Notes on Positivism in Historical Methodologies

Coined by philosopher Auguste Comte (1798-1857), a French philosopher and sociologist.
Comte's positivism was part of a larger philosophical project to reorganize human knowledge and society based on scientific principles.
Comte believed history had discoverable 'laws,' akin to those in the natural sciences. Note: Historians generally view Comte's approach with skepticism.
Core similarity between philosophical and historical positivism: Emphasis on knowledge derived from empirical evidence. This means observable, measurable data is considered the most reliable form of knowledge.
Empirical evidence: Information received through the senses. Example: 'I saw it with my own eyes!' This implies direct observation is a key source of reliable information.

Historians rarely have firsthand ('I saw it with my own eyes!') accounts of the past. They are separated from past events by time.
They analyze evidence from primary source documents, such as letters, diaries, official records, and artifacts.
Positivists assert that historical information can be verified through rigorous analysis of these sources, aiming for objective reconstruction of past events.

Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886) was initially considered the first positivist, largely due to his emphasis on rigorous source criticism and his view of history as a science.
Ranke emphasized the critical importance of primary source documents as the most reliable form of historical evidence.
His emphasis on primary sources and source criticism aligns strongly with positivist principles.

Ranke believed some forms of knowledge, particularly spiritual insight, were exclusive to God and not accessible through empirical methods.
He considered history both a science (in its method of inquiry) and an art (in its narrative presentation).
Quote: ‘History is distinguished from all other sciences in that it is also an art.’ This highlights Ranke's belief that historical writing involves interpretation and artistry, not just objective reporting.
Despite this, Ranke was largely seen as a positivist for much of the 20th century, influencing historical practice profoundly.
Being labeled 'Rankean' implied an intense focus, sometimes seen as excessive, on factual detail and empirical research.
Later in the 20th century, scholars like Gilbert and Iggers re-evaluated Ranke, emphasizing the complexities in his thought that distanced him from strict positivism.

G. R. Elton (1921-1994) was a prominent advocate for positivism, particularly in his influential work The Practice of History (1967).
Elton's view that historical facts are simply 'found and recorded' is not widely accepted because many historians believe human interpretation inevitably influences the selection and presentation of facts.
Elton's positivism served as a counterpoint to the extreme relativism of postmodernism, which questioned the possibility of objective historical truth and denied any hierarchy of validity among different interpretations.

Elton acknowledged the inherent difficulty of attaining absolute historical truth due to the limitations of evidence and the subjectivity of interpretation.
He argued that historians should nevertheless strive for absolute truth as a guiding principle, even if it remains an unattainable ideal.
Professional historians, according to Elton, are trained in methods of source criticism and analysis that maximize their chances of approaching historical truth.

Historians should formulate research questions independently of preconceived answers to avoid biased interpretations.
They should acknowledge that people in the past acted within the context of their own time, without knowledge of subsequent events (avoiding presentism).
They should remain open to new information and interpretations that may challenge or alter their existing perspectives.
They should present their ideas and findings in clear, accessible language, avoiding jargon and unnecessary complexity.

Elton’s most famous historical work, England under the Tudors (1955), is highly regarded for its detailed research but also reflects his particular interpretive stance.
Elton greatly admired Thomas Cromwell, a key figure in the Tudor government.
Richard Evans suggests that Elton's admiration for strong government in Tudor England was influenced by his experience of the rise of Nazism in Europe, shaping his views on effective governance.

Neither Ranke nor Elton, despite being central figures associated with positivism, produced historical works that fully embody purely positivist principles.
This may explain the decline in the number of historians who explicitly identify as positivists, as historical theory has moved toward more nuanced approaches.

Most historians, except for those adhering to strict postmodernist views, generally agree on certain methodological rules for writing credible history.
These rules echo those of Ranke: strive to represent events 'as they really were,' emphasizing accuracy and source-based evidence.
And Elton: avoid skewing historical evidence, maintain an open mind, avoid imposing present-day perspectives on the past, and maintain clarity in writing.

Bias and objectivity are recurring themes in historical methodology and are central to discussions of positivism.
Most historians integrate elements of both positivism (emphasizing empirical evidence) and other interpretive approaches in their historical writing, seeking a balance between objectivity and interpretation.