History is universally accepted among people as the study of the past. However the past consists of everything that’s ever happened to anyone, anywhere, so why do we learn about specific people and events in school and not others? Well the simple answer to this question is because it would be impossible to learn everyone’s individual story, so as an avid historian we only focus on the core of history, and certain people/events that made a significant impact on humanity.
In class, to further our understanding on the study of history, we were introduced to six key concepts, each a different historical lens used to analyze the past, and we were tasked to create a presentation, in groups of 3-4, that showcased our learning on one of the six lenses. Historical lenses, or as I like to call them, historical learning concepts, are a means of analyzing history in different, interesting ways. By using historical lenses, we can achieve a better and more thorough understanding of historical events that happened long before we were born.
My group consisted of Tom, Alanah, Cashel, and myself, and we chose to present the concept of historical perspective, a term we were all some what familiar with from grade 11. In our presentation we included a detailed script, a keynote, and a tough Kahoot at the end to test the classes knowledge on the definition of historical perspective, and how it is used to analyze important historical events.
During each presentation we were tasked to take notes on one of the six historical lenses so that by the end of the week we would have a general understanding of each concept, and how to apply them to a historical event. The notes I took are imbedded below.
Historical Significance – What and who should be remembered in history
The process used to evaluate what was significant about past events and people. When evaluating historical significance there are three main questions you have to consider: how notable the event was at the time, how widespread and lasting the consequences of the event was, and if the event became symbolic or representative of key historical issues or trends. However, what may be deemed historically significant to some may not be to others.
Evidence and interpretation – Is the evidence adequate to support the conclusions reached?
Evidence and interpretation involves the use of reliable evidence, both primary and secondary sources, to help answer history. To help us with this we ask ourselves: can we trust the sources of information? Do the sources provide relevant evidence? And does the evidence support the interpretation offered?
Continuity and change – For each aspect of life, how have things stayed the same, and how have things changed?
When analyzing history to see how culture, lifestyle, land, and society has developed and advanced, we can come up with an accurate conclusion by looking at each aspect of life, how things have stayed the same, and how they have changed over time. When doing so, we must ask ourselves: were the continuities and changes positive or negative? And did any of these changes cause turning points in the course of history?
Cause and Consequence – What are the range of factors that contributed to the event?
Cause and consequence is representative of the actions leading up to a historical event and everything that happened after it. When analyzing cause and consequence we must ask ourselves: what are the range of factors that contributed to the event, would this event still have happened if these factors hadn’t occurred, and what were the intended and unintended consequences of the event.
Historical Perspective – Historical perspective involves viewing the past through the social, intellectual, and emotional lenses of the time in order to understand what life was like for those living then.
Understanding historical perspective is difficult as we cannot physically relive the past, and often times our views of history are clouded by our modern 21st century values. However, like any historical lens, there are a few easy steps to consider when looking to achieve a thorough historical perspective of an event. First you must consider what you know from present perspective, then identify the values and beliefs from when the event took place, and finally assimilate the information and determine whether your views of the past were influenced by the present evidence.
Ethical judgement – Is what happened right and fair?
When determining whether something is ethical or unethical, there are two main questions to consider: are ethical judgements included in the historical accounts you are studying, and if so do you agree with the judgements that are already made, and are the ethical judgements reasonable or justifiable. When analyzing historical events, you must also look for historical ethical judgements from all sides before coming up with your own opinions, although there is no right or wrong answer as each perspective differs.
Below is my visual representation of the six historical thinking concepts. I chose to make a mini mindmap because it not only showcases my learning of the historical thinking lenses, but it also demonstrates my level of understanding through the use of adequate historical examples and connection of thought.
Now to practice! Below is my detailed analysis of the moon landing of 1969 with the 6 historical lenses being applied.
Nearly 50 years ago, Neil Armstrong became the first man to walk on the moon, stating, “that’s one small step for man, one giant leap for man kind.” Up to that point going to the moon had been deemed unachievable, so still to this day it remains a historically significant moment in history for many reasons. At the time, the moon landing was extremely notable as it capped off a decade of conflict and brought great pride to Americans as a symbol of the Cold War. The moon landing served as a positive end of a turbulent decade that saw the civil rights protests, the Vietnam War and the assassination of major political leaders – John F Kennedy, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy. The moon landing also served as a major symbol of America’s resilience as a nation throughout the Cold War. They’d defeated the USSR in the decade long space race to the moon, and it was not only a significant achievement for Americans, but all of man kind. The sight of the first human to walk on the moon was broadcasted on television all over the world, and was an incredible moment that people were able to celebrate. It drew the largest television audience for any live event up until that time, and still today remains one of the highest achievements of humanity.
Neil Armstrong poising next to the American flag on the surface of the moon.
A newspaper article reporting the 1969 moon landing.
