Theme 1: History as a Discipline

1.1 Guiding Question: What is history?

1.2 Unit Description
History alive.
This unit of study focuses on understanding history as a discipline. The discussion differentiates
the past from history and proposes definitions of history that connect to an intentional process of
finding answers to questions. In this paper, you will find basic information on what is history,
what are sources of history, and the process of understanding the past.
The discussion is very important since it will orient you towards developing a historical
consciousness of Belize. All histories are inconclusive and you must understand that history is
alive, it is a debate, it is a continuous search, and it is an opportunity for your present and future.

Here you will get information and videos that will help you understand what is history. Enjoy.

1.3 Objectives
 Differentiate between the past and history.
 Analyse the meaning of history.
 Describe the steps in the historical process.
 Identify the different categories of inquiry to study the past.
 Describe the different stages of historical awareness.
1.4 What does Belize Mean?
1.5 The Past Versus History
Supporting Question: What differentiates the past from history?
The past and history are two very different things in historiography. In order for us to understand
the meaning of history, we must first differentiate it from the past. Though some debate still
exists regarding the definition of history as a discipline, it is well accepted as an inquiry into the
past. So if the past is different from history? What differentiates them? How is the past different
from historical inquiry? Why are they different?
Let me first begin with a brief analysis of what is the past. Arthur Marwick, in his analysis of the
nature history, posits that the past is the totality of what has happened and gone. He argues that it
comprises all actions, all thoughts, all products of all human beings who have ever lived
(Marwick, 1993). In his analysis, Marwick presents the past as something that incorporates,
everyone, everything, events, actions, effects, and thoughts. He presents a very broad
understanding of the concept. The word totality emphasizes that the past is the sum total of
everything.
History, on the other hand, is characterized as an inquiry into the past. It is not the totality of the
past rather it is an investigation to find answers to a specific question, topic, or area of interest. It
is not simply an event or series of events of the past. It is not simply the historical records or
other evidence left behind. Rather history, it is the act of selecting, analysing, and writing about
the past. It is something that is done, that is constructed, rather than an inert body of data that lies
scattered through the archives (Davidson, 2000).
Though there is a difference, Michael Salevouris and Conal Furay, argue that history can be both
things. They propose that history in one sense, proports everything that has happened in the past.
Their analysis suggests that this language is primarily used by non-specialist in the field.
However, as it relates to the discipline of history, history takes a second meaning. This second
meaning is relating to an inquiry into the past.
View: History Versus the past: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rzus5nwQFPs
View: What is history? A community of Argument https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=dauxQKyIN4M
1.6 The Inquiry
Supporting Question: What is Historical Research?
Historical research is a process of discovery and construction. The historian investigates
what happened in the past by researching the available evidence in order to establish the facts
and the chronology of events. This evidence may include written records, archives, manuscripts,
maps, and documents, but also unwritten evidence— photographs, paintings, coins, records,
tapes, videos, computer hard drives, and so on. The historian must select and distinguish what is
important and significant from what is unimportant and ephemeral. Historians discover evidence,
but we construct a history.
History aspires to construct and tell true stories about the discovered evidence of the past.
Of course, truth about the past remains elusive and approximate. We can never be certain that we
have understood the past correctly. But historians always seek the truth about the past insofar as
that is possible. Truth is that never quite attainable straight line that is never precisely straight.
As craftsmen, historians construct their story on the basis of evidence by selecting and arranging
the facts (or ideas, values, or artifacts) in a chronological sequence that has a beginning, middle,
and end. Where the story begins and ends is a matter of interpretation, as well as discovery. In
this process, past facts become present statements of fact, narrated after the fact by the historian.
