Chapter 3 HistoryChapter 3 History

Lesson 1 Introduction Lesson 1 Introduction History as a PuzzleHistory as a Puzzle

Questions for DiscussionQuestions for Discussion

• Why do you Why do you knowknow what the image on what the image on your puzzle is? your puzzle is?

• Does it matter if all of the pieces are Does it matter if all of the pieces are there or not? Why or why not?there or not? Why or why not?

• Will historians ever have all the Will historians ever have all the pieces to the puzzles in history of, for pieces to the puzzles in history of, for example, the 14th century? How can example, the 14th century? How can they claim they know anything about they claim they know anything about the 14th century?the 14th century?

Questions for Discussion Questions for Discussion (contd.)(contd.)

• You most likely talked with your classmates You most likely talked with your classmates when deciding how certain pieces of the when deciding how certain pieces of the puzzle fit together. If you agreed on an puzzle fit together. If you agreed on an interpretation, you reached a interpretation, you reached a consensusconsensus. How . How do you think consensus might work for real do you think consensus might work for real historians (just take a guess, consensus will be historians (just take a guess, consensus will be examined in more detail later in the chapter)?examined in more detail later in the chapter)?

• How did the scientific (or hypothetical) method How did the scientific (or hypothetical) method work when you were doing the puzzle (hint: work when you were doing the puzzle (hint: did you make and test any hypothesis did you make and test any hypothesis regarding what the image was or where the regarding what the image was or where the pieces fit in)?pieces fit in)?

Lesson 2 Lesson 2 Science and Historical Science and Historical

KnowledgeKnowledge

Homo floresiensisHomo floresiensis and and “knowledge” about its “knowledge” about its

classificationclassification• Homo floresiensisHomo floresiensis: fossils : fossils

of human-like creatures of human-like creatures found on the Indonesian found on the Indonesian island of Flores in the island of Flores in the Liang Bua Cave in 2004Liang Bua Cave in 2004

• One metre highOne metre high • Had a brain about the Had a brain about the

size of a modern size of a modern chimpanzeechimpanzee

• Had intelligence and it Had intelligence and it lived in a communitylived in a community

Skull of Homo floresiensis (left) next to a modern human skull.

Was it another human Was it another human species?species?

• If it was, If it was, the history of the evolution of the the history of the evolution of the human species will have to be rewrittenhuman species will have to be rewritten

• It has been believed and taught, that It has been believed and taught, that Homo sapiensHomo sapiens were the only human were the only human species on the planet from the time that species on the planet from the time that the Neanderthal became extinctthe Neanderthal became extinct

• However The fossil of However The fossil of HomoHomo floresiensisfloresiensis is is only 18,000 years old, this means it lived only 18,000 years old, this means it lived many millennia after anything like it was many millennia after anything like it was supposed to existsupposed to exist

Or just a regular human being Or just a regular human being with with Microcephaly Microcephaly ? ?

• Microcephaly is a rare disease in which Microcephaly is a rare disease in which the person inflicted has an abnormally the person inflicted has an abnormally small head, and therefore also a small small head, and therefore also a small brainbrain

• This often leads to dwarfismThis often leads to dwarfism • Dan Lieberman and others (2005)Dan Lieberman and others (2005) says it says it

is a human with is a human with MicrocephalyMicrocephaly• Dean Falk and others (2005)Dean Falk and others (2005) says it is not says it is not

Why is this important?Why is this important?

• Scientists from around the world are Scientists from around the world are studying the fossil remains of studying the fossil remains of HomoHomo floresiensisfloresiensis and coming to conclusions and coming to conclusions about human historyabout human history

• They are studying the same fossils, using They are studying the same fossils, using the same scientific method, but they are the same scientific method, but they are coming to totally different conclusionscoming to totally different conclusions

• Both sides claim to have knowledge about Both sides claim to have knowledge about what they claimwhat they claim

• But their claims contradict one anotherBut their claims contradict one another • Whom should we believe? Whom should we believe?

