Sejarah sezaman

Sejarah sezaman, dalam historiografi bahasa Inggeris, adalah subset sejarah moden yang menggambarkan tempoh sejarah dari kira-kira 1945 hingga sekarang.^[1] Istilah "sejarah kontemporari" telah digunakan sekurang-kurangnya sejak awal abad ke-19.^[2]

Garis masa sunting

Rujukan sunting

^ Brivati, Brian (1996). "Introduction". Dalam Brivati, Brian; Buxton, Julia; Seldon, Anthony (penyunting). The contemporary history handbook (ed. 1st). Manchester: Manchester University Press. m/s. xvi. ISBN 9780719048364.
^ For example, Edinburgh review, Volume 12 (1808) p. 480 (cf., There is this general distinction between contemporary history and all other history, —that the former is a witness, the latter a judge. The opinions of a contemporary author on the events which he records, are only then authority, when the impression made on a bystander happens to be a material part of the case; nor is this any exception to the maxim, that his business is to testify, not to lecture. On facts, however, he is paramount evidence; and that, not only in the age immediately succeeding him, but also, which is generally forgotten, to the latest times. The modern historian, who consults original authorities through the-medium of some later predecessor, descends from the character of a judge to that of a faithful reporter of decisions.)

Pautan luar sunting

Kategori berkenaan Sejarah sezaman di Wikimedia Commons
The Philosophical Gourmet Report's description of "Analytic" and "Continental" philosophy^{[pautan mati kekal]}

[1] Brivati, Brian (1996). "Introduction". Dalam Brivati, Brian; Buxton, Julia; Seldon, Anthony (penyunting). The contemporary history handbook (ed. 1st). Manchester: Manchester University Press. m/s. xvi. ISBN 9780719048364.

[2] For example, Edinburgh review, Volume 12 (1808) p. 480 (cf., There is this general distinction between contemporary history and all other history, —that the former is a witness, the latter a judge. The opinions of a contemporary author on the events which he records, are only then authority, when the impression made on a bystander happens to be a material part of the case; nor is this any exception to the maxim, that his business is to testify, not to lecture. On facts, however, he is paramount evidence; and that, not only in the age immediately succeeding him, but also, which is generally forgotten, to the latest times. The modern historian, who consults original authorities through the-medium of some later predecessor, descends from the character of a judge to that of a faithful reporter of decisions.)

[1]

[2]