Is history largely of interest because of the objective causal relations that exist among historical events and structures like the absolutist state or the Roman Empire?
In each of these instances the noun's referent is an interpretive construction by historical actors and historians, and one that may be undone by future historians. This is to choose a scale that encompasses enough time and space to be genuinely interesting and important, but not so much as to defy valid analysis.
On the contrary, if research is carried out properly, the resulting account is a fair description.
So a historiography that takes global diversity seriously should be expected to be more agnostic about patterns of development, and more open to discovery of surprising patterns, twists, and variations in the experiences of India, China, Indochina, the Arab world, the Ottoman Empire, and Sub-Saharan Africa.
His interpretation of history was based on the assumption of ordinary actions, motives, and causes, with no sympathy for theological interpretations of the past. These authors single out one factor that is thought to drive history: a universal human nature Vicoor a common set of civilizational challenges Spengler, Toynbee.
On world history: an anthology, H. What this amounts to is the idea that history is the result of conceptualization of the past on the part of the people who tell it—professional historians, politicians, partisans, and ordinary citizens.