The trouble with History

Discussion in 'Historiography' started by Gerard, Jan 21, 2010.

  1. Gerard

    Gerard Seelow/Prora

    Just read this article by Antulio Echeverria about how History can be used to "prove anything or its contrary": http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/parameters/05summer/echevarr.pdf

    He makes a fairly telling statement when he says "History, contrary to popular assumption, is not the past. The terms
    are commonly, but incorrectly, used interchangeably. The past, simply put, is
    what happened. History, in contrast, is the historian’s interpretation of what
    happened."

    Anyways enjoy the article.
     
  2. Oldman

    Oldman Very Senior Member

    It is your take on events.
    Remembering that if there you see a small part of the big picture you are involved in at the time, afterwards perceptions may change and views will always differ from person to person even as they are actually writing the pages of history in battle..

    A common remark in threads I have read on this forum is "I was" or "we were" from the veterens or accounts already written in documents this give their view at the time or as a memory.

    We are all great historians as we have the great advantage of hindsight, and can or could mould the facts to our thoughts or beliefs, no matter hoe impartial we try to be we end up erring on onside or the other..

    Was not the Tolstoy court case about this or a similar issue.
    A perception of history?
     
    CL1 likes this.
  3. Smudger Jnr

    Smudger Jnr Our Man in Berlin

    It is your take on events.
    Remembering that if there you see a small part of the big picture you are involved in at the time, afterwards perceptions may change and views will always differ from person to person even as they are actually writing the pages of history in battle..

    A common remark in threads I have read on this forum is "I was" or "we were" from the veterens or accounts already written in documents this give their view at the time or as a memory.

    We are all great historians as we have the great advantage of hindsight, and can or could mould the facts to our thoughts or beliefs, no matter hoe impartial we try to be we end up erring on onside or the other..

    Was not the Tolstoy court case about this or a similar issue.
    A perception of history?


    I think you hit the nail on the head. It really is all about a persons perception.

    Preconcieved ideas etc all go towards differing views of the same incident as witnessed by different people.

    This is why it is always better to read several books on a subject rather than just one.

    If everyone all thought the same and liked the same things life would become boring.

    Regards
    Tom
     
  4. James Daly

    James Daly Senior Member

    Ah historiography, good stuff :D

    I used to hate it at uni, I just wanted to get my hands dirty with records and things. I'm glad I did it though, it makes you think a lot more critically about things. I guess when you're a booze addled 18 year old it tends to tie you up in knots :p

    Its a whole school of history in itself - objectivity, selection, bias, truth, memory, class, gender, economics, race... there are plenty of historians out there who never touch any documents at all but only write about the theory of history.

    I know people tend to think that its all a load of claptrap and its not got anything to do with military history, but look at the Irving/Lippstadt case, and then read 'In Defence of History' by Richard Evans. Its very thought provoking indeed.

    If anyone wants to follow up on Historiography, the standard texts are 'What is History?' by EH Carr, 'Rethinking History' by Keith Jenkins and 'The pursuit of History' by John Tosh.
     
  5. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Hot air manufacturer

    I'll have fries with that!
     
  6. idler

    idler GeneralList

    'The pursuit of History' by John Tosh.

    That name must have livened up the historiography lectures a bit.
     
  7. James Daly

    James Daly Senior Member

    That name must have livened up the historiography lectures a bit.

    especially when one of our lecturers told us 'my tutor was Tosh' :lol:

    I can remember reading esteemed authors such as George Rude and John Beaglehole too.
     
  8. von Poop

    von Poop Adaministrator Admin

    If anyone wants to follow up on Historiography, the standard texts are 'What is History?' by EH Carr, 'Rethinking History' by Keith Jenkins and 'The pursuit of History' by John Tosh.

    And Elton's reply to Carr: 'The Practice of History'.
    My compulsory uni module was actually called "The Trouble with History"... Some of those books send shivers up me... Grim... often incredibly tedious, but worthwhile.
     
  9. Alan Allport

    Alan Allport Senior Member

    The American scholar David Hackett Fischer's book Historians' Fallacies is a marvellous introduction to the methodogical problems of history. Fischer is a witty and imaginative writer who uses practical examples from the work of other historians to analyse classic problems such as causality and the Snark-like hunt for 'objectivity.'

    Best, Alan
     
  10. James Daly

    James Daly Senior Member

    And Elton's reply to Carr: 'The Practice of History'.
    My compulsory uni module was actually called "The Trouble with History"... Some of those books send shivers up me... Grim... often incredibly tedious, but worthwhile.

    My course was very sociology-laden in the second year, full of stuff about race and Empire in the late 19th Century... all sorts of stuff about 'the beating heart of the savage' and such like.

    Has there ever really been much written about the historiography of military history? I can recall a couple of articles in the RUSI Journal a few years about about 'the uses of military history', but nothing any meatier than that. It can be a tedious subject but it does have the effect of sharpening your mind beyond just thinking about what-happened-when.
     
  11. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer Pearl Harbor Myth Buster

    'History is the past retold with "modern" biases.'
     
  12. Alan Allport

    Alan Allport Senior Member

    Has there ever really been much written about the historiography of military history?

    Jeremy Black's Rethinking Military History and Stephen Morillo's What Is Military History? are good in this regard. Then there is John Lynn's Battle, which tests a number of stock assumptions about military history using practical test cases.

    Best, Alan
     

Share This Page