How is fact checking and referencing done in historical studies?
score:3
Since you have located History SE on the Internet, one approach would be to ask here
I have read an account of a particular event X from a source Y
"Is the account true of false?"
in the cases for which a historical account has particulars that are still not known
Again, you can ask the question here. That does not mean that the particular question can or will be settled here to any particular observer's complete satisfaction.
Some historical questions do not involve controversy, for example, "On what date was the United States Declaration of Independence signed?".
Other historical questions might not ever be entirely resolved, even using modern technology, to any or all readers, students, authors of history complete satisfaction, for example, the questions of the origin of the Ancient Egyptians and the claims of certain people having "deciphered" or "transliterated" the so-called "hieroglyphics" of Ancient Egypt.
To illustrates the basic issue of citing and relying primary evidence and then setting historical questions aside, some people might live a number of years believing that their parents are their biological parents before being told, or discovering themselves, they were adopted, or, that one of their parents is actually not their biological parent. Since no human remembers being born, the child has only the account of their parents to rely on, or, when they reach a certain age, the ability to cite a birth certificate. However, if the child is never told that they were adopted, or one of their parents is not their biological parent, then they could easily live their entire lives without ever questioning the primary source of a birth certificate being true or that one or more of their parents is not their biological parent.
There is also the element of instinct involved in the investigation and study of history, which should not be discounted entirely, else one might not investigate paths to the truth that do not appear in a previously published work, but rather, spring from your own intellect. At some point an individual might become enlightened to the degree that they draw their own conclusions based on their own reasoning. The important point to remember at that stage is to clearly state that you have drawn your own conclusions, and attribute the conclusion to yourself. Facts can be disputed and conclusions drawn refuted. History is a living art and science. Whether you stand on the conclusions that you draw, whether supported by a primary or secondary source, is your own prerogative.
Cannot honestly state that History SE is absent of institutional flaws, users which have disclosed or un-disclosed biases, or that even sources cited will not be questioned. Though History SE is at least here and available to vet questions such as "I have read an account of a particular event X from a source Y "Is the account true of false?"".
Upvote:5
The scholarly discipline of history uses debated consensus forming across reviewed journal articles, chapters and books to describe a number of not currently rejected narratives of processes, relationships or agents.
Truth, fact and event don't belong to disciplinary history. "Not currently demonstrated to be meaningfully wrong," is what we do instead.
There are some ground rules of what not to do: misusing sources; not using essential sources; using inappropriate sources; not using enough sources; not using a great enough variety of sources. The response from reviewers will be harsh.
All historical writing involves theory use. Sometimes explicitly, often implicitly. Using bad theory, or using it inappropriately, will bring harsh responses.
Finally, the historical community pursues and in some cases publicly crucifies people purporting to be historians who are instead knowing and wilful liars. The community of historical scholars, and other allied fields such as teachers, archivists, librarians and curators have in the past fifty years been willing to attack western governments over historical myth making.
Upvote:11
what infrastructure and or institution is assigned the role of policing and regulating the authenticity of publications online.
There is no such institution, nor should there be. Truth isn't a token that can be possessed and guarded by any institution. Truth is a process, and peer review is one of the feedback mechanisms to guide that process. History is dynamic. What we know today is incomplete; tomorrow we will discover more and we will check the new facts against the old, and debate which is the most compelling narrative that includes most of the facts and omits the fewest facts in which we have high confidence. The day after that we'll discover something new and iterate.
You will discover incredible publications, both online and offline. Credible publications tend to cite other credible publications and make claims supported by evidence. Incredible publications tend to bend facts to fit theories. But there is no brilliant line. Our understanding of - just to pick an example - the causes of the American Revolution have changed utterly within my lifetime. Whiggish history used to be ubiquitous, but is now a subject for contempt. French historians used to be judged by how many times they cited Marx / page (that may be coming back into fashion).
I recoil from the notion of any institution or infrastructure that would "police and regulate" truth. The very concept is horrifying; no matter what complexities arise from unregulated truth, they cannot compare to the danger of regulated truth.
A pithier quote
Every periodical is its own ultimate authority, over its own content, as it should be. @pietergeerkens
(I just went back and did a tonecheck of my writing - don't know if it is necessary, but just for the record, none of the above is intended to be disrespectful or disparaging to @Adam; the above is merely my opinion in response to the question.)
Updating the question to address what I think is a gap in assumptions. I make a set of assumptions about any institution - if an institution were given the power to control publications, I think this assumptions would quickly dominate that institution's behavior.
The welfare of the institution is more important than the mission of the institution. Threats to the institution are existential; threats to the mission (history) are eternal and subject to interpretation.
Challenges to the interpretation of the institution are effectively threats to the institution and must be suppressed.
Challenges to the staff of the institution must be addressed vigorously.
"International" is a goal; nobody ever really forgets the prejudices of the natal country. If you were trained in history in France, you honestly believe that proper history should contain citations of Marx every 0.37 paragraphs, etc.
