On The Historiography Of Eric Foner

Eric Foner is one of the most distinguished historians in contemporary America,who especially well-known for his study on the history of the Civil War and the Southern Reconstruction,as well as the politic and culture of American.Moreover,as an academic scholar,he also actively involves in public practice.Through these actions,he not only narrowed the gap between the professional historiography and public history,but also brought some new vitality for American history.This dissertation discusses three aspects: the history of the Civil War and the Southern Reconstruction,the change of American freedom,and history practice,with the aim to discuss the historical thoughts and practice of Foner,which in order to demonstrate his unique techniques and excellent achievements of historiography.This dissertation divides into three parts,the forward,the main text and the concluding remark,among the main-text contains five chapters.Now,the following is the primary content of each chapter:The first chapter investigates the historical background,academic origin and life environment of Eric Foner.It is necessary to understand the formation and development of his historical thoughts.The depart point of the second chapter is historical ontology.It decodes Foner’ s historical view on the Civil War,the Reconstruction and the freedomism.As we all know,“freedom” and “equality” occupies an important position in Foner’ s thoughts.Through exploring these issues so that we can deepen our understanding and cognition of American’s democracy,which is the western capitalism model today.Chapter three,as an famous historian in the Civil War and the Reconstruction field,Eric Foner also makes an effort in the contemporary American historiography,including contribution to “fragmentation” in American history and public history.The forth chapter treats Foner’ s historical epistemology and methodology,attempts to explore the details of his distinct historical cognition and writing methods.Chapter five,I concentrate on contributions and defects of his historiography.