tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post6680232521769574253..comments2024-03-28T02:46:03.227-04:00Comments on The Historical Society: ContingencyRandallhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16755286304057000048noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7872819010848426693.post-29681878514893606142010-06-17T14:00:13.681-04:002010-06-17T14:00:13.681-04:00Heather,
Thanks for the post. I just got back fro...Heather,<br /><br />Thanks for the post. I just got back from a Teaching American History colloquium (teaching method and content to public school teachers) where I was trying to explain contingency and its importance to historical thinking. I've benefited greatly from Thomas Andrews and Flannery Burke's short essay in _Perspectives_ a few years back on the "5 C's of historical thinking" (http://www.historians.org/perspectives/issues/2007/0701/0701tea2.cfm). Their definition of contingency is a little different (elements in place that allow a story to unfold as it does) than yours, but I've always tried to give my students a sense of both.<br />It strikes me, however, that where you end up looks a whole lot like Raymond Williams's definition of determination from _Marxism and Literature_, which I've also found very useful in my own understanding of the relationship between larger historical forces, "agency," and the role of historical accident.<br />I'm glad to see that the history blogosphere is starting to talk historiographically! Thanks!Ryan J. Careyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08310975835994534721noreply@blogger.com