Historical Actors and Our Standards

Something that comes up in my classes all the time - disappointment. It’s true that there are many unsavory chapters in American history, and the people that we meet along the way often suggest that many who lived in the past were objectively horrible individuals. Kids get mad, and it’s understandable. But I try to remind them that while it is perfectly fine to have emotional reactions to things that strike us as terrible, we have to remember to do our best to understand historical actors in their contexts. In my book, Mastering the Past, I meditate on this idea a bit. Check it…

History students must remember that historical actors are not us. So, you should not be disappointed when they fail to live up to our standards. Do everything in your power to understand them on their own terms and in their own contexts. This is not letting them off the hook – the ever-so-trite expression “they were products of their time” kind of makes it seem like everyone thought the same way about everything at any particular point in history, which of course is not true. Slaveholders thought they were doing the right thing, but there were plenty of people at the time who vehemently rejected the morality of the institution. And yet, even this group doesn’t exactly align with the morality of the twenty-first century. The abolitionists of the nineteenth century said and did some cringe-worthy stuff too.

Frederick Douglass’s disparaging remarks about Native Americans comes immediately to mind. This is why understanding context is absolutely essential. Historical actors could not possibly have made decisions or said things based on the way we see the world today. Here’s a safe bet that often rattles my students: 100 years from now, some people studying history will look back at our times in disbelief…asking, how could they have done (fill in the blank…)? You get my point. Some things change. Some ideas change. What is perfectly acceptable to the majority today may be ridiculous or even appalling to folks in the decades to come. 

In short, it’s perfectly okay to struggle with troubling ideas and grapple with difficult concepts. The human experience is messy, confounding even. Events involving humans are complex and complicated, and our understanding of what seems to be the simplest idea or event is constantly under revision. So, when you come across a book or article claiming to be the definitive history on something, be suspicious. 

So, there’s my little contribution for the day. If you are a history student (or teacher for that matter…) and struggling with this sort of thing, I am happy to talk with you about it. Just drop a note in the comments.