Michael Holmes: What is History?
Our own Dr. Michael Holmes examined the traditional concept of history as a social science and claimed it is really a science. Even though most of us have studied history by memorizing names, dates, and places, we have only learned a chronology. Studying history is using that chronology, trying to understand why things happen, and putting events in a logical order. “After this because of this.” Actually then, history recognizes its evolutionary nature (in the sense that everything is caused) and its science nature by strict adherence to rules. Yes, true history is science, and it follows its own strict rules. It is based only on evidence to support facts, otherwise it is only entertainment. Stated another way, history cannot ask why when one cannot get into another’s mind, whether past or present. “No one can go back and psychoanalyze George Washington.” Neither can history make use of “ifs and buts” for they are only guesses or ideas which cannot be documented. History can only ask how? Before the 1920s there was no professional history, though some had thought about earlier. In the nineteenth century Burkhardt put together two theories to explain history: the Great Man theory that says there are some persons colossal enough to shape history (Caesar or Hitler) and the Great Forces theory that says some forces are too big for man to control (earthquakes, sociological or political movements, climate change, etc.). And finally, like science, history does not take sides; it seeks only to document and to help us understand what happened. To repeat: always history must be based on facts. Those facts can be found only in the written record. We must leave a written record or who will know the facts of this century? And a closing, sad, note: consider how much history we have lost because of the silence on all the events and peoples who have left no written record; e.g., slaves from all ages, surfs, women, minorities and the persecuted?
Our own Dr. Michael Holmes examined the traditional concept of history as a social science and claimed it is really a science. Even though most of us have studied history by memorizing names, dates, and places, we have only learned a chronology. Studying history is using that chronology, trying to understand why things happen, and putting events in a logical order. “After this because of this.” Actually then, history recognizes its evolutionary nature (in the sense that everything is caused) and its science nature by strict adherence to rules. Yes, true history is science, and it follows its own strict rules. It is based only on evidence to support facts, otherwise it is only entertainment. Stated another way, history cannot ask why when one cannot get into another’s mind, whether past or present. “No one can go back and psychoanalyze George Washington.” Neither can history make use of “ifs and buts” for they are only guesses or ideas which cannot be documented. History can only ask how? Before the 1920s there was no professional history, though some had thought about earlier. In the nineteenth century Burkhardt put together two theories to explain history: the Great Man theory that says there are some persons colossal enough to shape history (Caesar or Hitler) and the Great Forces theory that says some forces are too big for man to control (earthquakes, sociological or political movements, climate change, etc.). And finally, like science, history does not take sides; it seeks only to document and to help us understand what happened. To repeat: always history must be based on facts. Those facts can be found only in the written record. We must leave a written record or who will know the facts of this century? And a closing, sad, note: consider how much history we have lost because of the silence on all the events and peoples who have left no written record; e.g., slaves from all ages, surfs, women, minorities and the persecuted?