What is History?

Australian War Memorial

In the same vein as the blog I put together on Dr Philip SA Cummins' lecture for the HTA HSC Senior Study Day, here are my notes from Dr Paul Kiem's session on approaching the What is History? section of the Extension History syllabus, also from the same day.

Dr Kiem puts an emphasis on students adopting an 'overview understanding' of history, something that essentially encompasses the following areas:

• Prehistory/oral tradition
• The emergence of the organised narrative via early historians (Herodotus, Thucydides, Bede).
• The Enlightenment and the birth of rationality (Gibbon)
• Academia and the question of whether history can seen as a science (Ranke)
• The crises of WWI and WWII and how this led to postmodernism in historical thought (Carr, Jenkins, Evans)
• A broader view of history that engages with the discipline's continuing development

Dr Kiem has a relatable and easy-to-follow method for approaching Question 1 of the Extension History HSC, in which students are encouraged to look at the debates and themes of historiography as 'building blocks', and this is demonstrated in a great resource here, on Youtube:

A student's success in Question 1 is directly related to their ability to call into play various arguments that historians have battled it out over in the past or continue to contest today. Better yet, a great Extension History student will be able to draw comparisons between the same arguments made in two different eras in order to show a sense of perspective and (hopefully) their own personal position in relation to said arguments.

Some examples of the big ideas historians have debated:

• What impact has postmodernism had on history?
• What does Australian history tell us about history?
• Can there be a universal history that applies to everyone?
• Is history a science or a form of literature?
• Is history possible or desirable? That is, can we ever truthfully represent the past?
• To what extent is history a reflection of today's politics?
• Will Hollywood take over if historians abandon the field? And, if so, what would be the impact of this?
• To what extent do the stories need to be told by those who see the difference between the past, the memory and history?
• What is the influence of metanarratives (such as national identities) on history?
• Who should take precedence in the academic vs. public history debate on the different purposes of history?
• Who does history belong to? The academics or the public? Or the government? Amateurs? 
• What role does the digital revolution play? Think: source preservation, 'culture of abundance', digitisation as a tool for the democratisation of history, history becoming more dynamic and collaborative, archives also moving our understanding beyond narrative histories. 

Dr Kiem also highlights the importance of students demonstrating an understanding of history now. Things like the commemoration of ANZAC and the national ongoing debates in Australia over its purpose, value, and contestability. Remember Scott McIntyre? (follow this link for his controversial tweets about ANZAC Day).

Or what about the digital revolution and the how this is impacting on the way history is written now? Check out this recent story about an American high school student using the internet to prove a History professor wrong (follow this link).

And what of the future of history? There's the Big History project, which combines hard science with history to tell a narrative that emphases the prevalence of patterns rather than people in the ebbs and flows of historical change. And there's Francis Fukuyama, who posits a new concept of history in light of the way the end of the Cold War threw our idea of everything into doubt.

The possibilities are endless. Students need to look at a range of these debates and familiarise themselves with the ones that they understand best, and be able to use these historical arguments in relation to a range of questions.