In addition, history seeks to understand and explain past events by interpreting their
meaning. The historian seeks to discover order and structure in the chaos and messiness of the
past. The historian also constructs order and structure by creating a narrative or an argument,
based on verifiable evidence. Historians know they live in a present where bias and interpretation
of the past abound. They understand their own bias. Yet they try to be objective. In addition to
telling a story, they develop a persuasive argument on the basis of the evidence, an argument that
they believe is reasonable and accurate. They write about context, as well as text. They identify
causes that will help explain how or why events happened the way they did. They seek
understanding and empathy with individuals in another time and place. They persist in asking
questions about the past: Why and how did events happen? What caused an event? Which
individuals play important roles? And what is the meaning of the events studied, in terms of both
past and present?
1.7 The Historical Process
Supporting Question: How is the historical research done?
The historical process is a fancy statement to describe the procedure by which historians study
the past. As a discipline, historians use a method that is based on three major steps or elements:
1. Questioning: Studying or doing history begins with questions about the past. What do we
want to search for? What is interesting about the past?
2. Gathering Sources and evaluating evidence in those sources. There are two types of
sources:
a. Primary Sources: Materials produced by people or groups directly involved in the
event or topic under consideration, either as participants or as witnesses. Some
primary sources are written documents, such as letters; diaries; newspaper and
magazine articles; speeches; autobiographies; treatises; census data; and marriage,
birth, and death registers. These are original documents created
contemporaneously with the event under discussion.
b. Secondary Sources: Unlike primary sources, secondary sources are texts — such
as books, articles, or documentary films — that are written or created by people
who were not eyewitnesses to the events or period in question; instead, the
authors of secondary sources synthesize, analyze, and interpret primary sources.
c. Note on sources: the status of a source as primary or secondary does not depend
on how old the source is nut rather on the historical question asked.
 3. Drawing conclusions supported by evidence that answers the question. Not all
interpretations are the same and considerations need to be made for objectivity and
subjectivity in history. Historians aim to recreate the past and search for truth. This
process necessitates a quest for an objective analysis of history. However, it is evident
that subjectivities are also an important part of history. There is still much debate about
history and objectivity and subjectivity, primarily, because historians ascribe to different
schools of thought.
a. Objectivity: Not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and
representing facts.
b. Subjectivity: The quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings,
tastes, or opinions
View: Primary and Secondary Sources of History: https://www.youtube.com/watch?
v=kOXfArLq6uY
View: Can history be objective? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FVm3eNMmCMY
1.8 Historical categories of Inquiry
Supporting Question: How do we know about the past?
Historical questions help to understand history from different angles of analysis. The nature of
the question asked related to the organization of data based on particular themes and angles of
study. Here are some guiding patterns for the study of the past.
1. Cause and effect: Recognizing that the past events were affected by something and they
in turn affected future events.
a. What were the causes of events?
b. What were the effects of events?
2. Change and Continuity: Historical chronology focuses on understanding changes over
time and also identifying aspects that remained the same.
a. What has changed?
b. What has remained the same?
3. Turning points: Changes with a large magnitude that shift the course of an event, the life
of an individual or society.
a. How did past decisions or events affect future choices?
4. Using the Past: The past can serve to understand events and also inform future choices.
a. How do events of the past help us to make sense of the present?
5. Through their eyes: This is important to understand context and the belief, expectations,
desires and fears of people at particular times.
a. How did people in the past view their world?
1.9 Stages of historical consciousness
Supporting Question: What are the stages in understanding history?
Stage I: History as Fact: Viewing history as a simple collection of facts, dates, and names.
Stage 11: History is more than facts. It provides a story of sequential development over time. The
stories are often interesting and it is satisfying to know how things happened as they did. The
stories are fascinating but the person still lacks the understanding of cause and effect and other
angles of analysis in history.
Stage 111: The realization of how complex human affairs are and how much there is to be
learned about even tiny segments of the past. At this level people begin to think like historians.
They finally realize that, due to the enormous size and complexity of the historical record,
accounts of even the smallest segment of the past are very selective and limited in what they
cover. They understand, further, that individual historians are the ones who ultimately decide
what to include and exclude in any history of any subject. Historians tell different stories
depending on their interests and points of view.
Stage 1V: Coming to terms with the interpretive nature of written history. Persons understand
that the evidence for any historical event is contradictory, complex, and incomplete. They are
also aware that there is far more evidence available than any historian can handle.
