1) Historians write about the past through the lens of their own time period and with consideration of dominant ideas for interpreting history.
2) Historians use a variety of written sources like documents, oral accounts, artifacts, and archaeological findings to construct an accurate narrative of past events.
3) The study of history can be organized in different ways such as chronologically, culturally, territorially, or thematically and historians may focus on very specific topics or more broad universal patterns.
Personal bibliography forming a public image of a scientist Birute Railiene
Information service experiences technological changes – expanding possibilities for data retrieving and storing, the process also involves rising remands from the users. Library services has to change to meet the changing need of users.
Bibliography – the basis of international intellectual cooperation (EC Richardson, 1939) – still
Personal bibliography – instrument to draw a historical portrait of a person, institution, field of science
Personal bibliography – a core for prosopography in a history of science
The paper presents a broad overview of various approaches adopted in the field of historiography across the ages starting from ancient times. It also discusses the merits and demerits of the major schools of thought and proposes a new methodology for the study of history within the framework of the proposed Twenty-First Century school of Historiography. This paper proposes a stakeholder-focussed approach towards historiography and encompasses a wide range of topics from research and definition of processes to dissemination of information to multiple stakeholders, and comprises a large number of checks and balances to prevent potential misuse of history or a one-sided interpretation of history. It also proposes a wide-range of heuristic tools to aid the researcher in carrying out his research and emphasizes objective and data-driven approaches throughout. It seeks to lay a greater emphasis on the roles and responsibilities of a historian from the point of view of the twenty-first century. The key objective of this paper is to ensure that the historian avoids the pitfalls of all ideology-driven approaches and acts in the greater interests of science, society and the education system, and that as many checks and balances as possible are put in place. We seek to reiterate that in the glamorous era of science and technology, the role of a historian can only become much more purposeful and exciting and can encompass completely new vistas of research and historiography. Although these approaches stem from the author’s research experience in Ancient India, the approaches and principles of Historiography can be put to use anywhere in the world.
Personal bibliography forming a public image of a scientist Birute Railiene
Information service experiences technological changes – expanding possibilities for data retrieving and storing, the process also involves rising remands from the users. Library services has to change to meet the changing need of users.
Bibliography – the basis of international intellectual cooperation (EC Richardson, 1939) – still
Personal bibliography – instrument to draw a historical portrait of a person, institution, field of science
Personal bibliography – a core for prosopography in a history of science
The paper presents a broad overview of various approaches adopted in the field of historiography across the ages starting from ancient times. It also discusses the merits and demerits of the major schools of thought and proposes a new methodology for the study of history within the framework of the proposed Twenty-First Century school of Historiography. This paper proposes a stakeholder-focussed approach towards historiography and encompasses a wide range of topics from research and definition of processes to dissemination of information to multiple stakeholders, and comprises a large number of checks and balances to prevent potential misuse of history or a one-sided interpretation of history. It also proposes a wide-range of heuristic tools to aid the researcher in carrying out his research and emphasizes objective and data-driven approaches throughout. It seeks to lay a greater emphasis on the roles and responsibilities of a historian from the point of view of the twenty-first century. The key objective of this paper is to ensure that the historian avoids the pitfalls of all ideology-driven approaches and acts in the greater interests of science, society and the education system, and that as many checks and balances as possible are put in place. We seek to reiterate that in the glamorous era of science and technology, the role of a historian can only become much more purposeful and exciting and can encompass completely new vistas of research and historiography. Although these approaches stem from the author’s research experience in Ancient India, the approaches and principles of Historiography can be put to use anywhere in the world.
Sujay core principles of twenty first century historiography final final finalSujay Rao Mandavilli
This paper extends the concepts delineated in our earlier paper ‘Historiography by Objectives: A new approach for the study of history within the framework of the proposed Twenty-first Century school of Historiography’ and uses them to enunciate the core principles which we believe will form a part of the proposed Twenty-first century school of Historiography. This paper therefore strives to provide the vehicular platform upon which the objectives set forth in the aforesaid paper should be ideally nurtured and furthered. This paper additionally strives to buttress and substantiate our proposals with further arguments. The Twenty-first century school of historiography, it must be stated at the very outset, does not stem from any kind of a rebellious, a contrarian or a recalcitrant approach but intends to ensure that the field is suitably modernized keeping in mind the requirements of the Twenty-first century without jettisoning appreciable or profitable aspects of existing approaches. This paper attempts, at the same time to steer clear of the perils and pitfalls of postmodernism and intellectual nerdism and forge a new trajectory altogether. This approach also seeks to be as commodious and all-encompassing as possible by proactively embracing as many existing approaches as possible except dour and anachronistic ones, and others that have outlived their utility. It also seeks to formulate dialectical approaches in all facets and endeavours. We also argue that this is not only because all existing approaches are inadequate to cater to the rapidly changing requirements of the Twenty-First Century but also because we are already at the thin end of the wedge and existing approaches are inevitably fraught with unsavoury consequences, and will throw up counter-reactions in the longer term. As noted in our earlier papers, dialectical approaches and approaches based on critical analysis and scientific method would be the key to grappling with the sobering realities and the changed requirements of the Twenty-first century and would be the keystone to further progress across varied disciplines. This paper also emphasizes the proactive aspect of historiography, as this is at the core of all efforts to make it a meaningful and a modern discipline. This paper also delineates the social duties and functions of a historian and reinforces his role and duties in ushering in rapid social and cultural change and expediting scientific progress across disciplines. ‘Historiography by Objectives’ and other attendant approaches, first mooted in the aforesaid paper, continue, of course, to be an inalienable part of the overall proposals of this paper.
