Abstract
Argues that "the presupposition grounding normal or traditional historical practice is . . . that the historian's work is an accurate representation of an actual past . . ." (184). For such historians, the past is not problematic. Historians in this mold seek to comprehend the plenitude of the past by
"contextualizing" it, placing it within ever larger contexts. They assume that the past itself is a "complex but unified flow of events," a "Great Story" (188‑89). Berkhofer argues for a demystification that would deny that any single master interpretive code can be privileged over other codes (196). He sees "contemporary literary theory" (poetics) as authorizing such a move, presenting the historical profesion with "a plurality of possibilities" (198). (am)
"contextualizing" it, placing it within ever larger contexts. They assume that the past itself is a "complex but unified flow of events," a "Great Story" (188‑89). Berkhofer argues for a demystification that would deny that any single master interpretive code can be privileged over other codes (196). He sees "contemporary literary theory" (poetics) as authorizing such a move, presenting the historical profesion with "a plurality of possibilities" (198). (am)