I can still clearly remember my 10th grade AP World History teacher good-naturedly drilling us on 7 different types of analyses that are used in historical writing. I remember thinking, “Most of these make sense and seem obvious, but it gets really confusing when you start giving them each their own separate name and category, especially since there’s so much overlap.” The AP test, he warned, would have separate essay sections that would each focus on a different type of analysis. It was important for us to be able to recognize which type we were being told to use, and to know how to use it effectively. I’m making him sound much, much more strict and methodical than he actually is.
Even though these categorizations and labels were a little confusing at the time, once I got an understanding of them, I quickly realized how integral they were to writing in history classes. These 7 skills are vital in order to have a thorough understanding of history, and in order to write about it well. I still use all of them to this day. I’ve detailed these 7 types of analysis below, as well as included sample questions for each (just so you know what it would look like in action).
1. Comparison
Comparison is one of the most essential and most common of the various analyses that history students are asked to apply in their writing. Comparison takes two (or more!) items and notes the similarities between them. Note that when describing comparison, I only spoke of pointing out similarities, instead of similarities and differences. This is a crucial point in a writing prompt, and is often where mistakes tend to happen, especially if you’re under a time constraint. Comparison only refers to pointing out similarities, while contrasting only refers to pointing out differences. It’s important to note what is being asked of you in a writing prompt in order to answer correctly and maximize points.
Q: Describe the similarities of the Japanese feudalism of the 12th to the 17th centuries to European feudalism of the 10th-13th centuries.
2. Contextualization
Essentially, contextualization refers to giving your reader background information about whatever it is you’re writing about. It’s hard to fully grasp the significance of the California Gold Rush if we aren’t told that California had recently become a state, or that people from across the country and the world flocked to California to strike it rich. Contextualization allows the reader to see and understand the perspectives of the persons involved, as well as the impact of whatever subject you’re writing about.
Q: What was the significance of Eli Whitney’s invention of the cotton gin in the Industrial Revolution?
3. Synthesis
Synthesis is usually one of the more difficult types of analyses to explain. Synthesis refers to a *blending* of sources, much how clothes made from synthetic fibers is made of blended materials. The goal of synthesis is to take a broad concept, say, warfare, and point out how war has been waged in different cultures and across different time periods. It is kind of similar to comparison in that both are pointing out similarities between two historical events, persons, etc. However, THESE ARE NOT THE SAME. Usually, when you are told to compare, you are *told* what it is you need to be comparing. With synthesis, however, it is your job to think creatively about the topic at hand and pull information from various regions and time periods and blend them together, showing how they all have something in common.
Q: Describe the role Enlightenment ideology played in the Age of Revolution (1760-1850). Use examples from at least three separate revolutions in your answer.
4. Causation
Causation is pretty straightforward. It just refers to explaining the cause for a certain historical event; it is extremely similar to contextualization. For instance, if I were to write about World War 1, I would discuss the political tensions that had been growing in Europe for many years. I could then point out the assassination of Franz Ferdinand as the last straw, an event that ultimately led to the beginning of the “Great War.”
Q: Explain the various causes for the decolonization of Africa in the mid-20th century.
5. Continuity and Change Over Time
Again, this is one form of analysis whose definition is all in the name. When you’re writing about continuity and change over time, you will usually be discussing about traditions that are hundreds of years old and still being practiced today. Maybe these customs have stayed the same, or maybe they have evolved over the years. Your job is to explain this to the audience, and point out if these historical trends have changed or stayed the same.
Q: How did gender roles and attitudes towards gender change in American culture from 1941 to 1975?
6. Periodization
Periodization also bears similarities to contextualization. When writing using contextualization, you have to describe and characterize the time period that you’re discussing. The goal is to explain why a certain event was typical — or atypical — of the time period in question. It’s important to think about the values or laws of this time period, and consider how they influenced people’s actions. Also important to this are the questions: “Why is this event considered to be a part of this time period instead of another one? Is it a turning point, considered to straddle two periods?”
Q: Why do historians use both the term “Gilded Age” and “Progressive Era” to describe the era from 1877-1917? What is the benefit of using one term over the other? Do you think each term carries a certain connotation?
7. Interpretation
Interpretation requires you to consider your primary sources very carefully. Let’s say I’m reading a diary written by a Loyalist woman during the American Revolution. If she calls the Patriots “uncouth,” is that an accurate description of those who didn’t support the British Crown? Or is she writing from her own biased perspective? Interpretation is important because it helps you see where your sources fall short. Perhaps our diary author didn’t know all of the details about a certain battle, so she just filled in the blanks with her own assumptions. Or maybe there are some parts of the diary in which she purposely lied. I think this is the most important of the other types of analyses I have talked about here, because it requires to understand that the first hand accounts that are left to us can’t always be taken at face value; sometimes we have to read between the lines to see what’s really there.
Q: What does the language of the Declaration of Independence tell us about the views of the Founding Fathers? How did their worldview influence the document?
Let me know which one of these 7 types of analyses was the most confusing, and which one made the most sense!
I also made a Youtube video on the topic, which can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pM2JnUCBjZ0&t=23s
The next blog post will be a little bit different from what we've talked about previously...
Comments
Post a Comment