When discussing evidence and interpretation of the 1969 moon landing, many people believe it to be fake even though there’s a substantial amount of credible evidence that says otherwise. Shortly after the Apollo 11 mission, Austronauts, NASA, and other officials appeared in the news, and with the landing broadcasted all over the world on live television, people saw and read primary sources of the event. Photos, videos, and interviews, all helped to provide relevant evidence of the account, so it was reasonable to believe the interpretation offered that Neil Armstrong really was the first man on the moon, and the United States had won the space race. However, overtime people began to poke holes in the authenticity of the space footage, and ask questions that seemingly could not be answered, so many doubted that the Apollo 11 mission ever took place. Film critics claimed that Neil Armstrong never went to space and the entire broadcast was filmed in a studio, offering the interpretation that the U.S. staged the entire moon landing to trick the world into believing that they had won the decade long space race. In either case, depending on your opinion of the event, there’s relevant evidence to support either interpretation.
Taking place nearly 50 years ago, we can see how a significant event such as the moon landing influenced both change and continuity not just in the U.S but all around the world. Perhaps the biggest change that came about as a direct result of the space race was the rapid advancement in technology that followed the moon landing of 1969. Today the technology used in a smart phone is millions of times more powerful than the computing systems that NASA used to get to the moon. However, to further put this into perspective, a pocket calculator has more computing power than the computers that were used in the Apollo mission. Just think about that. Technology has come such a long way in such a short period of time. As for continuity, one thing that has not changed since the Apollo 11 mission is mans willingness to push the boundaries and achieve the seemingly unachievable. By the 1960s, we had had reached all corners of the globe, including the highest and farthest. The final frontier was to see life beyond the earth, the moon. Now in 2018, we have our sites set on Mars, and it won’t be long until man once again achieves the seemingly unachievable.
The outdated computing systems that put man on the moon.
When analyzing the cause and consequence of the 1969 moon landing, it’s tough to say that man would’ve ever made it to the moon without the mass funding and national pride that backed the competitive space race between the U.S and the USSR. There is no doubt that most of the motivation and funding for the space programme came from national pride, as neither country stood to gain much from walking on the moon. However, there was a strong rivalry between the Communist Soviet Union and the United States, and when the USSR made it into space in 1961, the space race ramped up as each country wanted to make it to the moon first. Like sport, the space race was a global competition, which spurred technological progress as a direct consequence, and later became a symbol for human achievement as an indirect consequence. The technological advances needed for the Apollo program accelerated innovations in rockets, computers and other space-age materials, but more importantly the first moon landing united people all around the world as over 600 million tuned in to watch the broadcast. People all around the world knew the importance of the events taking place, and put aside their differences to share the moment and celebrate the vast achievement at hand.
The Apollo 11 on the surface of the moon.
When analyzing the moon landing from a present perspective, you can’t help but admire the success of the mission. As I stated earlier, the computing systems that NASA used to get to the moon were less powerful than a pocket calculator, and yet they were still able to land on the moon and get home in one piece. When analyzing the moon landing from a past perspective, Americans felt an overwhelming sense of national pride to defeat the Soviets in the space race, and to be the first nation to land on the moon. During a decade where the social and political structure in the U.S was suffering through racial tension and times of war, people in the U.S, and all around the world, took a collective sigh of relief as it was “one small step for man, one giant leap for man kind.” Although many people in the United States disagreed at how much the government was spending to fund the space program during times of economic recession, it was an incredible moment in history that all Americans could celebrate.
Now that I’ve looked at the moon landing from both a past and present perspective, it’s easy for me to point out some errors in my pre existing historical perspective of the event. When I first learned about the Apollo 11 mission, I honestly underestimated the world wide reaction that people would have. For some reason I guess I didn’t view the moon landing as being the pivotal point in history that man ventured beyond earth. I thought of it as almost being almost easy and insignificant compared to that of going to Mars or anywhere else in space. Another aspect of the event that I never took into account was the lack of technology that NASA possessed at the time. It’s not only amazing that they made it to the moon, but it’s amazing that they made it to the moon in such a short amount of time with such little resources and sufficient technology.
Neil Armstrong on the moon.
When applying ethical judgment to the moon landing of 1969, it’s clear that there is no boundaries when it comes to the realm of ground breaking science. In order to put the first man and women into space, the soviets experimented by sending a dog by the name of Laika into orbit in 1957. The Soviets had no idea if humans could survive in space, so they used Laika as a test subject because the lives of animals are obviously deemed less important than humans. Laika died only a few days after landing back in orbit, and unfortunately many animals have suffered this same fate in the name of science, but that doesn’t make it right. Just because no social movement erupted around animal testing for the space program doesn’t mean that their lives are worthless, and just because we ended up actually making it to the moon doesn’t make it ethical either.
Lakai, the first dog to be sent into orbit.