Bell Ringer! Welcome to class! Please take out your Disclosure Document, rip the back part off, and turn it into the basket! Then please answer the following QUIETLY: Is there a classroom website? How many participation points do you get a day and give one way you can loose them? How many Hall passes and Late Slips to you receive this semester? What is the most credit can you receive on a late work assignment with out the late slip?

The Method of Historical Inquiry Why Do We Study History?

Recall History is what we choose to remember about the past. Our common experience binds us together.

Interpretation History involves explaining people and events. Historians read between the lines. History can illustrate ideas. Speculation means guessing about the past.

Interpretation What is happening in the image? Which side created the image? Why?

Continued… What is happening in the image? Which side created the image? Why?

Application Use the past to understand the present. Examine situations in the past; Looking at both sides. Understanding the different beliefs and ideas of the past.

Analysis Break the event down into its parts: Which parts can you identify? Examine each part. Try to create a time line of events: Which are causes? effects?

Synthesis History involves making sense out of a jumble of facts. You can search for patterns. You can predict. You can make generalizations: broad statements that summarize.

Finally: Draw your own conclusion Draw your own conclusions: Did the pioneers have to right to take land from the Native Americans?

Evaluation History involves making judgments about people in events.

Why Study History? “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, it expects what never was and never will be.” — Thomas Jefferson

How do historians come up with their own conclusions? Primary resources: First hand account of an event Example: our Boston Massacre pictures, Journals, interviews, newspapers, artifacts, live footage. Secondary resources: An event told by some one who wasn’t there Example: biographies, documentaries, etc.

Let’s try to be historians! Main question: Did Pocahontas save John Smiths life?

Who says what? General history says… True Relation says… Why would Smith add on to his earlier story? Is it a lie, exaggeration, or fact?

Historians Interpretation Paul Lewis says… “In 1617, Pocahontas became a big media event in London. She was a “princess” (daughter of King Powhatan) and the first indian woman to visit England. Because she converted to Christianity, people high in the church, as well as the King and Queen, paid attention to her. While all this was going on, John Smith published a new version of the True Relation, adding footnotes that say Pocahontas threw herself on Smith to save him. Smith even takes credit for introducing Pocahontas to the English language and the Bible. Then in 1624, Smith expands his story in General history. He adds details to the story and says that Pocahontas risked her life to save his. Why would a chief who had been so friendly before, suddenly decide to kill John Smith?”

Continued… J.A. Leo Lemay says… “John Smith had no reason to lie. In all of his other writings he is very accurate and observant. For 250 years after his captivity, no one questioned his story. The reason the two versions differ is that their purpose is different. In a True Relation, Smith didn't’t want to brag about his adventures, he wanted to inform readers about the land and the people of Virginia. In the General History, his goal was to promote settlement in Virginia (and added stories that might get people interested). There is no doubt the event happened. Smith may have misunderstood what the whole thing meant. I think it was probably a common ritual for the tribe, where a young woman in the tribe pretends to save a newcomer as a way of welcoming him into the tribe.”

J.A. Leo Lemay vs. Paul Lewis Which historian do you find more convincing and why?