The Who: Historical Actors

By now we should be recognizing that questions that once seemed simple (who, what, when, where) are far from that. Considerations about historical actors are equally complex. Historians must identify who or what are the historical actors that played a central role in shaping the time and topic under study. Historical actors more than likely are people, but sometimes they are things, such as organizations (including governments), demographic groups (such as laborers), or ideas (such as democracy).

As with the foci of historical studies, who a historian considers to be historical actors gives us a clue as to how the scholar sees the past. Are these individuals, or are the historical actors organizations or institutions, with a seeming life of their own beyond the persons who work within them? Sometimes the type of history indicates who can be historical actors. Social history and biography, for instance, usually see common people (individuals) as influential and important. Intellectual history sees ideas as shapers of societal norms and values (see also Chapter Five, Biography and Life Story Research).

In considering whom they study, historians often categorize the historical actors according to various demographic or sociological traits. This helps to define them as members of specific groups and to understand their place in society. The three key markers are race and ethnicity, class, and gender. By looking at individuals as members of these groups, historians can see patterns of social relations in society. Usually, but not always, people with shared characteristics have similar legal and social standing in society. For instance, until very recently (the twentieth century), women were all but excluded from certain professions; thus the concept of gender helps historians understand the economic and social opportunities and limits on women as a group, rather than just limits on specific individual women in society. Furthermore, historians argue that race and ethnicity, class, and gender are key to understanding how the past unfolds, and that those characteristics provide central ways to interpret history.

Race and ethnicity, class, and gender are not the only categories we consider about individuals and their social groups. Historians also may consider religious affiliations and sexual orientation. Clearly people may not fit easily into such groupings and they may belong to more than one group. Historians try to flesh out how social groups may influence the lives of these people. Sometimes they do, sometimes they do not; but by considering social categories, historians try to better understand people in the past. Remember, too, that historians may not be considering just individuals but groups, examining, for instance, the experiences of gay and lesbian teachers, or even organizations that advocate for special groups. Thus individuals or groups may be historical actors.

The power that historical actors have to shape society or policy is sometimes referred to as agency. However, historians are very cautious about ascribing a motive or even assigning responsibility for change. Historians tend to describe events or changes and only attribute cause or motive on the part of historical actors if there is clear and compelling evidence. What constitutes clear and compelling evidence? Direct reference in materials to actions someone ordered or took, or to beliefs someone held that led to the outcome, would be compelling.

Overwhelming evidence (numerous documents that point to a certain historical actor) also would argue for cause or motive. Simple correlation (a rise in women's employment and a concurrent rise in divorce rates) would not indicate that one caused the other; it would be a basic correlation, but not causation. To clarify, a correlation simply indicates that when one thing happens (for instance, an increase in the daily average temperature in the Northeast from April through September), another thing happens (emergency room visits increase). Rising temperatures do not cause more accidents requiring emergency room visits. The rise in the number of bicycle or skateboard accidents—outdoor activities that increase in warm weather—do cause a rise in emergency room visits. Thus there is a correlation between warm weather and emergency room visits, but warm weather is not a cause; there is no causation. Historians are interested in correlation, but should never assume causation. Good historical research will consider all relevant sources of information, weigh the facts, and show any evidence of causation or motive, if indeed it is evident.