When most people think of a historian, they think of someone who sits in dusty libraries sifting through piles and piles of documents, books, websites, and anything else that can possibly provide credible evidence of the past. While that is in part true, historians have a much bigger role than simply compiling knowledge.
Oftentimes, a historian must make decisions regarding what information to include and what to disregard. They are charged with the task of recording what they believe to be the most relevant and important information that they come across.
On the surface, this does not sound bad, but on a subtle level, it has a profound impact. The information included or disregarded, big or small, changes our perception of the past. A person cannot see the past for what it truly was; we only have records left behind from those who were from that time period. A historian constructs a representation of the past, depending on what information they do or do not include. Take the death of Silas Dean, for example. Silas Dean is a little-known diplomat who lived during the American Revolution. Several years after the war, Dean wanted to return to America; however, before his return he died mysteriously. His death left many questions. Historians offer details of varying importance, ranging from some of his daily activities, mental condition, past actions (both known and speculated), as well as his relationships with different people. When reviewing this compiled information, they had to decide what information should be kept.
Because we are human, we make mistakes. We can conclude that we will never have a perfect representation of the past, due to the fact that historians will over-emphasize some details, under-emphasize some, and leave some out. This is because a historian did not see the value in the information because it is biased against a particular group he is researching. It could also be a result of shoddy workmanship.
Nevertheless, the point is the same: a historian constructs a representation of history from the resources that have been preserved from that time period.
Returning to Silas Dean, even with the information that historians had on hand, is it impossible for them to draw a concrete conclusion on his peculiar death? Did he indeed commit suicide? Or was he poisoned because he knew too many dark secrets?
Historians have been able to construct several different possible scenarios, each with varying degrees of strength. But nothing absolute has arisen from the piles of evidence.
The ultimate goal of a historian is to create a seamless reconstruction of past events, and to trace their influence throughout time and back to the present day. Yet, this is impossible because records from the past are not 100 percent accurate. Some events were not even recorded at all and some even contradict each other.
To explain this paradox in a different way, historians aim for absolute truth-all facts and evidence recorded with undisputable evidence to support their claims. However, because there is always bias, both in the past and in the current day, this goal becomes impossible. A perfect rendition of the past is not possible and the best we can hope for is an imperfect rendition supported by strong evidence.
Historians hold a lot of power in the world; the representations they build influence us immensely, and without their representations, we would be in the dark about history’s lessons. Everything that is possible today, everything that happens today, has history at its foundation. We rely on historians to reveal this foundation so that we can continue building.
In conclusion, a historian’s goal is to build an accurate representation of the past, with as little bias, errors, contradictions, and with as much fluidity as possible.
Adam Farence is a second-year student majoring in history. He can be reached at AF764146@wcupa.edu