It is vital to define the concept of history. History is nebulous i.e. it does not have a precise definition as it is broad and complex. As such, there are many perspectives, views, and definitions.[1] According to E.H Carr “history is a continuous interaction between the historian and his fact, an unending dialogue between the past and the present.[2]
Professor Geoffrey Barraclough defines history as “the attempt to discover, on the basis of fragmentary evidence, the significant things about the past.[3] With this definition, it could be said that history is based on searching for fragmented evidence, selecting significant evidence in the fragmented evidence, and making an accepted judgement based on carefully considered fragmented evidence from the past.
Furthermore, the discussion on the Nature of History is very vital, from the several definitions of history, it could be agreed that the subject matter of history is past human action or humanistic nature.[4] History concerns human actions in the past, it involves actions that emanate from human society.
History is fragmented by nature because it focuses on aspects or parts of an event, but not the whole event. Thus, because it deals with the past, historians must rely on the present or available sources,[5] and thus these sources are evidence from experiences. Once they are available, the historian has to logically deal with the selection of this evidence, and in doing that he has to deal with his humanistic nature.[6]
It is important to note that history is dynamic,[7] it keeps changing. This could be explained further in the words of Barraclough when he says: “History is always in a state of flux because it deals with a state of continuous change’[8]
In other words, the nature of history implies that history deals with past human actions, humanistic nature, fragmented history, dynamic events, selection of evidence, interpretation of facts etc. The historian is mostly attacked by his humanistic nature (empathy, subjectivity). All the above nature of history places a role in objectivity, as objectivity helps the historian interpret fact without bias.
REFERENCE
[1] Olubomehin, O.O. 2001. The Issue of Objectivity in Issues in Historiography. Olubomehin, O.O (ed). Ibadan: College Press & Publisher Limited. Pp 37-39
[2] Carr, E.H. 1961. What is History? London: Macmillan Press. P24
[3] Barraclough. G, 1975, History in the Changing World, Oxford: Basil Blackwee pp2
[4] Ajetunmobi R.O 2004. Historiography and the nature of History, Ikeja: OACE p. 3-10
[5] Adeoti E. O. and Adeyeri J. O. 2012, History, Historian and his works: Issues, Challenges and prospects : International Journal Of Educational Research and Technology, Vol 3. India p37
[6] Olubomehin, O.O. 2001. The Issue of Objectivity in Issues in Historiography. … pp37-39
[7] Arifalo S.O. 2002, Historical Consciousness in Pre-literate Nigerian societies in Reading In Nigerian History and Culture,Ajayi S.A and Oguntomisin G.O (eds) Ibadan: Hope Publications Limited p.25
[8] Barraclough. G, 1975, History in the Changing World,
Related Post
You can contribute by leaving a reply