Making History: How Great Historians Interpret the Past [TTC Video]
11 January 2017, 23:49
Course No 8818 | AVI, XviD, 640x480 | MP3, 128 kbps, 2 Ch | 24x30 mins | + PDF Guidebook | 4.46GB
History is not truth. While it forms the backbone of our knowledge about the world, history is nevertheless only a version of events. History is shaped by the interpretations and perspectives of the individual historians who record it. Consider:
- Sallust, writing his dark history of Rome to rail against the political corruption he saw consuming the empire—while artfully concealing his own role in it;
- John Foxe, in his Book of Martyrs, writing about church history to discredit the Catholics and legitimize the reign of Elizabeth I;
- David Hume, penning his massive History of England with the deliberate goal of creating a potboiler that will earn him a fortune.
What, then, is the motive and the vision of the historian? How do historians create their histories? And what role does the historian's viewpoint and method play in what we accept as truth?
These questions underlie a history lesson of the most revealing kind.
In Making History: How Great Historians Interpret the Past, award-winning scholar Allen C. Guelzo of Gettysburg College takes you inside the minds of our greatest historians. Over 24 intriguing lectures, he challenges you to explore the idea of written history as it has shaped humanity's story over 2,000 years. Told through enthralling historical anecdotes, the course travels deep into mankind's fundamental desire to record and understand the world, to shed new light on the events and experiences of yesterday, and to use the past as a window onto the present and the future.
History: The Art of Discovery
"History is more than merely a pile-up of facts or a chronicle of the past," notes Dr. Guelzo. "It is an art—and a very complicated one at that. And like the others arts, it has techniques and perspectives, some of them old and long-since retired, some of them in violent conflict with each other."
The actors in this art of discovery are the great historians themselves, from the ancient Greeks to our own time. You look through the eyes of our civilization's greatest historical minds to ponder why they conceived and wrote history the way they did.
In key sections, you explore the seminal thinking of these men:
- Herodotus, considered by many the first history writer, who replaced the epic imagination of Homer with istorieis, or inquiry
- Livy, the author of a 142-volume didactic history of Rome that spanned three continents and seven centuries
- David Hume, who framed English history with an evolutionary vision of economic, political, and intellectual freedom
- Edward Gibbon, whose monumental Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire forged a complex picture of epic collapse and decay
Beneath the Surface of Written History
With Professor Guelzo's penetrating perspective, you examine the processes that create accepted views of historical events. As you take apart the elements of history writing, you discover how the great stories of the past were chosen and how they were interpreted.
In considering the key choices the historian makes, you uncover the ways in which understanding how history is written is crucial to understanding historical events themselves. You also explore how the version of history you accept reveals much about you as an individual and as a member of a community.
The journey rewards you with an unforgettable insight into our human heritage and the chance to look with discerning eyes at human events in their deeper meanings. Anyone with an interest in history, philosophy, or intellectual history will find these lectures a far-reaching meditation on the evolution of historical thought.
"Constructing" the Past
As a core feature of Making History, you explore the major interpretive concepts or historical genres that form the backbone of Western history writing. These are among the many fundamental genres you examine:
- Celebration: History writing as the remembrance or glorification of great deeds or events, providing a cultural identity for a given people
- Declension: An interpretive model of decline, charting the deterioration of political, social, and moral systems
- Continuity: The understanding or justification of present events as they conform to patterns of the past
- Apocalyptic: A view of human events as moving toward an ultimate, devastating rupture with the past, leading to a new order
You follow these core genres through time and learn how they interact with other ways of viewing history, including history as science, as economics, as progress, as class struggle, and as culture. You also chart the ways these themes intersect and oppose each other across the centuries, as they illuminate the origins of our contemporary thinking.
In the Trenches with Great Minds
Professor Guelzo's storytelling enriches the background of the writing. In the Greek world, you travel with Xenophon and Thucydides through their own dramatic military exploits, as they develop models of history writing that still carry weight. In the early Christian era, you witness Augustine's personal trials as he defends Christianity against the pagans. In the 19th century, you trace Macaulay's dynamic career and his white-hot impact on the reading public.
From Thucydides, you hear Pericles' great articulation of democracy. You hear Sallust's reasoning that ancient Rome declined due to moral rot, Luther's condemnation of the papacy, and Macaulay's soaring rhetoric in his contemplation of the Puritans.
Throughout the story, the evolving arc of historical thought plays out as a heated series of battles of interpretation.
In the bloody era of the Christian Reformation, you see how the conflict of Luther's ideology with Catholic dogma takes the form of warring views of church history. In the revolutions of the Enlightenment, Gibbon, Leopold von Ranke, and Auguste Comte overthrow the Christian influence, advocating the use of scientific systems in understanding history.
