Final answer:
Historical context is crucial in analyzing historical narratives, providing the circumstances that influence interpretation. Scholarly methods for evaluating documentary sources, like considering author intent and background, drive the accuracy of such analyses. Strategically framing the argument using secondary evidence is essential to making a compelling case.
Step-by-step explanation:
When analyzing a historical narrative, it is indeed plausible to argue that historical context is a most critical factor. Historical context provides the circumstances - social, political, biographical, and cultural - that shape a particular event or person's actions, thus influencing how we should interpret their importance and impact. For example, examining the social context of Gwendolyn Brooks's poem 'We Real Cool' helps us understand the deeper implications of the narrative within the framework of the society and time it was written.
Methods used by Miner and other scholars like the evaluation of author, audience, intent, and context allow for a detailed and accurate interpretation of primary sources. This approach ensures that one grasitates the narrative by engaging with the extensive background of the text. The understanding of competing narratives and the way historians use documentary sources to provide numerous perspectives is integral to grasping the full scope of historical analysis.
In constructing an argument, one must be selective and frame the analysis strategically. Providing too much information might dilute the thesis, while too little may leave the reader uninformed. Hence, the use of secondary source evidence to make a logical and compelling case is vital. In agreement with the museum's decision to remove the statue, the careful selection of what is included in our analysis can both highlight the reasons for admiration and address potential failings, leading to a thorough understanding.