View: Why do we learn history? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VMqoIZqpZAc&t=47s
1.10 Uses of History
Supporting Question: What are the uses of history?
History provides us a sense of our own identity. Each of us is born into a nation, but also into
a region, a culture, an ethnic group, a social class, and a family. Each such grouping can and
does influence us in a number of ways. The life experiences and values of an African American
born into a poor family in the rural South are apt to differ greatly from those of a white
Californian born into a suburban family. The study of history helps us to get our bearings in such
respects—in other words it allows us to achieve a social as well as a personal identity.
History helps us better understand the present. The cliché is true that to understand the
present one must understand the past. History, of course, cannot provide clear answers to today’s
problems (past and present events never exactly parallel each other), but knowledge of relevant
historical background is essential for a balanced and in-depth understanding of many current
world situations.
History—good history—is a corrective for misleading analogies and “lessons” of the past.
Many who believe the proposition that history is relevant to an understanding of the present
often go too far in their claims. Nothing is easier to abuse than the historical analogy or parallel.
Time and again politicians, journalists, and sloppy historians can be heard declaring that “history
proves” this or “history shows” that. But the historical record is so rich and varied that one can
find examples that seem to support any position or opinion. If one reads selectively, one can find
historical episodes to support a variety of policies and ideas. Good history, on the other hand, can
expose the inapplicability of many inaccurate and misleading analogies, as well as expose the
dishonesty inherent in “cherry-picking” historical episodes in order to bolster a predetermined
conclusion.
History enables us to understand the tendencies of humankind, social institutions, and all
aspects of the human condition. Given the vast range of its inquiry, history is the best “school”
for study of many dimensions of human behavior: heroism and degradation, altruism and
avarice, martyrdom and evil excess, freedom and tyranny—all of which are part of the record
and part of the story that history tells.
History can help one develop tolerance and open-mindedness. Most of us have a tendency to
regard our own cultural practices, styles, and values as right and proper. Studying the past is like
going to a foreign country—they do things differently there. Returning from such a visit to the
past, we have, perhaps, rid ourselves of some of our inherent cultural provincialism.
History provides the basic background for many other disciplines. Historical knowledge is
extremely valuable in the study of other disciplines—literature, art, philosophy, religion, political
science, anthropology, sociology, and economics. Further, with regard to the last four, it is fair to
argue that the social sciences “are in fact daughter disciplines [to history], for they arose, each of
them, out of historical investigation, having long formed part of avowed historical writing.”
History can be entertainment. This may seem trivial, but it certainly must be counted as one of
the central “uses” of history. Much written history is also good literature, and the stories
historians relate are often far more engaging and entertaining than those we find in works of
fiction.
The careful study of history teaches one many critical skills. Among the critical skills
discussed: how to conduct research, how to evaluate evidence, how to present your arguments
clearly in writing, how to read, view, and think critically, and, of course, historical thinking.
These analytical and communication skills are highly usable in other academic pursuits—and in
almost any career you choose.
View: Why Study history? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MH-poqMomhk
1.11 References
Clause, Peter and John Marriot, History: An Introduction to Theory, Method, and Practice.
Oxon: Routledge, 2017.
Brindage, Anthony. Going to The Sources: A Guide to Historical Research and Writing.
Hoboken: John Wiley & sons, 2018.
Conal Furay and Michael Salevouris, The Methods and Skills of History: A Practical Guide,
Fourth Edition. Malden and Oxford: John Wiley & Sons, 2015.
Rampolla, Mary. A Pocket Guide to Writing in History, 9th Edition. Boston and New York:
Bedford/St. Martin Macmillan Learning, 2018
Williams, Robert, The Historian’s Toolbox: A Student’s Guide to the Theory and Craft of
History. Oxon: Routledge, 2015.
Mandell, Nikki. Thinking like a Historian: A framework for Teaching and Learning. Wisconsin:
Wisconsin Historical Society Press, 2008.