Rejecting the logic of Enlightenment ideals, the Romantics develop another method for understanding history: the glorification of emotions, nature, and the sublime. On the heels of Romanticism, you meet another breed of historian, from Wilhelm Dilthey to Arnold Toynbee, who demands understanding of cultures and patterns.
On our own shores, you taste the poignant struggles of the Puritans, the Indian wars, and the closing of the frontier, as history writers come to grips with the promise and disillusionment of the new nation.
Professor Guelzo highlights compelling connections in theme and thinking between historians of different epochs. You see how Bancroft and Prescott's narratives of the American Revolution hearken back to the ancient Greeks, and how Karl Marx's writing echoes themes articulated by Augustine in the 5th century.
This is knowledge to enrich all the history you know and all the history you encounter. Join one of America's outstanding historical scholars in this bold engagement with critical thinking about the past.
Robert E. Lee and His High Command [TTC Video]
11 January 2017, 23:35
Course No 8557 | AVI, XviD, 720x480 | MP3, 80 kbps, 2 Ch | 24x30 mins | + PDF Guidebook | 4.41GB
Few events have captivated students of American history like the Civil War. Its battles are analyzed repeatedly, studied and "what-ifed" by professional tacticians and tireless amateurs. Its profoundly dramatic implications and moments have no parallels in our history, whether it be friend fighting friend, the end of slavery, or an entire society and way of life burned away, sometimes literally. The war's most striking personalities seem somehow magnified—and few among those personalities have ever held our attention like General Robert Edward Lee.
With his Army of Northern Virginia, he came to embody the cause of the Confederacy itself, inspiring a commitment from troops and civilians that eventually overshadowed even those given to its political leaders and institutions.
How did this come to pass?
In a war that produced no other successful Confederate armies, how was Robert E. Lee able to create and inspire an army whose achievements resonated not only across the Confederacy but also in the North, as well as in foreign capitals such as London and Paris?
Answers to the Most-Asked Questions about Lee
This course addresses and answers the most-asked questions about Robert E. Lee and the men he chose to serve under him:
- What was Lee actually like?
- Was he someone whose character and ideas—as some have claimed—were mired in the past?
- Was he really an "old-fashioned" general who was too much of a traditionalist and gentleman to fight the kind of modern, ruthless war demanded by the times?
- Or was he a brilliant and aggressive strategist and tactician who understood exactly the kind of war he would need to wage, the size of his window of opportunity, and the kind of senior officers he would need if his strategy was to succeed?
- How did he choose those officers, and what personal and tactical characteristics did they share?
- What experiences shaped them?
- Why did they succeed or fail?
- How did what happened on the war’s extraordinarily bloody battlefields influence public opinion on the home fronts of both the Confederacy and the Union?
- And how did that opinion, in turn, shape the actions of Lee and his officers?
Gain a New Understanding of How the War Unfolded
This course addresses these and other issues with an approach designed to appeal to everyone who wants to understand more about the Civil War and why it unfolded as it did:
- It’s a course that will appeal whether your interest is in the strategy and tactics underlying its major battles or in the broader context within which those battles took place.
- If you’re relatively new to exploring this conflict, these lectures offer a refreshingly balanced starting point.
- And if you’re already knowledgeable, this course will deepen your appreciation of the decisions made by Lee and his generals and the implications they had both on and off the battlefield.
Perhaps more than anything else, you gain a tremendous depth of insight into how those decisions were a function of the individuals who made them. You learn how Lee’s choices in elevating these 15 men to high command influenced, for better or worse, the course of the war.
Guiding you through this human and strategic drama is Professor Gary W. Gallagher, whose 48-lecture course on The American Civil War remains one of our most popular.
Professor Gallagher’s teaching, writing, and research skills have made him one of the most respected Civil War authorities in the world.
Meet the Men Who Waged the Confederacy’s War
As you would expect, these lectures contain vivid portraits of the men whose names are familiar to anyone with even a passing curiosity about this great conflict:
- Lee himself, whose striking appearance undoubtedly helped contribute to the almost mystical aura with which many authors have endowed him but whose experiences serving under the famous Winfield Scott in the war with Mexico taught him invaluable practical lessons about modern warfare.
- Lee’s skill at managing military resources and his awareness that audacity and ruthless aggressiveness can contribute to victory against a more powerful opponent threatened to disrupt the Union war effort more than once.
- "Stonewall" Jackson, whose dogged purpose and initiative helped forge, with Lee, a military partnership second only to that of Ulysses S. Grant and William Tecumseh Sherman.