To misquote Federalist, "If historians were angels, there would be no need for the international institution of accuracy in history." But historians are human, and institutions designed by humans will serve the institution more than the discipline. The only possible protection is to prevent the formation of the institution.
Put another way, since history is a science, Kuhn indicates that progress in that science will consist of hard fought conflict. Any institution is only going to serve to retard that progress by providing a bastion for the established truth.
More post
- 📝 How did the Antarctic Plateau lose the kings' names it originally had?
- 📝 Do historians agree that most wars are caused by religion?
- 📝 How was the dynamics of a naval battle in the 17th century?
- 📝 What is modern criticism of Nazism?
- 📝 What is the origin of the expression "I'm the culture they're dying for"?
- 📝 Are automatic assault rifle useless in current conflict?
- 📝 What kind of religions did ancient aboriginals of Australia follow?
- 📝 At the beginning of the 20th century, how did Austria-Hungary and Russia's foreign policies conflict in the Balkans?
- 📝 When did the last formal and recorded duel take place?
- 📝 Is there a historical trend for people to complain about the laziness of youth, in French culture?
- 📝 How to understand the geography of Napoleon's military campaigns?
- 📝 What time period is this uniform?
- 📝 When and where did the myth about solar eclipse affecting pregnant women start?
- 📝 Why did George McClellan fail to act?
- 📝 Was it ever illegal for two people of different religions to marry in the UK?
- 📝 What did the word "leisure" mean in late 18th Century usage?
- 📝 Are there any archeological finds or primary source drawings of the Chinese "blade shaped" bamboo-copter or rotary fans?
- 📝 When and where was the term "nigra" used and what was its relation to "nigger"?
- 📝 Were the heavy war reparations on Germany after World War I the main cause of its hyperinflation in 1923?
- 📝 Who is the Amyrtaios of Herodotus?
- 📝 Was the Taiping Rebellion the deadliest war of the 19th Century?
- 📝 Did people 'go to the beach' for pleasure during classical antiquity?
- 📝 Watergate, the burglars - why bring crisp cash with them to the break-in?
- 📝 Why did Emperor Xian's flight from Chang'an take one year?
- 📝 Why did Puerto Rican families send their children to New York?
- 📝 What is the origin of the first dynasty in Scotland?
- 📝 Broad and deep historical causes of gang violence in Mexico and El Salvador
- 📝 What caused the decline of Buddhism in Japan?
- 📝 What, if any, futurists that went to war actually denied the movement later?
- 📝 How close was the Soviet Union to collapsing during WW2?
Source: stackoverflow.com
Search Posts
Related post
- 📝 How is fact checking and referencing done in historical studies?
- 📝 How common are historical instances of mercenary armies reversing and attacking their employing country?
- 📝 How are Julian and Gregorian dates usually represented in historical works?
- 📝 How historical are early Chinese (Shang dynasty and earlier) dynastic records?
- 📝 How can we be sure that a certain historical claim is true and accurate?
- 📝 What is "discovery" in the historical sense? How do historians today view and describe "discoveries"?
- 📝 How are historical epidemiological studies done?
- 📝 What is the benefit of historical studies for the process of creating tactics and strategies in foreign policy?
- 📝 How do historians and linguists know how to pronounce the names from non-phonetic scripts?
- 📝 How accurate or supported is Jared Diamond's "Guns, Germs, and Steel"?
- 📝 How and when did the word "nuclear" replace the word "atomic"?
- 📝 How did the USSR manage to innovate in an environment characterized by government censorship and high bureaucracy?
- 📝 When and how did the USA and the UK become allies?
- 📝 When and how did people begin to consider slavery immoral?
- 📝 How did Italy and Germany get rubber in WWII?
- 📝 How were concentration and extermination camp guards recruited?
- 📝 Transatlantic Zeppelin trips usually took > 100 hours. How did they stock enough food, and where did they sleep?
- 📝 How and when was the modern company ownership structure invented?
- 📝 How were drawbridges and portcullises used tactically?
- 📝 How were the cities of Milan and Bruges spared by the Black Death?
- 📝 How did the ruling class in the Muslim world react to the discovery and colonization of the Americas?
- 📝 How to explain the apparent discrepancy in the use of papyrus vs. clay tablets between Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia?
- 📝 How true is the statement "Soviet troops got into Berlin riding American trucks, walking in American boots and using American trains"?
- 📝 How many lives were estimated to have been saved by the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs?
- 📝 How and why was the boundary between West and East Berlin decided to be where it was?
- 📝 When and how did the Han ethnic group become by far the biggest ethnic group in China?
- 📝 How was the modern geographic boundary between Europe and Asia decided?
- 📝 How were diplomats and their staffs treated when World War II was declared?
- 📝 What was the shortest time between a historical event occuring and a museum opening dedicated to said event?
- 📝 How long did it take for a diplomat to travel between Berlin and Vienna in the 1770's?