Warning: Undefined variable $num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 126
Warning: Undefined variable $posts_num in /home/shroutdo/public_html/courses/wp-content/plugins/single-categories/single_categories.php on line 127
This chapter covers how interpreting and recording history became more developed and changed during the nineteenth century. Historians began by making use of different primary sources for research. And instead of just isolating the facts of the past, historians began intertwining documents to synthesis with each other. Interpreting the past through multiple sources to create a “unity and progress of events” instead of having a dry strict chronicles of events which is the “supreme law” (Popkin, 77). The nineteenth century is when the researching history changed from providing facts to analyzing and interpreting historical events.
In the 19th century historians began straying away from dry facts that may exclude certain facts percentages and numbers. By interpreting history we are able to find parts which were neglected because of their lack of “importance.” Just as @armando35 specified in History in the 19th Century women had almost no say or part in history. Without their participation and lack of background diversity there would be fewer arguments over what may have happened or in having different perceptions of the past. To find out what happened in the past, historians need to research, argue, and compare. With similar backgrounds and less varying opinions, the general consensus may be too subjective to one “side” of history. From this, I take the importance of researching multiple aspects to a historical event. Rather than going for the first sources that surface up and agree with each other, but to search more thoroughly by finding sources that argue against each other.
Pingback: The Father of Marxism – Historical Thinking – Fall 2016