Sujay core principles of twenty first century historiography final final finalSujay Rao Mandavilli
This paper extends the concepts delineated in our earlier paper ‘Historiography by Objectives: A new approach for the study of history within the framework of the proposed Twenty-first Century school of Historiography’ and uses them to enunciate the core principles which we believe will form a part of the proposed Twenty-first century school of Historiography. This paper therefore strives to provide the vehicular platform upon which the objectives set forth in the aforesaid paper should be ideally nurtured and furthered. This paper additionally strives to buttress and substantiate our proposals with further arguments. The Twenty-first century school of historiography, it must be stated at the very outset, does not stem from any kind of a rebellious, a contrarian or a recalcitrant approach but intends to ensure that the field is suitably modernized keeping in mind the requirements of the Twenty-first century without jettisoning appreciable or profitable aspects of existing approaches. This paper attempts, at the same time to steer clear of the perils and pitfalls of postmodernism and intellectual nerdism and forge a new trajectory altogether. This approach also seeks to be as commodious and all-encompassing as possible by proactively embracing as many existing approaches as possible except dour and anachronistic ones, and others that have outlived their utility. It also seeks to formulate dialectical approaches in all facets and endeavours. We also argue that this is not only because all existing approaches are inadequate to cater to the rapidly changing requirements of the Twenty-First Century but also because we are already at the thin end of the wedge and existing approaches are inevitably fraught with unsavoury consequences, and will throw up counter-reactions in the longer term. As noted in our earlier papers, dialectical approaches and approaches based on critical analysis and scientific method would be the key to grappling with the sobering realities and the changed requirements of the Twenty-first century and would be the keystone to further progress across varied disciplines. This paper also emphasizes the proactive aspect of historiography, as this is at the core of all efforts to make it a meaningful and a modern discipline. This paper also delineates the social duties and functions of a historian and reinforces his role and duties in ushering in rapid social and cultural change and expediting scientific progress across disciplines. ‘Historiography by Objectives’ and other attendant approaches, first mooted in the aforesaid paper, continue, of course, to be an inalienable part of the overall proposals of this paper.
1. Description
Historians write in the context of their own time, and with due regard to the current dominant ideas of how to interpret the p
All events that are remembered and preserved in some authentic form constitute the historical record.[13] The task of histo
The study of history has sometimes been classified as part of the humanities and other times as part of the social sciences
Traditionally, historians have recorded events of the past, either in writing or by passing on an oral tradition, and have attem
Archaeology is a discipline that is especially helpful in dealing with buried sites and objects, which, once unearthed, contrib
There are varieties of ways in which history can be organized, including chronologically, culturally, territorially, and themati
2. nt ideas of how to interpret the past, and sometimes write to provide lessons for their own society. In the words of Benedetto Croce, "A
rical record.[13] The task of historical discourse is to identify the sources which can most usefully contribute to the production of accura
mes as part of the social sciences.[14] It can also be seen as a bridge between those two broad areas, incorporating methodologies from
n an oral tradition, and have attempted to answer historical questions through the study of written documents and oral accounts. For the
s, which, once unearthed, contribute to the study of history. But archaeology rarely stands alone. It uses narrative sources to compleme
ulturally, territorially, and thematically. These divisions are not mutually exclusive, and significant overlaps are often present, as in "The
3. he words of Benedetto Croce, "All history is contemporary history". History is facilitated by the formation of a 'true discourse of past' thro
bute to the production of accurate accounts of past. Therefore, the constitution of the historian's archive is a result of circumscribing a m
ncorporating methodologies from both. Some individual historians strongly support one or the other classification.[15] In modern . In the
ments and oral accounts. For the beginning, historians have also used such sources as monuments, inscriptions, and pictures. In gener
s narrative sources to complement its discoveries. However, archaeology is constituted by a range of methodologies and approaches w
ps are often present, as in "The International Women's Movement in an Age of Transition, 1830–1975." It is possible for historians to co
4. of a 'true discourse of past' through the production of narrative and analysis of past events relating to the human race.[12] The modern
e is a result of circumscribing a more general archive by invalidating the usage of certain texts and documents (by falsifying their claims
ssification.[15] In modern . In the 20th century, French historian Fernand Braudel revolutionized the study of history, by using such outs
scriptions, and pictures. In general, the sources of historical knowledge can be separated into three categories: what is written, what is
methodologies and approaches which are independent from history; that is to say, archaeology does not "fill the gaps" within textual sou
" It is possible for historians to concern themselves with both the very specific and the very general, although the modern trend has bee
5. the human race.[12] The modern discipline of history is dedicated to the institutional production of this discourse.
uments (by falsifying their claims to represent the 'true past').
udy of history, by using such outside disciplines as economics, anthropology, and geography in the study of global history.
egories: what is written, what is said, and what is physically preserved, and historians often consult all three.[16] But writing is the mark
t "fill the gaps" within textual sources. Indeed, Historical Archaeology is a specific branch of archaeology, often contrasting its conclusio
hough the modern trend has been toward specialization. The area called Big History resists this specialization, and searches for univers
6. dy of global history.
three.[16] But writing is the marker that separates history from what comes before.
gy, often contrasting its conclusions against those of contemporary textual sources. For example, Mark Leone, the excavator and interp
lization, and searches for universal patterns or trends. History has often been studied with some practical or theoretical aim, but also m
7. Leone, the excavator and interpreter of historical Annapolis, Maryland, USA has sought to understand the contradiction between textua
cal or theoretical aim, but also may be studied out of simple intellectual curiosity.[17]
8. the contradiction between textual documents and the material record, demonstrating the possession of slaves and the inequalities of w
9. f slaves and the inequalities of wealth apparent via the study of the total historical environment, despite the ideology of "liberty" inherent
10. the ideology of "liberty" inherent in written documents at this time.