WHY IS HISTORY A SCIENCE? - HISTORY - 2025

The story is a science because it uses techniques and methods to clarify and determine the content of their functions: the description and records of past events; its interpretation and dissemination; the link with the present and the connections between events that could be considered isolated.

Although the study of something that is no longer, but was, may seem inappropriate for something that is considered science, in the case of history, the use of the scientific method to address the past and reconstruction through vestiges provides this field a technical need for meticulousness and research.

History marks the present of societies and cultures, therefore its construction and dissemination must be a process that encompasses objective, accurate and reliable procedures. The aim is that the result not only provides a clearer and deeper perspective of the past, but also a better notion about the present.

The historical reconstruction has varied over time. Their techniques have evolved, moving away from the literary and subjective, to focus on descriptions and, in some cases, supported explanations of events.

In the same way, he has developed his own techniques for the historical narrative to reinforce its unique condition, and not as a literary division.

The scientific methodology of history

The historical method is the group of techniques and guidelines of knowledge applied for the reconstruction and narration of historical events. The conglomerate of techniques used have evolved, and their constant renewal allows more successful constructions.

Among the resources applied by the historical method, there are investigative processes that increasingly reduce speculation and allow a better comparison of the sources used, even if they seem contradictory.

History professionals work with sources of information that they can access themselves, but also draw on evidence and research from other areas such as archeology.

Analysis and criticism of the sources

The first step in history toward reconstructing a new series of events is to locate and carefully study the relevant sources.

Among the tools of the historical method is a series of questions that a historian must be able to answer in front of some source. In this first stage it is allowed to verify the even apparent legitimacy of the source.

This technique, promoted by Gilbert Garraghan, allows revealing the validity and relevance of the information obtained. But not only that, since its analysis allows us to discern the way in which that source can be used, and the primary construction of what the historical document will be.

Among the variants of the technique, resources are presented to confront sources of information that present discrepancies or contradictions with another, allowing them, through the application of questionnaires, to evaluate the legitimacy of that source, and therefore, to confirm if it is useful for the object Of the investigation.

Under this analytical perspective, related, contradictory sources, isolated testimonies, witness records, etc. are approached and handled.

The emphasis on the provenance and authenticity of a historical document is known as high criticism, or radical criticism; the textual analysis of historical texts through their copies and not the original, is known as low criticism, or textual criticism.

Historical explanation

When starting to work on information sources, once the sources are located in their proper historical context, for their reconstruction and writing, some parameters must be followed to guarantee the effectiveness of the historical descriptions and explanations raised.

The resources to be used are similar to those of critical analysis: a series of conditions that the testimonies and records consulted must meet in order to strengthen their validity and reliability. These strengthen the arguments for choosing one development over another.

One of these resources is the argument to the best explanation, proposed and applied by C. Began McCullagh, which consists of subjecting the information source to a series of conditions compared to other sources or records.

If the explanations consulted cover a considerable number of facts and their developments, compared to others whose contents do not have the same factual substance, it is very likely that the first is considered as true.

The arguments that would provide the best explanation must be nurtured with data and information, under scientific technical considerations.

Statistical inferences and analogies are other tools used for the construction of historical explanation and narration.

Each one arises from the management of sources in specific formats that allows me to reconstruct events and scenarios with statistical and numerical aspects.

Analogies and relationships in similar situations have allowed historical reconstruction to contextually relate events that, seen individually, could seem isolated.

Its application, however, is subject to the same strict research conditions that guarantee that the entire process is carried out under a scientific framework.

Historiography

Historiography reaffirms the social scientific condition of history and its mechanisms; it is the study of the techniques and methodologies applied by historians in the reconstruction and writing of historical discourse.

Historiography addresses and reflects on the techniques implemented for the creation of historical discourse around the world.

Each culture sought to record its passage through the world in a different way. Historiography seeks to integrate the techniques used by different societies to record their actions throughout their existence.

Historiography addresses the topics that they discern about the fidelity of the sources, the metahistorical analysis, the revisionism against the orthodox methods, the moral concerns that may arise when consulting specific events, among others.

In the same way, it has evolved to contemplate the new specific interests of historical research on the part of its specialized professionals.

From new scenarios, new techniques and approaches to the work of historical reconstruction are developed, and historiography is in charge of rethinking them.

It also allows us to know how other historical genres are approached that would complement the reconstruction, or give life to their own discourses, such as the political, social, or economic history of a culture.

References

1. Garraghan, GJ (1946). A Guide to Historical Method. New York: Fordham University Press.
2. Ginzburg, C. (2013). Clues, Myths, and the Historical Method. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
3. Lateiner, D. (1989). The Historical Method of Herodotus. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
4. Toynbee, AJ (1974). A Study of History. New York: Dell Publishing.
5. Woolf, D. (2011). A Global History of History. Cambridge University Press.