Historical documents and Historical documents and archaeological artefacts are archaeological artefacts are

silentsilent • This example of This example of HomoHomo floresiensisfloresiensis

illustrates the importance of interpretation illustrates the importance of interpretation in making historical knowledge claimsin making historical knowledge claims

• Documents, artifacts, and remains like Documents, artifacts, and remains like fossils say nothing themselvesfossils say nothing themselves

• Whatever it is artefacts and documents Whatever it is artefacts and documents mean, it is we that say they mean it.mean, it is we that say they mean it.

• We interpret a meaning onto themWe interpret a meaning onto them

Anything that can affect our Anything that can affect our interpretation can also affect interpretation can also affect

our knowledge claimsour knowledge claims• Religious convictionReligious conviction

• Political ideologyPolitical ideology

• Cultural heritageCultural heritage

• Educational Educational backgroundbackground

• Likes or dislikesLikes or dislikes

• All sorts of biasesAll sorts of biases

The Haerulf Runestone, Denmark

The Egyptians in South The Egyptians in South America???America???

• As you walk down you As you walk down you hear the sound of the hear the sound of the heavy stone door heavy stone door closing down behind closing down behind you with a grinding you with a grinding thudthud

• Gold glimmers in the Gold glimmers in the walls and from small walls and from small images carved into the images carved into the elaborate patterns on elaborate patterns on the floor and ceilingthe floor and ceiling

Down Down Downinto the depths of the temple

DiscoveryDiscovery

• You look, and see, it is a You look, and see, it is a small strangely shaped small strangely shaped figure with red eyes that figure with red eyes that seem to glare back at you seem to glare back at you like a little demonlike a little demon

• You hurry down the small You hurry down the small flight of steps into a large flight of steps into a large circular room lit by sunlight circular room lit by sunlight coming from four channels coming from four channels evenly spaced around the evenly spaced around the roomroom

• Each of the light channels Each of the light channels has their beam focused on a has their beam focused on a golden box which is golden box which is perfectly placed in the perfectly placed in the middle of the roommiddle of the room

Not the box in the chamber.Charles the lumphead forgot his camera.

Inside the box. What is it?Inside the box. What is it?

How did these get there?

Creating knowledge of Creating knowledge of historyhistory

• First step entails using the imagination First step entails using the imagination to come upwith a hypothesisto come upwith a hypothesis

• Deduction helps in the creation of the Deduction helps in the creation of the hypothesishypothesis

• However a hypothesis needs to be However a hypothesis needs to be more than just reasonable if it is to be more than just reasonable if it is to be knowledgeknowledge

• Often proof is neededOften proof is needed

Creating knowledge of history Creating knowledge of history (contd).(contd).

• Science is often involved Science is often involved • Science provides indisputable Science provides indisputable

empirical dataempirical data• This data serves as premises from This data serves as premises from

which logical, deductive conclusions which logical, deductive conclusions can be madecan be made

• Knowledge often depends on having Knowledge often depends on having consesnusconsesnus

However interpretation is However interpretation is always presentalways present

• No data or artefact speaks for itselfNo data or artefact speaks for itself

• All information must be interpreted and All information must be interpreted and given a meaninggiven a meaning

• Interpretation is a subjective human Interpretation is a subjective human process.process.

• Different people will interpret similar Different people will interpret similar information differently and subsequently information differently and subsequently make different knowledge claimsmake different knowledge claims

• History is interpretationHistory is interpretation

Lesson 3 SubjectivityLesson 3 Subjectivity

Now we’ll really get some answers!

SubjectivitySubjectivity

• There is subjective interpretation at every level of There is subjective interpretation at every level of historyhistory

• The historian is not an objective observer, but plays The historian is not an objective observer, but plays an active role in the creation of the knowledge an active role in the creation of the knowledge claims he makesclaims he makes

• The historian’s entire personality and all of his The historian’s entire personality and all of his knowledge, all of his morals and values are knowledge, all of his morals and values are interconnected with how he portrays historyinterconnected with how he portrays history

• Subjectivity is a two edged sword. It helps the Subjectivity is a two edged sword. It helps the historian understand, but at the same time it historian understand, but at the same time it masks him from fully understanding things masks him from fully understanding things from more perspectives than his ownfrom more perspectives than his own

Three types of subjectivityThree types of subjectivity

• Subjectivity of the Subjectivity of the historian writing historian writing todaytoday

• Subjectivity of the Subjectivity of the primary sourceprimary source

• Subjectivity of Subjectivity of secondary sourcessecondary sources

Why were the Dead Sea scrolls written?

