Surviving Master's-Level History Programs at Norwich University: A ...

is closest to the truth or history “as it was”? Of all thevarious schools of interpretation regarding the CivilWar, which one is the best, most accurate interpretationof the war and its causes? This question is impossibleto answer because vast portions of the past are lostto us. Even in our individual lives it is impossible tohave a complete record of all our actions, thoughtsand experiences, and our memories of past eventscan fade or change over time. In addition, humanpsychology and the subconscious means individualsare often completely unaware of all the reasons for aparticular action, decision or behavior. History, unlikescience or mathematics, which permits independentverification of discoveries via logic and the scientificmethod, cannot be repeated. We cannot travel backin time or isolate a past era in a lab and study it untilcertain verifiable truths are revealed. So, unfortunately,history cannot work its way toward truth in the senseof knowing everything about the past or work towardsome absolutely definitive, verifiable conclusion aboutwhy something occurred and its meaning. The bestit can do is develop interpretations that are credibleand supported by the best available evidence. Unlikethe sciences, history operates on a continuum of graysrather than stark blacks and whites. This means thatevery interpretation has its strengths and weaknesses.It also means historians can examine the same bodyof evidence, but come to very different interpretationsabout an event.In a sense, the job of a historian is not unlike thatof a police detective. Under the best circumstancesdetectives arrive at a crime scene that has beensecured and has not been contaminated. Professionalcriminalists collect physical evidence linking thesuspect to the scene, and the victim and/or witnessesprovide statements consistent with the physicalevidence and accounts of other witnesses. In cases ofassault, rape or murder, the body of the victim willprovide additional physical evidence. In some instancessurveillance cameras will record the crime. Under thesecircumstances, the truth or facts of the case and theguilt of the accused is exceptionally easy to establishbeyond a reasonable doubt.Some cases are far more difficult to solve. State,federal and local police forces all have “cold cases”that have not or cannot be solved due to a lack ofevidence or leads. In some cases crime scenes becomecontaminated, witnesses will not cooperate withdetectives or will give fragmented or contradictoryaccounts. Sometimes witnesses will be of questionablecharacter and intentionally provide unreliable,dishonest statements. In some instances there are nowitnesses and exceptionally intelligent and carefulcriminals will do a thorough job destroying evidencelinking them to the crime. Occasionally, incompetentdetectives or prosecutors will bungle an investigationor dishonest police will plant evidence or coerce aninnocent person into confessing to a crime they didnot commit. Under these circumstances, guilt beyonda reasonable doubt is difficult to prove and defenseattorneys have exceptional opportunities to discreditwitnesses and evidence and provide compellingalternative explanations to jurors.In many ways historians are analogous to detectives ordistrict attorneys working a difficult cold case featuringa contaminated crime scene, limited body of evidence,contradictory and occasionally unreliable witnessaccounts, and multiple suspects with motive andopportunity. The complexity, number of suspects andlimited evidence of the case permits the developmentof numerous theories, based upon the evidence, aboutwho did what to whom and why. To take the legalanalogy a step further, historians constantly havethe past on trial and are, like prosecutors or defenseattorneys, attempting to convince a jury of theirarguments about their evidence, as well as the causalityand significance of events.15