How This Archive Works
Methodology
Humanity Files is built on a single premise: claims about history should be traceable to evidence. This page explains how.
How Cases Are Selected
Humanity Files documents crises that occurred in the Western world, were committed by Western states and institutions, or developed through influential Western political, social, scientific, economic and philosophical systems. A case is added when it meets three conditions: it is historically significant, it is documented by credible primary or scholarly sources, and it illustrates a traceable relationship between an idea, an institution, a policy, and a human consequence.
Humanity Files documents actions by particular people, governments, institutions and movements. It does not assign collective guilt to nationalities, ethnicities, religions or civilizations.
The project focuses heavily on Western history, but does not claim that cruelty, exploitation or mass violence are unique to the West. The scope is a deliberate editorial focus, not a claim of exclusivity.
Source Hierarchy
Where sources conflict, Humanity Files gives greater weight to sources higher on this list:
- Court judgments
- Legislation
- Official government archives
- Declassified government documents
- National archives
- International organizations
- Parliamentary / congressional investigations
- University archives
- Peer-reviewed research
- Major museums and historical institutions
- Scholarly books
- Reputable investigative journalism
- Testimony — presented as testimony, not as established fact
- Secondary journalism
- Disputed or unverified material — included only when clearly labeled
Preferred institutions, where relevant to a case, include:
- U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (NARA)
- The National Archives (UK)
- Library of Congress
- Smithsonian Institution
- United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
- United Nations and its agencies
- International Committee of the Red Cross
- National and government historical offices
- National museums
- University archives
- Peer-reviewed academic journals
- Official commissions and public inquiries
Evidence Status Labels
Every File displays a plain-language evidence status. These labels appear throughout the archive:
Primary government, court, or archival records are directly available for this case.
Reputable sources disagree about whether one factor actually caused an outcome, even where the outcome itself is not in dispute.
The facts are largely settled, but historians disagree about how to interpret motive, intent, responsibility or significance.
The page exists as a structured shell. Content is being researched and has not yet been published as a complete File.
Historical Uncertainty & Casualty Estimates
Casualty and impact figures are rarely exact. Where a File cites a number, it is presented as an estimate with a range, attributed to a named source, alongside an explanation of why reputable estimates vary. Humanity Files does not select whichever available figure is most dramatic; where multiple reputable estimates exist, they are shown side by side.
Allegations vs. Convictions
Humanity Files draws a firm line between an established legal fact and an allegation. Every File and profile distinguishes, where applicable, between a person who was convicted, charged,accused, a witness, an associate, someone merelymentioned in a document, and a disputed claim.
This distinction matters most in cases involving unsealed civil records, flight logs, contact books, and similar documents that name many people. Appearance of a person's name in a contact book, flight log, photograph, testimony, court filing, or released government record does not by itself establish criminal conduct. Humanity Files never implies criminal guilt from proximity or association alone.
Correlation vs. Causation
Social trends — marriage rates, fertility, family structure, community participation — have multiple, debated causes. Where Humanity Files documents a trend without scholarly consensus on its cause, the File is markedCausation Contested and presents competing explanations rather than adopting one.
Political Neutrality & Philosophical Interpretation
Humanity Files does not advance a partisan political position. Ideas are presented as their originators argued them, distinguished from later interpretation, distortion, or selective use. A "Do Not Confuse" feature appears throughout the site specifically to prevent an idea from being collapsed into its worst historical misapplication — see, for instance, the distinction between an idea and its distortion.
Corrections & Version History
Every File displays a "Last reviewed" date. Substantive factual corrections are logged publicly at/corrections/, with the version, date, the change made, and the reason for it.
How Disputed Claims Are Handled
Where historical causation is contested among reputable scholars, the File is labeledCausation Contested. Where the underlying facts are contested or interpretation diverges sharply along scholarly lines, the File is labeled Historical Interpretation Disputed. Neither label is a judgment about which side is correct — it is a signal to read the disputed-issues section before treating a claim as settled.