- "Jeb" Stuart, the great cavalryman whose flamboyant battle dress, complete with scarlet-lined cape, yellow sash, and an ostrich plume in his hat, belied his superb skills at reconnaissance and screening, the crucial responsibilities of Civil War cavalry
- James Longstreet, whom Lee warmly greeted as "my old war-horse" and who served as Lee’s senior subordinate throughout Lee’s tenure at the head of the Army of Northern Virginia.
And you’ll meet others as well, from the profane and acerbic Jubal A. Early, a West Pointer who had chosen law over the military before joining the Confederate forces, to a fascinating group of younger officers.
You also learn how Lee’s officers were often distinguished by extraordinary aggressiveness and courage on the battlefield, often at great personal cost.
A Human-Sized Look At the War
Among them was a young general named Stephen Dodson Ramseur, who was mortally wounded at the Battle of Cedar Creek.
The retreating medical wagon carrying him from the battlefield was captured by Union forces. And Professor Gallagher paints a deeply moving scene of several Union officers who had been cadets with Ramseur at West Point—including George Armstrong Custer—coming to sit with him through the night until he died.
This West Point connection was not an isolated incident.
With a wealth of officers who had been trained at West Point—Lee himself had been superintendent—along with those who had come from prestigious academies such as the Virginia Military Institute and The Citadel, the Confederacy had a distinct advantage in the depth of its officer corps.
This was especially evident during the first two years of the war, when many young Union officers were still gaining experience in military basics.
The Confederacy’s Extraordinary Problem of Attrition
Ramseur’s death also illuminates the extraordinary problem of attrition faced by Lee.
You learn that in this last war in which generals actually commanded from the front, attrition among the Confederacy’s generals sometimes exceeded 25 to 30 percent in a single campaign.
The struggle to replace them forms a leitmotif throughout the history of Lee’s army.
Examine the Idea of the "Lost Cause"
Professor Gallagher concludes the course with a highly critical look at the body of post-war writings embodying the viewpoint that came to be known as the "Lost Cause."
This viewpoint, much of it orchestrated by Jubal Early, shunted aside the issue of slavery and used States’ rights and other arguments to defend the Confederacy’s actions. It emphasized Lee’s greatness and the Union’s massive advantage in men and other resources.
You learn that although most modern historians have long abandoned it, the "Lost Cause" continues to be evident in popular conceptions of the war.
Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition [TTC Video]
06 January 2017, 17:01
Course No 4294 | AVI, DivX5, 640x480 | MP3, 128, 2 Ch | 24x30 mins | + PDF Guidebook | 4.15GB
What is effective argumentation? How does it work? Abraham Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and other great figures were masters of the craft. So how can you reason through your position and make the best possible case for it with the same skill and ease as the experts? Argumentation: The Study of Effective Reasoning, 2nd Edition is a rigorous introduction to the formal study of argumentation—communication that seeks to persuade others through reasoned judgment.
In 24 lectures you learn the building blocks of an argument, the different categories of argument and the issues that are at stake in each, the kinds of evidence that serve as proof in an argument, and many other aspects of argumentation and reasoning, illustrated with examples from some of the most famous speeches, debates, and controversies in American history.
What You Learn
Award-winning Professor David Zarefsky of Northwestern University has five goals for this course:
- You will learn how to recognize arguments; how to find them in conversations, newspaper editorials, speeches, in controversies of any kind; and how to know them when you encounter them.
- You will become aware of how arguing reflects choice, broadening your understanding of the choices that arguers can make and that you can make when you build and construct an argument.
- You will learn how to evaluate various types of arguments. In the process, you'll learn the standards that should govern your assessment of these qualities.
- In attempting all of these tasks you will examine examples of a variety of historical and contemporary arguments, shedding light on some significant controversies by looking at them from the perspective of argument.
- Having become familiar with argumentation theories, you should be able to improve your ability both as an analyst and as a maker of arguments.
Argumentation starts with four lectures that review the intellectual and historical backgrounds of argumentation. Then in Lectures 5 through 11 you explore the strategies and tactics of argument construction, attack, and defense. Lectures 12 through 18 consider the components of argument in greater detail and examine how they work. Next, Lectures 19 and 20 focus on the appraisal of arguments. Finally, in Lectures 21 through 24, you investigate how argumentation functions in society, covering such topics as argumentation in specialized fields and the different ways that arguments can end.
Argumentation in Action
Professor Zarefsky infuses Argumentation with rich historical examples to illustrate the principles of argumentation in action. For example, in 2003, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell gave a dramatic speech before the U.N. Security Council, seeking approval for the use of military force against Iraq. Dr. Zarefsky uses this speech to explore how arguments employ complex structures. Secretary Powell's address used a combination of parallel and convergent structures. Through careful analysis, you'll learn how these structures work logically and why supporters of President Bush's Iraq policy treated the arguments as purely parallel, while opponents treated them as convergent.
