People don’t learn things in isolation, but in relationship to other things. Historians are no different. The third category of historical thinking skills reflects the ways historians make sense of the past by placing particulars in some larger framework. For example, they understand historical events and processes by comparing them to related events and processes to see how they’re similar and different. Second, historians recognize that historical evidence, including artifacts, photographs, and speeches, can only be adequately understood by knowing something about their context—that is, the time and place where they came into existence.

Comparison

Comparisons help world historians understand how a development in the past was similar to or different from another development and in this way determine what was distinctive about it. For example, through comparative study, scholars have concluded that empires that developed over the last two thousand years share key features. First, rulers have to legitimize their rule through religious or ideological traditions. Second, they have to maintain political unity by dealing with people on the peripheries of the empire. Finally, since empires develop by conquering other people groups, empires have to deal with ethnic diversity.

But while these patterns hold true for all empires, each one addresses these challenges in its own way. The Ottoman Empire justified its rule through Turkish tradition as well as Islamic belief. It rewarded loyal elites on the margins of the empire through tax breaks. And it dealt with minorities by creating the millet system (whereby Ottoman subjects were divided into religious communities ruled by their religious leaders). Through the tool of comparison we understand how Ottoman rulers handled common problems in unique ways.

As you develop this skill, practice comparing two nations that existed at the same time—like the Ottoman and Mughal Empires—and also compare the same government at two different points in time. For example, how was government in Song China similar to—and different from—government in Tang China? Be sure that the two things you’re comparing are relatively similar, or else the comparison doesn’t make much sense. For example, historians of China have pointed out that when looking at economic development in early modern China, it is better to compare that large country to developments in all of Europe rather than to tiny England only.

Contextualization

Just as historical events make more sense when they’re studied alongside similar events, historians know that any event can only be understood in “context.” Context refers to the historical circumstances surrounding a particular event. World historians look for major global developments in any era to help determine context. They typically think in terms of two levels of context: an immediate (or short-term) context and a broad (or long-term) context.

The easiest way to begin thinking about context is to figure out when a particular event (or document) took place. Then brainstorm the major developments of the era. Ask yourself, “How might these larger events have shaped this event (or document)?” For example, when reading Document 20.1 by the leader of Nazi Germany, Adolph Hitler, note that it was written in 1925–1926. What were the major immediate geopolitical developments of the mid-1920s? World War I had ended relatively recently when Hitler wrote Mein Kampf, and many Germans were unhappy with the terms of the Treaty of Versailles that had ended that conflict. Thus, you can count on the treaty and Germany’s reaction to it being important to understanding Hitler’s work. In the 1930s, Hitler came to power in Germany under an explicit goal of repudiating the Versailles Treaty and restoring Germany’s military might. This context is crucial for understanding Germany’s support for Hitler and the Nazi program.