Session 2

Methods of analyzing historical data. Quantitative vs. qualitative - how to choose methods of data analyses.

What about accidentally found data? How should those sources be categorized? How should they be looked at in terms of veracity and accuracy?

Images and truth - what is actually true vs. what is a representation of period culture?

How historians make sense of data and evidence that might be contradictory.

Reporting of statistics in historical documents. Are they accurate? What is their purpose? Anonymous refereeing of journal articles - process.

How does a History department work? What do the professors have in common? Is there a common thread through the department? Is there a concept of a coherrent curriculum? How should history be taught?

Dealing with gaps in the historian's knowledge base. How much reading is enough? What about people who work in multidisciplinary areas (economics and history, sociology and history, etc.)

What makes a historian a historian? A PhD? What do historians have in common? Postulate: historians are driven more by narrative than by analysis.

Why do history at all? What is the difference between a historian and an antiquarian? History offers a unique perspective on the present - ability to take stock of where we are today by means of comparison.

Easier to make connections to past if the gap of time is less vs. larger gap of time. Generation gap? Grandparents/grandchildren? Individual maintains own history. So far back, no personal connection at all.

Anachronism vs. Antiquarianism - how does a good historian find a balance?

Is pain historically constructed? Is pain today the same as pain in ancient times? Is pain a universal human experience, true for all time, or does it change?

How do historians relate to each other? When disciplines are fractured, how do they communicate?