The Change in the Study of History

The Change in the Study of History

            Western America is full of adventures and a rich history. The presentation of its history has suffered major crises since different historians give different stories which are difficult to ignore.  The fact that the region has expansive geography makes it difficult to define. Several historians have argued that western America was settled due to violence and romantic adventures. However, there is a significant difference in the way Turner and Limerick reflect the changing perception of history. Patricia Limerick argues based on economic reality whereas Fredrick Turner explains based on the development of the frontier. There is a significant change in the study of the history of West America. The region is no longer viewed as to have originated from warfare, the definition of its history has changed, the slavery question rightly perceived and population density no longer used as a measure of historical development.

Historical studies present the western frontier to have developed out of warfare and chase. The argument behind this is that European settlement was met with competition from Indians. The civilization of the West, for example, is seen to be different from other cultures. Chance and accident are vital in the said civilization, (Kalgan, 2017). The perception is however challenged by several scholars who change the general view of the history of West America. Fredrick Turner argues that the Western Frontier should be based on economic history. In fact, the region is a fertile research field that holds more than anticipated. The argument seems to be well supported by Patricia Limerick who argues that western history should be based on economic reality. The current inhabitants of the region involve themselves in business, and this can be attributed to a rich business tradition. It, therefore, serves justice to say that the past can be interpreted in terms of economic development rather than warfare.

There is a change in the definition and interpretation of history. The writing of history has been recently based on the events of historians own times. In 1981, Fredrick Turner introduced the idea of using the present to interpret the past. He argued that the current developments could be seen as what had been undeveloped in the past. If this interpretation is viewed with keenness, the study of history will generally change. History should actually be reviewed continuously if it is based on the present since development is not a one-time incident. The argument by Turner, however, faces more significant risks. Limerick argues that Turner was indifferent in his opinions. He had great respect of individual’s point of view, and this respect flowed to individual’s difference in ideas. There was a higher risk in that a change in Turner’s thoughts meant a change in the history of West America.

The slavery question has received a significant change in perception over the years. Initially, it has been a belief by many that there exist unhealed scars from the slave trade in the west. Slavery in its simplest terms is seen as a massive uprooting of a large number of people accompanied by pain and suffering. The idea that slaves are taken to labor against their will for little or no pay makes its perception to be negative, (Chaplin, 2016). Turner, for example, argues that the slavery question can be viewed rightly to be an incidence rather than a trait of the West Americans. The development of nationalism and the growth of American political institutions could have necessitated the increase of slavery. It was equally beneficial if the idea was viewed as half-slavery half-freedom leading to cross-fertilization of ideologies and political institutionalism.

Relying on population density to measure the development of a frontier has changed. Turner argued that the fact that the western frontier had no more potential land for competency was the end of history writing. However, this was met with a lot of criticism. The point that everything on the frontier had been privatized seemed not accurate since a large part of the land was left federal. The argument was based on the idea of land ownership that had rapidly occurred in the west. Land ownership, however, does not mean the end of historical development. An example is how the agrarian revolution was made much rapid due to land privatization. Strength on Turner’s argument would, however, be where land was made private but left idle. There however was a significant change in the perception brought about by Turner’s study of history. The radical social history of America changed according to, (Ingold, 2016).

In conclusion, the change in the study of history has taken the input of several scholars. Patricia Limerick has done great work in supporting or challenging the ideas of Fredrick Turner. The contribution of the two scholars has helped change the perception of the slavery question, definition and interpretation of history.