How do today's historians find out what happened in the past?

How are they sure about what they're saying?


What are their research method?





plz be precise! thank you

How do today's historians find out what happened in the past?
Through history
Reply:It depends on how far back in history they want to learn. for example, if the wanted to learn about history after writing was commonly used, they look at documents written by people who were there at the time. Farther back, paintings, scrolls and hieroglyphics are used. Farther back than that, tools and utensils are carbon dated to tell us how old they are, than there is some degree of detective work to see how they were used. As far as dinosaurs, the fossil record is pretty clear and extensive, and tells us how old different animals are, and how they lived.
Reply:Historians can use lots of methods:





-Reading literature and journals from the past





-Analyzing artifacts





-Carbon dating





-memoirs, old documents, journals, etc.





-Lots of people purposely document things for historians of the future.
Reply:No joke: I have a "Time Machine" in my study.





So many books collected in over 50 years, all due to probably my 4Th grade teacher.





Also to be honest, historians, academics can utilize the Internet in different ways than all high school and even many college students. Many books, academic journals are "closed" to both the "search engines" (Goggle) and such.





Either one pays for access or gets via his or her university or employer. Most, medical journals are an example here.





No, it is not fair.





I know that Time Magazine's archives are free but the London Times, Washington Post, New York Times, well you have to pay them for an article or newspaper issue.





Many of us read several languages: I did not say speak them,


so I can search the web in German or French with relative ease.





"Historians" that includes all such as a Junior High teacher, High school, college instructor or Professor are taught, then obligated to "footnote" show our sources "chapter %26amp; verse".





I was truly a lousey teacher; hated "students" but "had to" teach to get my Ph.D., now I answer, retired.





"Research" is a skill, not well taught or often even suggest to students as to "how to" do.





I am good a researcher, I was and am, not worthy of the title "teacher".





Your question is great: but my answer is simple:





passion, love of the question and the "chase" or journey to find an answer. As I see in all the posts today here.





PS





Do Not vote me "best" of anything!
Reply:Magical meanderings.
Reply:After picking a period or subject of interest you begin researching it. The best source is libraries, museums and foundations which have archives where you can research letters, diaries, and other written material from the period or subject you are researching. You also rely on the work of other experts in the field and their writings to help you research the subject. You can also look at public records such as marriage, birth, divorce, land records, newspaper articles written in the period, government documents which may hold information. You need to find these sources and authenticate the source as to the validity of the information it provides regarding the subject. This is done by names of people, organizations etc which may have had reason to be in contact or present during the period of time you're studying or the person during a certain period of time. It is a tedious and painstaking process.
Reply:Wikipedia, of course!
Reply:THEY analize every fact and figures of histroy ,take ancient arts and literature studies,fossil testing and carbon dating,sharing and aquaring knowledges from various sources,debates and studies,etc.some thing in ancient things can be judjed to be correct and for others they may or approximate.thats all.
Reply:They carbon date monkeys.
Reply:Modern historians rely on primary or contemporary written/typed archives and records, books written by other historians, peer-review journal articles, manuscripts, archaeological evidence, court records, diaries and journals, newspaper articles, interviews, photographs or other pictorals, art and architecture, etc. There are other types of sources, of course, but this is a (somewhat) general idea. Historians rely on whatever types of sources that are needed in their research.





Historians write about a subject based on their specific approach, as well as the focus of their research. Because of this, it is necessary to review the research and writings of multiple historians in order to get a good idea of a subject. This is also how other historians create their hypotheses and conduct their own research.
Reply:The historians most important resources are archives. In archives historians find a number of things - newspapers, personal records, the papers of famous (and even non-famous) people, etc. Pretty much anything you can imagine will appear in the archives . . . even material culture. For example, a good friend of mine is writing her PhD dissertation on a 20th century female singer and her performance dresses are all held by a school of fashion. If you know where to dig, most everything is available.





Methodology depends on each historian and their project. A really fine example of American research is Laurel Thatcher Ulrich's book A Midwive's Tale. Here, she started with a diary (really a business ledger) and worked out from there, finding documents from other people mentioned. The great French historian Robert Darnton works with books and newspapers from the French Revolutionary era. He looks at everything from who owned what books to what was written in the books to what the lives of the authors were like.





The best way to be sure about what is being said is to find as much evidence as possible. If you find a statement that says in the 1860s, Milwaukee, WI was a "usually quiet and orderly city" you've found an interesting claim, but need to back it up. Proving your argument with a critical mass of evidence is important. Let me know if this is unclear . . . and I'll try to clarify.