Why should you practice this kind of argument analysis? "It enables you to understand what's going on in the argument," says Professor Zarefsky. "Few of us are ever going to have the opportunity to address the U.N. Security Council, but if you do this with a letter to the editor, or an editorial in the local newspaper, or in a conversation that you have in your family, the same process works just as well, and you can get some real insight into the nature of the arguments."
Principles behind Historic Speeches
More examples of important principles at work in historic speeches include
- The Lincoln-Douglas Debates of 1858: The dueling speeches of U.S. Senate candidates Abraham Lincoln and Stephen A. Douglas illustrate the principle that argumentation takes place with a particular audience in mind—in this case, the swing voters of central Illinois. You also learn that all argument involves risk, and that Lincoln and Douglas each sacrificed strategic advantages in meeting to debate.
- Lyndon Johnson's 1965 Voting Rights Message: President Johnson's historic address to a joint session of Congress was a policy-oriented speech that focused masterfully on the relevant topoi—the traditional categories of issues that arise in dealing with a controversy. You learn why it was named one of the top 10 American speeches of the 20th century by a national survey of communications scholars.
- The Kennedy-Nixon Debates of 1960: John F. Kennedy's reply to a journalist's question during the third presidential debate with Richard Nixon illustrates the application of the "mini-max" principle—the minimum effort and risk yielding the maximum gain. You see why Nixon's rebuttal does not reflect the best strategic choices in meeting Kennedy's arguments.
- Abraham Lincoln's House-Divided Speech: Lincoln's speech accepting nomination to run for the U.S. Senate against Stephen Douglas demonstrates a classic use of figures of speech. Lincoln employs the analogy of workmen building a frame house to connect prominent politicians of the day with a plot to legalize slavery throughout the United States. He can't prove it directly, but by using a clever figurative analogy he makes a convincing case that the plot is inexorably unfolding.
- Franklin D. Roosevelt's December 8, 1941, War Message: Roosevelt's speech to Congress on the day after the Pearl Harbor attack is a vivid model of a type of argument called the warrant from example. A warrant is an authorization to make an inference from evidence to claim, and Roosevelt cites a litany of examples of Japanese aggression to establish their intent for general war.
- Martin Luther King, Jr.'s "I Have A Dream" Speech: You learn how this celebrated speech illustrates a sign argument, in which Dr. King juxtaposes intolerable conditions for African Americans with a Scriptural allusion to the onrushing "mighty stream" of justice. He infers that one phenomenon predicts, or is a sign for, the other.
A Teacher with Passion, Insight, and Humor
These are just some of the creative ways that Professor Zarefsky explains a subject that is inherently fascinating, though often technical and demanding. Rarely has it been taught with the passion, insight, and humor that Professor Zarefsky displays.
For instance, in discussing the concept of "stasis," he shows how a simple accusation of theft offers a variety of responses that will determine exactly what is at issue and therefore what needs to be settled. That point of dispute is called the stasis. The claim, "You stole my car," could be countered with, "No, I never had your car," asserting that the act never took place. This is called "stasis of conjecture". By contrast, the reply, "I only borrowed your car," signals an argument over how to characterize the act and is called "stasis of definition." "I needed your car for an emergency" cites urgent circumstances and is called "stasis of quality." And a refusal to discuss the matter at this particular time and place with the response, "If you've got a case, then take me to court," indicates that another forum is more appropriate and is called "stasis of place." Determining stasis is crucial to understanding the issues at play in any argument.
Additional technical aspects of argumentation that you study include the basic structure of arguments (claim, evidence, inference, and warrant); the patterns of complex arguments (multiple, coordinative, and subordinative); the six types of inductive inference (example, analogy, sign, cause, commonplaces, and form); and such strategic issues as patterns of attack and defense, choices of language and style, and fallacies to avoid, including the surprising insight that the exact same pattern of inference can sometimes be fallacious and sometimes valid, depending on circumstances.
Sound Argumentation: Antidote to Destructive Behaviors
Throughout Argumentation, Professor Zarefsky never loses sight of the purpose of sound argumentation. "Argumentation legitimizes freedom of speech and makes it work to a constructive purpose," thereby preventing a debasing trend in which bad arguments drive out good.
Professor Zarefsky notes that a June 2005 op-ed piece in The New York Times suggested that argumentation may be a lost art. The article pointed out that people increasingly interact only with those who already agree with them; that differences of opinion are treated as unbridgeable; and that attempts to persuade are cloaked in deception. The result is fewer opportunities for compromise, deliberation, and mutual understanding. "Understanding and practicing argumentation is the antidote to these destructive behaviors," says Professor Zarefsky. The crucial difference that makes arguments productive, instead of futile, is an appreciation for the principles that underlie this common, vital human activity.