How do historians reconstruct the past from fragmentary evidence? Join us for the introduction to this new series exploring how we uncover Red Hook’s hidden past.
By William P. Tatum III, Ph.D.
Transcript of 1755 slave census of Rhynebeck Precinct; the original documents were destroyed in the 1911 NY capital fire leaving us only with these 19th-century transcripts. Edward O’Callaghan, The Documentary History of the State of New York, v. III p. 509. Click on image to view larger.
“How was your week?”
Consider your reaction when someone unexpectedly asks you what you’ve been up to over the past week. If you’re like me, a sip of coffee, a few “hmms,” or a drawn out “weeeelllll” covers your desperate rifling through your memory. One day tends to bleed seamlessly into the next, especially in these “interesting” times.
Historians face a similar challenge. We ask them questions, expecting a polished, complete answer informing us about events that transpired before our earliest memories. There is little patience for gaps or best guesses, unless one is discussing known mysteries. Yet the records from which they can draw factual information are even more fragmentary than our memories of last week.
What is the difference between “the past” and “history”?
The popular idea of history conflates two contrasting elements: the past and historical narrative. The past is fact: people lived, died, and did things, but the records left are incomplete. Historical narratives—the histories we read, hear, and watch—are stories we tell ourselves about the past. Usually, the goal of a ”history” is to illuminate something we care about in the present. Like the news, sports, and other media, historical narratives are subject to the market forces of perceived relevance. History is the opinion we hold of the fragmentary facts we know about the past.
So, how do we “do” history?
This blog series will present the primary sources—those surviving fragments of the past—that inform our work in local history. Our goal is to demonstrate the difficulties involved in recovering the stories that are hidden from view. Enslaved persons, the poor, immigrants, and other downtrodden groups and individuals have left us with few documents detailing their experiences of life. Yet now, more than ever, we must make every effort to reconstruct their experiences. The names and the faces have changed, but the challenges of inequity, poverty, and social isolation remain.
Assembling a puzzle
The posts in this series will focus on the challenges of the surviving evidence. You will not find complete stories. You will see how historians account for bias in the source material and seek to address the multiplicity of loose ends and missing information. We will explore where the historical narratives begin and how researchers and writers apply the art of history to reconstruct a 10,000-piece jigsaw puzzle using only a few pieces and never peeking at the box cover.
We encourage you to share your thoughts and insights as part of an on-going community conversation about how our shared past can help us understand the challenges we face today. Red Hook has always been a diverse community: in recovering the stories of our predecessors, we seek to construct histories that resonate with everyone today.
Further Resources:
Carol Kammen, On Doing Local History
Lucy Maynard Salmon, Why is History Rewritten?
National Council on Public History, blog “History @ Work”
“Doing History” A Podcast from the Omohundro Institute
Episode 14 “History & Historians in the Public” from Lonnie Bunch, the Founding Director of the Smithsonian’s National Museum of African American History and Culture
About the Author
William P. Tatum III has served as the Dutchess County Historian since 2012. He earned his B.A. in History from the College of William & Mary in Virginia and his M.A. and Ph.D. in History from Brown University. His work has focused on building a collaborative county history community and increasing access to our county’s historic documents. You can find more information at www.dutchessny.gov/history.