This year The Fiji Times will achieve 153 years of existence on September 4, 2022.
The journey from September 4, 1869, when the foundation stone was led by George Littleton Griffiths and now it has become the first oldest operational newspaper.
In the world of intense competition in print journalism, many may have their personal opinion about the credibility and objectivity of each paper.
For many The Fiji Times is considered to be the best, but how can one determine its authenticity.
Should a scholar look through the sales records, coverage area, number of prints, quality of news, critical analysis, print quality or other factors?
Scholars make generalisations of any event/phenomena based on facts not on emotions or bias, so analysing the question of FT’s is the best? It has to go through an array of questions and facts.
Thus, this opinion article tries to make readers understand the methodology of historians to analyse the past events/phenomena in order to make a generalisation that includes linking of different facts in time or space towards each other to formulate historical generalisation.
Objectivity and rationality of historian is put into a task for a group the cumbersome unrelated historical facts or sources, and to understand this material to provide generalisation for others to understand.
This op-ed enlightens the concepts of generalisation that give an explanation based on the causation of an event or action.
It helps the readers to get answers to every event or phenomena’s five Ws (Who, What, When, Where, Why) and one H (How) attached to every event, phenomenon and action.
What is generalisation in history?
Generalisation is a process of developing linkages between facts, in order to frame principles, hypotheses and conceptions.
It is the manner in which historian comprehend their sources and attempt to provide an understanding of the facts to others.
Historians establish a link or relationship between the facts and provide an explanation and caution, effect or impact of an event.
The interpretation and analysis of events are made by a historian to give a general understanding to the readers.
Under this process, the classification of facts/data/phenomena is conducted by comparing and contrasting them; it also includes drawing similarities and differences between them to provide a conclusion based on facts.
The chronological arrangement of the facts is made to make cause and effect relationship between them.
The facts are arranged in sequence order.
Historians make a connection between the facts like data, events, past events and testimonies to make a generalisation to convey them to the audience.
Making a generalisations does not have any universal set method or technique, but it is largely dependent on precedent and present works, analysis of past historical data (considered a low level of generalisation), from other branches of social sciences generalisations, theories and philosophies (high level of generalisation) and historian’s own experience and common rational thinking.
Inquisitive historians help to investigate the facts to make generalisations.
Does generalisation help history writing?
It assists historian to organise the facts in a systematic manner and giving them a kind of sequence order.
This even expands the vision of historians’ understanding of the facts, their reality and serve to establish complex correlations.
Further, it also assists the historians to establish chains of cause and effect by evaluating, understanding and explaining the findings.
Generalisations drive historians to seek fresh historical sources and these facts can be understood in the light of new generalisation, eventually, it encourages historians to quest for new materials. It is highly useful to make fresh links between old widely accepted facts in the light of using new generalisations.
Generalisation also helps historians to check or test their claims and words. This overall helps to question every fact and derive new possible interpretations of the old facts.
This even sparks debates and discussions among historians who attempt to justify their generalisation of the event/s is more objective and viable over others.
It leads to thinking, re-thinking and coming to a conclusion of accepting a generalisation of an event or action.
This initiates processes of meaningful conversations and helps to better understand the past, which may lead to a difference of opinion among historians and others may find alternative explanations by re-investigated the new sources.
There are kinds of generalisations based on facts or events, the interconnection between different elements, and establishing connections that have a wider reach.
Generalisation is bound to happen and is inevitable. As per one notion, the historian should only arrange the facts in a sequence and check the authenticity but not to interpret or make its generalisation; whereas contradictory view believes sources need to be selected, arranged chronology and interpreted by historians, as the facts/sources do not speak for themselves and subsequently make generalisations.
Without generalisation, no comprehensive analysis, interpretation, or narrative is conceivable.
It is also impossible for a historian to explain events and organizations without making broad generalisations.
It also helps historians to make new generalisations by interpreting or re-investigate the old facts to revise or negate or confirm the old generalisations.
The question of ‘how’ and ‘why’ in any historical inquiry of facts can be answered in detail by generalization, whereas answers of other W’s like When, What, Who and where can be answered by simple direct facts or basic generalisation.
It assists historians in analysing the importance of sources, establishing correlation and representing the relevance. After a historian makes a generalisation, it helps to examine its relevance, test its loopholes and check its viability.
It also allows us to question the facts and check their objectivity and provides a way to reinterpret the past facts and develop further understanding.
Some scholars have opposed the concept of historical generalisation, stating that generalisation cannot be made in history as the facts of the past cannot be directly viewed.
As history is not repeated, so generalisation is impossible and the future cannot be accurately anticipated.
While other belief history proves broad principles, displays common trends, patterns and tendencies, where history repeats itself and historians can generalise, that is feasible.
Conclusion
I consider FT is one of the best as it has an exemplary editor-in-chief who delivers the best that is available on that particular day to the readers, and other series of factors that make it a generalisation truth that The Fiji Times is widely accepted and read as one of the best dailies of Fiji.
Others may have a different opinion. In general, generalisation require an unbiased objective approach.
It inspires historians to discuss and debate on the issues, which is benef cial for history and history writing, as it helps the critic to give a fresh investigation and provide new directions of earlier generalisation by analysing the same facts or some other new facts.
It helps to understand the fundamental forces behind past events and assist historians to forecast the future. In a nutshell, generalisation helps us to debate and it assist in broadening one’s understanding of a topic/subject.
The lack of generalisation makes the historical facts only facts, and the purpose of using the past makes generalisation in the present to improve our future becomes futile.
- DR SAKUL KUNDRA is an assistant professor in history and acting head of school, School of Arts and Humanities, College of Humanities and Education, at Fiji National University. The views expressed are his own and not of this newspaper or his employer. For comments or suggestions, email. dr.sakulkundra@gmail.com
