Historical Schools of Thought (1 Viewer)

[bontelmart]

Hey Everyone. I have been making some brief summaries of the historical schools of thought and was just wondering if there is information I am missing from each school. This is what I have:

Ancient- Purpose was to record history and entertain
- Recorded military events
- Supported Nationalism
- Used Historical Truth

Empirical- Scientific- must have an answer when investigated
- Knowledge is gained from experience and observation

Moderism - Must study history to know the historian
- History is relative to historian and his/her context
- Opposed to Enlightenment. Looks at history from a social point of view
- Distinguish between fact and historical fact (what is the difference?)

Post Modernism- Believe knowledge is a tool for upholding power
- No truth in the past- it has gone
- Historical texts are no more than literary texts

Thanks Everyone!!! My exam is in two days Goodluck in half yearlies! :wave:

 

[roar84eighty]

I think it would be worthwhile to create a detailed summary, especially for these historiographical eras (also on major historians); these definitions are way too general.

 

[Kujah]

Are the characteristics of modernism that you wrote down correct?

 

[roar84eighty]

That's what I was thinking, some of the points only apply to certain aspects of that historiographical era.

 

[Kujah]

They seem to contradict what historical modernism is. Most of the dot points categorised there would fall under relativism/post-modernism.

 

[xeuyrawp]

Hey Everyone. I have been making some brief summaries of the historical schools of thought and was just wondering if there is information I am missing from each school. This is what I have:

Ancient- Purpose was to record history and entertain
- Recorded military events
- Supported Nationalism
- Used Historical Truth

Empirical- Scientific- must have an answer when investigated
- Knowledge is gained from experience and observation

Moderism - Must study history to know the historian
- History is relative to historian and his/her context
- Opposed to Enlightenment. Looks at history from a social point of view
- Distinguish between fact and historical fact (what is the difference?)

Post Modernism- Believe knowledge is a tool for upholding power
- No truth in the past- it has gone
- Historical texts are no more than literary texts

Thanks Everyone!!! My exam is in two days Goodluck in half yearlies!

To be honest, I would say that, with the exception of empiricism, most of that is wrong. Sorry... *shrug*

 

[roar84eighty]

They seem to contradict what historical modernism is. Most of the dot points categorised there would fall under relativism/post-modernism.

Lol true, I seemed to have missed that.

 

[Rjat]

Hey Everyone. I have been making some brief summaries of the historical schools of thought and was just wondering if there is information I am missing from each school. This is what I have:

Ancient- Purpose was to record history and entertain - partially true
- Recorded military events - partially true
- Supported Nationalism - partially true
- Used Historical Truth - what is truth?

In fact, any of these might be applied to nearly any school of history, so they are not very characteristic of ancient historians.

Empirical- Scientific- must have an answer when investigated
- Knowledge is gained from experience and observation

Moderism - Must study history to know the historian - a modern idea, but not modernist at all
- History is relative to historian and his/her context - see above
- Opposed to Enlightenment. Looks at history from a social point of view - no
- Distinguish between fact and historical fact (what is the difference?) - no

Post Modernism- Believe knowledge is a tool for upholding power
- No truth in the past- it has gone
- Historical texts are no more than literary texts

Thanks Everyone!!! My exam is in two days Goodluck in half yearlies! :wave:

You need more differentiation in the schools e.g. an ancient historian like Herodotus is not writing the same history as someone like Thucydides or Polybius or Procopius etc. The differences are very significant. You need to be at least looking partly at why they wrote what they did. This goes for all the different schools.

 

[live.fast]

Both Kujah and Rjat are correct. You need to have some variation within these 'schools of thought'. At the same time, you're a tad off (maybe more than a tad) with a few of them - do you use any particular textbook for history extension?