Transcript Detailed Analysis

Why Historians Disagree
Allen F. Davis &
Harold D. Woodman
Why Historians Disagree
Unit 11
W arming up
B ackground
T ext Analysis
R einforcement
Why Historians Disagree
Unit 11
Questions/Activities
Check-on Preview
Objectives
Warming up
Warming up
Questions/Activities
What kind of writing is this? How does the language strike
you?
•
•
•
•
•
Academic writing ?
Formal words or informal words?
Impersonal structures ?
Long or short sentences ?
Clear presentation ?
Warming up
Check-on Preview
Why do historians disagree? Tick the reasons.
A. They get wrong facts.
B. They select and use different historical facts.
C. They differ on the importance of the same facts.
D. They consider different levels of cause and effect.
E. They view the event from different perspectives and
analyze it in different theoretical frames.
F. They are often revising their ideas.
Warming up
Objectives
1. Learn why historians disagree.
2. Reflect on what history is.
3. Practice reading skills:
• reading for the gist
• reading academic articles
4. Analyze the structure of an expository writing to see how
the main ideas are cleverly organized and connected
(transition).
5. Apply what you will learn to your study and life.
Why Historians Disagree
Unit 11
Views on History
Background
Background
Views on History
“The End of History?” (Francis Fukuyama)
– A. New Historicists: history and literature
– B. French Annal School and total history
– C. Big tradition and small tradition
– D. Grand narrative and rejection of such a narrative
In all, the TEXTUALITY of history.
Background
Views on History
A. New Historicism
It’s a reaction to deconstructionist view of history which
amounts to historical nihilism. Yet it’s radically different
from traditional historicism.
 History is not a series of events that have a linear, causal
relationship.
 The self-claimed objective analysis is impossible.
 Traditional historians ask, “What happened?” and “What
does the event tell us about history?” New historicists ask,
“How has the event been interpreted?” and “What do the
interpretations tell us about the interpreters?”
Background
Views on History
B. The French Annal School
A radical shift of perspective in the study of history from the
SIGNIFICANT events—political, economic, personal—to the
DAILY and ROUTINE happenings in the life of the common
people. A shift of focus from the court and battlefield to the
folk and tea table of the common.
Background
Views on History
C. Big tradition and small tradition
 An idea particularly important in the study of cultural
anthropology.
 By comparing the state-sponsored reports on and records
of the exploits of Chinese Three Gorges Project and the
movie Still Life by Jia Zhangke, we can see the
incompatibility of big and small traditions.
Background
Views on History
D. His-story and her-story
Women have either been excluded from the history or been
denigrated in the historical account. When they were
included, they were marginalized or subordinated by the
male (not necessarily male) historians, or used as scapegoats
to explain the misfortunes in the history.
Why Historians Disagree
Unit 11
Structure
Text Analysis
Detailed
Analysis
Text Analysis
Structure
Part I The introduction (paras. 1-5 )
A.Misconceptions about the study of history (paras. 1-3)
B. Definition of history (paras. 4-5)
Part II The body (paras. 6-11)
A.Selection of different facts about the same event (para. 6)
B. Use of the same facts from different premises (paras. 7-10)
C. Analysis of different levels of cause and effect (para. 11)
Part III The conclusion: inevitability of disagreement
(paras. 12-13)
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part I (A): Discussion
1. How was history taught in your high school? What were you
usually required to do? How were you evaluated?
2. What are the basic assumptions and implications of this
approach?
3. What is the problem of this approach?
Do historians usually agree in their descriptions and
explanations of the same historical events?
Does this mean that some of them are right while some of
them are wrong? Does this mean that they have their facts
wrong? Why or why not?
4. How would you react when you found historians dealing with
the same event often disagree?
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part I (A): Words & Expressions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
be introduced to…by way of
immerse
react to
the state of affairs
presumably
contending historians
a matter of memorizing facts
a matter of personal preference
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part I (B): What is history?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
•
Is it a record of the human past?
Is it in some way similar to literature?
Is it a collection of interesting and instructive stories?
Is it a tool of propaganda?
Is it only about facts?
What does the job of historians involve?
Is it a science? Is it purely objective science?
A further question:
If history is easily used as a tool for propaganda, if history is
based partly on guesswork, does this mean that the study of
history and historical works are not reliable? How can historians
achieve any credibility?
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part I (B): Words & Expressions
•
•
•
•
base…on
restricted vs. limited
remains n.
conclude
• Different ways of giving a definition
– In its broadest sense, A denotes B.
