AP World I Homework History: 1. What types of resources might a historian use when studying past events? What is the difference between a primary and secondary resource? Provide examples. A historian might use either primary or secondary sources to gain knowledge and understanding of past events.
Analyse the ways history and memory generate compelling and unexpected insights. In your response, make detailed reference to your prescribed text and at least ONE other related text of your own choosing. History and memory are both multifaceted ideas that are challenged continually. History is often perceived as fact, in the recount of an event or retelling of a story that did in fact, take place. Through study however, it becomes clear that history is a consequence of memory, which makes it unreliable and changed by circumstance.
Studying the works of many noteworthy historians is shown to expose a story about the tendencies of their thought. It is a work of historiography tracing the development of the American historical profession, identifying the professional norms of their practice, and presenting a series of arguments about the profession's objectives and concerns over the "Objectivity Question". Novick asserts his work has no unifying thesis (17). While this and other efforts at full disclosure are considerable, his stated purpose divulges his goal to do more than merely enlighten the reader. "The book's aim is to provoke my fellow historians to greater self-consciousness about the nature of our work," Novick wrote of his motivation (17).
Historians can really change the way historic events are viewed by their personal choice of emphasis on specific details. Looking at an event through a positive and negative perspective, historians can choose whether they focus more on the negative view, or the positive view. Basically, it is the discretion of the historian to balance the different viewpoints so the individuals taking in the information can decide for themselves which view they want to focus on the most to grasp their overall feeling of the historic event. The problem with this however, is historians generally emphasize one point of view more than another which can direct individuals’ thoughts of historic events as a results of the historians viewpoint, and not their own. Furthermore, historians take history and document it with their own values and opinions in mind.
It is a defense of studying each historical period on its own terms, and not imposing one's own moral and social standards on figures and situations that existed with, perhaps, a different set of ethical and cultural concerns. Butterfield’s text described historians who project modern attitudes on to the past, pass moral judgments on historical figures, and regard history as significant only to the extent that it labored to create the modern world. Such judgments are viewed as problematic because they tempt historians not to understand the past on its own terms. Butterfield argues that historians should write aesthetically rather than polemically, exercising "imaginative sympathy" in appreciating the lost worlds of the dead rather than seeking, or expecting, the vindication of their own current positions (92). The "Whig interpretation," as Butterfield calls it, sees history as a struggle between a progression of good libertarian parties and evil reactionary forces, failing to do justice to history's true complexity.
Memories are a way of recalling ones personal experiences. Whether a positive or negative nature they form who we are as individuals. History is the recorded experiences and events which have occurred in the past. There is a strong entwinement between history and memory and this allows the inconsistencies of personal memories to influence the credibility of human history. This is reflected in Denise Levertov’s poems’ ‘Ways of conquest’ and ‘In Thai Bin (peace) Province’.
Author O’Brian also confuses the reader by writing his novel as if everything that was told took place in the real world. For example, just by saying “this is true” (64) doesn’t always make it true. O’Brian leaves it up to the reader to distinct what they see the story as: reality or fiction. It is said that “a true war story… makes the stomach believe” (74). Author and character O’Brian tell the story in such a way to make it believable that the two different people are really the same person.
You may also have to discuss which points of view are missing from the given documents. Since the DBQ focuses on historical skills within a world history framework, remember to place documents chronologically, culturally, and thematically. You're not expected to know the author or topic of all the DBQ documents, or to include information outside of the documents. Continuity and Change-Over-Time Essay The Continuity and Change-Over-Time Essay focuses on large global issues such as technology, trade, culture, migrations, or biological developments. It covers at least one of the periods in the course outline and one or more cultural areas.
Compare the historiographical methodology of Thucydides and Herodotus. How does Thucydides introduce himself and his project and describe the purpose of his work? How does he describe his historical methods? How does this compare to Herodotus' self-presentation as a historian? 2.
Differently from Bartov, Glass uses mostly primary sources with some secondary sources. While both articles could be of great value to any historian studying the development and cause of anti-Semitism in Europe and the motives behind the Holocaust, Glass' article is more useful and less open to criticism than Bartov's article for three main reasons. Firstly, Glass' use of primary and secondary sources legitimizes the claims he made, while Bartov neglects to use any primary sources. Secondly, Glass argues against the well-known theory of "indifference", explaining the role of the common German citizen in the Holocaust. Bartov's argument is less-evident and less-clear.