Interpreting History: Causation and Ultimate Meaning
(Cause and Effect)

The third way of knowing history is "interpreting by hypothesizing cause-effect and by generalizing about the ultimate meaning of events and lives" (Hennings, 1993, p. 363). Hennings further argues that "a key organizing idea of history is that events influence subsequent events. In essence, history is a search for causes and for outcomes" (1993, p. 366). Like historians, students must learn to make interpretations as well. Strategies related to causation are divided into two topics: hypothesizing cause and effect and generalizing about the meaning of events.

Hypothesizing Cause and Effect

Some authors and lecturers explicitly indicate cause and effect relationships in history. Others only imply causal relationships, in which case it is up to students to recognize and specify causes and consequences. The following strategies aid in identification of causal relationships in history.

Look and listen for cue words and phrases that indicate cause-effect relationships. Develop a list of additional cues.

• causes, effects
• reasons, consequences
• result, as a result, resulted in
• lead to, brought about
• because, since
• therefore, hence
• consequently, ergo
• outcomes, and ramifications.

After identifying causal information, students may clarify the relationships by organizing the material using flow charts, webs, or hierarchies. These organizational aids are illustrated in the Information Organization section. A simple cause-effect map is shown below.

Hennings explains that "readers of history must learn to ask the key questions through which historians hypothesize causes and effects:

• 'What were the events leading up to X?
• Which of the events caused X to happen?
• What were outcomes and effects growing out of these events?'" (1993, p. 366).

Develop causal thinking skills by working individually or in groups to complete causal relationship maps, such as the template shown below. Events are first listed chronologically in the middle box. Then possible causes of or influences on the events are listed in the top box. Consequences or effects of the events are summarized in the bottom box (Hennings, 1993, p. 367).

When reading biographical histories, students should ask themselves the following key questions in order to develop their own hypotheses about cause and effect relationships.

• "'What were the influences upon this person that made him or her do what he or she did?
• What were the influences that made him or her become the kind of person he or she was?
• What effect did this person have on people and events of that time and of today?'" (Hennings, 1993, p. 366).

Students must be reminded or remind themselves that just because one event preceded another does not necessarily mean that the earlier event caused the later event. Consider the following key questions:

• "'Did the one event ... cause the second?
• What evidence do we have to support this hypothesis?
• What evidence suggests otherwise?'" (Hennings, 1993, p. 367).

Generalizing About the Meaning of Events

History students are encouraged "to analyze historical events for trends and recurring elements, to generalize based on the facts they read, and to consider the ultimate meaning, or significance, of events and lives about which they are reading" (Hennings, 1993, p. 367). The following strategies assist students in identifying patterns and forming generalizations.

Form generalizations about events by asking these key questions:

• "'What was the long-term significance of these events?
• What impact did these events have on people living then? Living today?
• What can we who are living today learn from the past?
• And taken together - as a whole - what do these events tell us about the way the world of people works?'" (Hennings, 1993, p. 368).

Form generalizations about key historical figures by asking these key questions:

• "'What was the ultimate significance of this person's life?
• What was the significance of his or her life for others living during that period and for us today?'" (Hennings, 1993, p. 367).

When generalizing about historical figures, distinguish between "eventful" and "event-making" people. Eventful people do not actually impact the course of history; important historical events would have occurred with or without them. Event-making people, on the other hand, affect history in ways that transcend their lives. In these terms, Queen Victoria of England is considered an eventful person with respect to the industrial revolution, because it would have occurred with any ruler. Lenin is an event-making person in Russian history because another person is unlikely to have had the same influence (Hook as cited in Hennings, 1993).

Historical facts must be organized before they are interpreted. Events may be grouped together and labeled; then the facts are used to form generalizations and to identify evidence supporting the generalizations. Hennings gives these examples:

• "This was essentially a period of westward migration.
• This was an era of conquest.
• This was a 160 year span of intense intolerance.
• This was a period when peoples of Eastern Europe threw off the yoke of Communism and sought freedom" (1993, p. 368).

The same can be done for event-making figures in history. Events in the person's life may be lumped and categorized. For example:

• "This was a period in his life when he became intensely interested in the world outside himself.
• This was the most productive period of her life" (Hennings, 1993, p. 368).

Authors often provide generalizations in the introductions and conclusions of their writings. Look at these sections of each chapter for explicit generalizations "that set forth the ultimate meaning of the events or the person about whom they are writing" (Hennings, 1993, p. 368). Students should look for these generalizations when previewing each chapter and review them after reading each chapter. Instructors may do the same thing during lectures as they preview and summarize major topics.

Generalizations should be supported by historical evidence. Connections between generalizations and evidence are usefully summarized using organizational aids, such as the template and specific example shown below (Hennings, 1993, p. 368)