Bias affectsBias affects

• Primary sourcesPrimary sources

• Secondary sourcesSecondary sources

• All historians who All historians who have written about have written about historyhistory

The Siege of Antioch, from a medieval painting

When accounts of history When accounts of history contridict one another who do contridict one another who do

we believe?we believe?• The answer depends very The answer depends very

much upon the bias one hasmuch upon the bias one has• Subsequently any Subsequently any

knowledge “known” knowledge “known” depends also on this biasdepends also on this bias

• We can assume that the We can assume that the same has held true through same has held true through the ages. This affects what the ages. This affects what we know about the past.we know about the past.

• Understanding of the Understanding of the “truth” is a subjective “truth” is a subjective understanding. There are understanding. There are many truths.many truths. The Massacre of Antioch. Gustav Doré.

Lesson 4 Induction and Lesson 4 Induction and DeductionDeduction

Machu Piccu

InductionInduction

• InductionInduction isis making making predictions or predictions or assumptions about assumptions about future events based future events based on past experienceson past experiences

• Induction is crucial in Induction is crucial in the development of a the development of a hypothesis that hypothesis that historians later try to historians later try to develop support fordevelop support for

How do we know the slaves pictured in this painting were not willingly enslaved?

Induction (contd.)Induction (contd.)

• Induction is an invaluable tool for the Induction is an invaluable tool for the historian, but at the same time historian, but at the same time induction carries with it a significant induction carries with it a significant riskrisk

• The historian runs the risk of basing The historian runs the risk of basing her assumptions about one historical her assumptions about one historical phenomenon on the causes of phenomenon on the causes of another which she is familiar withanother which she is familiar with

• This will affect knowledge claimsThis will affect knowledge claims

DeductionDeduction

• DeductionDeduction is is making conclusions making conclusions based on premises we know to be truebased on premises we know to be true

• Deduction is a very effective tool for Deduction is a very effective tool for knowing as long as premises are known to knowing as long as premises are known to be truebe true

• However, deduction can cause knowledge However, deduction can cause knowledge problems is conclusions are made using problems is conclusions are made using premises a historian only believes to be premises a historian only believes to be truetrue

Lesson 5 Faith and History Lesson 5 Faith and History

The Death of Harold. Image from the Bayeux Tapastery.

Knowledge in history is of a Knowledge in history is of a unique typeunique type

• Knowledge is gained even though no one has Knowledge is gained even though no one has actually experienced the events and eras that we actually experienced the events and eras that we claim to know so much aboutclaim to know so much about

• In all the other areas of knowledge, the In all the other areas of knowledge, the knowledge gained is by some sort of hands-on or knowledge gained is by some sort of hands-on or “minds-on” experience“minds-on” experience

• History itself can not be tested in a scientific History itself can not be tested in a scientific sense, and it takes more than simply pondering sense, and it takes more than simply pondering on it to know iton it to know it

• There is no way to be 100 percent sure that the There is no way to be 100 percent sure that the beliefs we have about historic events are correct beliefs we have about historic events are correct or completeor complete

Much historical knowledge Much historical knowledge comes from putting faith in the comes from putting faith in the claimsclaims• The word “faith” sould not be defined as The word “faith” sould not be defined as

meaning religious convictionmeaning religious conviction

• Faith here is defined as Faith here is defined as ““a particularly a particularly unshakable form of belief, based unshakable form of belief, based upon ideas, teachings, and reported upon ideas, teachings, and reported historical events which to the historical events which to the individual seems conclusiveindividual seems conclusive.”.” David David Fontana Fontana Psychology, Religion, and Psychology, Religion, and Spirituality.Spirituality. (2003). (2003).

