What is the relationship between historian and his facts?

The relation between the historian and his facts is one of equality, of give-and-take. As any working historian knows, if he stops to reflect what he is doing as he thinks and writes, the historian is engaged on a continuous process of molding his facts to his interpretation and his interpretation to his facts.

What is meant by the historian is necessarily selective?

The historian is necessarily selective. The belief in a hard core of historical facts existing objectively and independently of the interpretation of the historian is a preposterous fallacy, but one which it is very hard to eradicate.

How Edward Hallett Carr defines his own meaning of history?

According to Carr, history is a continual process of interaction; a dialogue between the historian in the present and the facts of the past and the relative weight of individuals and social elements on both sides of the equation. ‘ and the assessment of his arguments by other historians.

What distinguishes facts of history from facts about the past?

A historical fact is a fact about the past. It answers the very basic question, “What happened?” Yet beyond merely listing the events in chronological order, historians try to discover why events happened, what circumstances contributed to their cause, what subsequent effects they had, and how they were interpreted.

How would you explain the relative importance of fact and interpretation in the writing of history?

Through interpretation, historians say what they believe the past means. They attempt to explain why and how things happened as they did and why particular elements in the past are important. To Carr, interpretation was the key to writing history.

How history is an unending dialogue between past and present?

Edward Hallett Carr (English Historian, 1892-1982) described the history in his book ‘What is History’ as ‘an unending dialogue between the present and the past’. Carr defined that the historical facts and historian are intertwined and would be meaningless in the absence of each other.

What do you think are the similarities and differences between past and history?

‘The past’ is completed and can never be changed, but ‘history’ is the ongoing discussion of trying to explain the past and is open to change and revision. ‘History’ relies upon what we know about ‘the past’, and this is dependent on the evidence available. You cannot write a history that is not based upon evidence.

What does the term interpretation mean in the context of studying history?

Historical interpretation is the process by which we describe, analyze, evaluate, and create an explanation of past events. We analyze the evidence, contexts, points of view, and frames of reference.