– More restricted is the notion that A is…
– A may be defined as …
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (A): Discussion
1. But this does not say enough. (para. 6)
 But this is still an inadequate answer to the question why
history is not simply a record of the past. Why?
 Do historians just give us all the facts about the recorded
past?
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (B): Discussion
1. What is this part about?
2. Historians come to different conclusions because they view
the past from a different perspective. (para. 2)
 What does “perspective” mean?
 How will differences in perspective lead to disagreements?
3. Why do the authors talk about Wilson’s new hat and the
sinking of American merchant ships?
4. Why do the authors mention a whole series of facts that could
be relevant to American entry into WWI?
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (B): Discussion
5. Why do the authors mention a whole series of facts that could
be relevant to American entry into WWI?
•
German unrestricted submarine warfare
•
British propaganda
•
American loans
•
The Zimmermann Note (The Mexican War)
•
A deep concern over the balance of power in Europe
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
The unrestricted submarine warfare
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
• Full text of The Zimmermann Telegram:
On the first of February we intend to begin submarine
warfare unrestricted. In spite of this, it is our intention to
endeavor to keep neutral the United States of America.
If this attempt is not successful, we propose an
alliance on the following basis with Mexico: that we shall
make war together and together make peace. We shall give
general financial support, and it is understood that Mexico
is to reconquer the lost territory in New Mexico, Texas, and
Arizona. The details are left to you for settlement. (to be
continued)
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
• Full text of The Zimmermann Telegram:
You are instructed to inform the President of Mexico of
the above in the greatest confidence as soon as it is certain
that there will be an outbreak of war with the United States
and suggest that the President of Mexico, on his own
initiative, should communicate with Japan suggesting
adherence at once to this plan; at the same time, offer to
mediate between Germany and Japan.
Please call to the attention of the President of Mexico that
the employment of ruthless submarine warfare now promises
to compel England to make peace in a few months.
Zimmermann
(Sent January 19, 1917)
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (A+B): Argumentation
1. Historians select and create evidence by using of some
theories of human motivation and behavior. (paras. 6-7)
2. Guided by different theories, historians select different facts
and interpret facts differently, coming to different conclusions.
(paras. 8-10)
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (B): Words & Expressions
•
•
•
•
•
relevant vs. related
the choice as to
admittedly
resolve
the event/question under
study
• cause
• the balance of power
• to sb’s disadvantage
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
thereby, whereby
make of
stem from
concern with
in short
maintain
give equal to weight
be the key to
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (C): Discussion
1. What is the main idea of para. 11?
2. Is it true that in analyzing causes of historical events the further
back one traces, the better?
3. Explain:
 Historians sometimes disagree because they are not really
discussing the same matter.
 The point at which causes are both necessary and sufficient
is not self-evident.
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
To illustrate the point, the authors use an analogy.
• Why are you late?
– Overslept
– I stayed up cramming for
the exam.
– I missed too many classes.
– I didn’t like the class.
– …
• The cause of the Civil War
– Open fire at Fort Sumter?
– Slavery
– the Compromise of 1850
– the militant abolitionist
movement of the 1830s
– the Missouri Compromise
– the conflict over slavery in
the constitutional convention
– Introduction of blacks to
America in 1619
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part II (C): Words & Expressions
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
premise
realm
be faulted on the grounds that
reach the point where/at which…
probe
dig deeper
go too far back to
tell enough to
trace the cause
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part III: Discussion
1. What does it mean when the authors say that historians often
disagree with themselves?
2. Can we eliminate all disagreements? Why not?
3. Why is it important to know why historians disagree?
4. Why do the authors say being able to see truth as “an elusive
yet intriguing goal in a never-ending quest” will make students
appreciate the study of history?
Text Analysis
Detailed Analysis
Part III: Exercise
Paraphrase
If the state of our knowledge were such that it provided us with
a model of unquestioned validity that completely explained
human behavior, we can. (para. 13)
If our knowledge of human beings and the world is thorough
and advanced enough to give us a model that can explain human
behavior completely and can work under any circumstances,
disagreements in history can be eliminated. Unfortunately such
a model has never existed.
Why Historians Disagree
Unit 11
Discussion
Reinforcement
Reinforcement
Discussion
1. The title of the text is “Why Historians Disagree.” Do
you think that the analyses only apply to historians? Why
do people disagree in general?
2. Why do historians disagree? What controversies have
excited Chinese or foreign historians concerning either
ancient or recent history? Describe one and explain the
causes of the controversy.
3. How do the authors achieve smooth transition between
paragraphs?