Faith in historical knowledge Faith in historical knowledge claimsclaims

• When we consider history how do we When we consider history how do we come up with our knowledge? come up with our knowledge?

• If we can only rely on what other If we can only rely on what other people have told us, or base our people have told us, or base our conclusions on documents other conclusions on documents other people have writtenpeople have written then what else is then what else is there except for faith in claiming there except for faith in claiming knowledge in history?knowledge in history?

Three types of faithThree types of faith

• Faith in the authenticity of the claims Faith in the authenticity of the claims made by past documents and artefactsmade by past documents and artefacts

• Faith in our own and previous Faith in our own and previous interpretations of events or documentsinterpretations of events or documents

• Faith in the authority of the history Faith in the authority of the history books and the one’s making historical books and the one’s making historical knowledge claims.knowledge claims.

Faith in authenticityFaith in authenticity

• Historians put faith in the Historians put faith in the authenticity of the authenticity of the documenats they read to make documenats they read to make their knowledge claimstheir knowledge claims

• Often there are only singular Often there are only singular sources from which sources from which information is takeninformation is taken

• Even if there are collaborating Even if there are collaborating documents, they make the documents, they make the assumption more feasible. It is assumption more feasible. It is impossible to be completely impossible to be completely suresure

• Faith is simply a necessary Faith is simply a necessary element on the part of the element on the part of the historianhistorian

Hadrians Wall. Great Britian

Faith on one’s own Faith on one’s own interpretationsinterpretations

• The historian needs to have faith in her The historian needs to have faith in her hypothesis when doing researchhypothesis when doing research

• When making claims and presenting work to When making claims and presenting work to peers, the historian must have faith that the peers, the historian must have faith that the work she has done is reflective of realitywork she has done is reflective of reality

• However, even the greatest level of However, even the greatest level of conviction does not make one’s claims trueconviction does not make one’s claims true

• Faith also brings with it the risk of fooling Faith also brings with it the risk of fooling oneself into seeing things incorrectlyoneself into seeing things incorrectly

Faith in the authority of the Faith in the authority of the history bookshistory books

• We put faith in the claims We put faith in the claims made by historians in made by historians in history bookshistory books

• Historians and history Historians and history books are powerful books are powerful authorities in our mindsauthorities in our minds

• There is no practical way There is no practical way for us to know for sure if for us to know for sure if the claims made in the the claims made in the books are true or not. We books are true or not. We must simply believe must simply believe them. them.

Lesson 6 Authority and Lesson 6 Authority and ConsensusConsensus

AuthorityAuthority

• Knowledge in history is malleable and Knowledge in history is malleable and authority has the means to shape historical authority has the means to shape historical knowledge in any way that seems fitknowledge in any way that seems fit

• What reasons are there for learning the What reasons are there for learning the history we do learn and not any other?history we do learn and not any other?

• In many countries around the world, the In many countries around the world, the portrayal of history is a highly political and portrayal of history is a highly political and very sensitive issuevery sensitive issue

‘Who controls the past,’ ran the Party slogan, ‘controls the future: who controls the present controls the past.’

George Orwell. 1984

ConsensusConsensus

• Knowledge in history is Knowledge in history is created via consensuscreated via consensus

• To tackle the problem To tackle the problem with subjective with subjective interpretations, a interpretations, a system of system of peer reviewpeer review has been developed in has been developed in the field of historythe field of history

• If a claim is to be If a claim is to be considered knowledge, considered knowledge, it must be accepted by it must be accepted by the greater community the greater community of historians of historians

Consensus (contd).Consensus (contd).

• The information in history books is “fact” The information in history books is “fact” because enough people believe that the because enough people believe that the interpretations made are good interpretations made are good interpretationsinterpretations

• A larger group is not at such risk for being A larger group is not at such risk for being blinded by subjectivityblinded by subjectivity

• However, just because a group of people However, just because a group of people agrees upon an interpretation, it does not agrees upon an interpretation, it does not mean that the interpretation is correct.mean that the interpretation is correct.