what does this debate tell you about the way historians reconstruct the past from evidence, in practice?
Anawer the topic question by reviewing the following articles:
Robert Finlay, “The Refashioning of Martin Guerre,” The American Historical Review 93, 3 (June 1988): 553-571.
Natalie Z. Davis, “On the Lame,” The American Historical Review 93, 3 (June 1988): 572-603.
The articles that you will review are the following:
• Robert Finlay, “The Refashioning of Martin Guerre,” The American Historical Review 93, 3 (June 1988): 553-571.
• Natalie Z. Davis, “On the Lame,” The American Historical Review 93, 3 (June 1988): 572-603.
Write a 900-1100 word essay answering the question: what does this debate tell you about the way historians reconstruct the past from evidence, in practice?
? Which of the two do you find the more persuasive? WHY? You must take a side, even if it is more nuanced than to accept one or the other wholeheartedly.
? Ask, what does this debate tell you about the way historians reconstruct the past from evidence, in practice? Use this question to write a brief introduction, to frame your discussion of Finlay and Davis, to further your analysis of how the debate between the two, in specific terms, sheds insight onto the work of historians, to thus refine your argumentation, and to offer a conclusion. While you want to address the core arguments by Finlay and Davis, you want to push your essay past simply he said, she said, to use their debate as evidence for your argument. Whichever scholar you agree with more, ask yourself why you find them persuasive.