Abstract

When has a historical narrative offered a satisfactorily “complete” explanation of an event? In order to understand how useful archetypal narratives are in terms of historical explanation, this essay tests these paradigms for “completeness” in historical explanation, operationalizing the distinction between explanans and explanandum, the latter category of which implies that an argument for how an event matters is a criterion of a complete historical explanation. Arguments about significance in history generally take the form of a specification of why an event matters in a particular longue durée narrative. The essay concludes by relating the problems of significance and explanation to major trends in the contemporary history of science. In particular, it recognizes the potential power of new work that has instrumentalized material accounts of the history of global warming in relation to a longue durée history of climate change. It argues that, in general, across methodologies and schools, history is an exemplary science in terms of its instrumentalization of sources, which leaves room for multiple interpretations of significance over the longue durée.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.