultural, -————_—__ Economic History Political History Social History Cultural History Historical Demography Environmental History [isararnsoy Sub-fields of History Fig, 3. The levels and sub-fields of history Political history, by which much of history has come to be known (although quite inaccurately), i concemed with authe rity or power and their institutions. tis often conceived that political history i as history of the natic state In a broader sense, though, the interest of political history isin the ways in which human have come together in society, under governmental or administrative machinery, organized and maintained social institutions, and interacted with other social units, Some areas of topics in political history are: the nature, forms or types, structures and functions of Sovernment; political participation (political strata, elite, group politics and movements); Colonialismn/ imperialism; nationalism; and revolution. Social History, meanwhile, is commonly defined as the history of a people with politics left out. More specifically it has been pursued at three levels as the history of (a) manners, customs, everyday life (in the ethnographic sense}, (b) social processes and institutions linked with the economic (hence, socio-economic history), and (c) sociai (particularly protest) movements of the lower classes. recent trend in history is historical demography, which looks into the changing Patterns in population characteristics and mobility. This particular sub-field is a special interest. ‘among social historians. Scanned with CamScannerThe study of a people's “way of life” as learned, shared, and transmitted from generation to Beneration by means of language and symbois is the concern of cultural history, which links the concern of the historian with that of the anthropologist. Topical interests under cultural history may include changes over time in the aspects of the material culture (tools, implements, technology, dress and adornment); ideas or beliefs and practices; rituals and ceremonies, and language. Under Cultural history, more specific interests are church history, art history, the history of costumes, and the like. Economic history, on the other hand, is defined as the historical study of man's effort to provide himself with goods and services, ofthe institutions and relationships which resulted from these efforts, of the changing techniques and outlooks associated with economic endeavours and of the Fesults (in social as well as economic terms) of his efforts. Its concerns include showing how ferent societies define the fundamental prolems in economic life, what institutions and arrangements have been developed for resolving problems, how and why the cheracter of such problems have continually changed and how such changes have affected the other aspects of al lfe. Hence, the changes in economic structures as well changes in economic thinking are more specific interests in economic history, and so are those which explain the impacts of certain economic policies or programs. At present, the concern over human impacts on the environment is the main impetus for the ‘emergence of environmental history as another sub-field of history. As its ‘hybrid’ name implies, environmental history takes off from an interest in the physical and cultural landscapes of the past, the processes that have created them, the inter-relatioaship between inanimate and animate life forms, as well as with human impacts on the environment. For instance, one example of a study in environmental history is how human activities had transfor med the vegetation or land uses in a Particular area, as to cause out-migration, for instance, or further encroachment into forested zones. While relatively new as a sub-discipline, environmental history actually has its roots in geography anc dates back to the debate between geographers and anthropologists since the 19" century in terms of whether itis the physical environment or culture which determines historical directions. Re-encoded, November 6, 2013 Jose Mathew Luga Scanned with CamScanner