There is no official definition of what is and is not “real history.” The definition of “real history,” then, can differ from historian to historian. My own view is that real history is not what happened and when, but rather why things happened and what impacts they have had.
Some people think of history as a series of names and dates. This is one reason why history tends to be unpopular among students. I do...
There is no official definition of what is and is not “real history.” The definition of “real history,” then, can differ from historian to historian. My own view is that real history is not what happened and when, but rather why things happened and what impacts they have had.
Some people think of history as a series of names and dates. This is one reason why history tends to be unpopular among students. I do not think of this as real history. I do not, for example, think that real history is knowing that WWII happened from 1941 to 1945 for the United States. Instead, real history has to do with why WWII came about and how it impacted people in the short and long terms.
There are also other disputes about what constitutes real history. Some people believe that real history should concentrate on the doings of the elites. These are the people who hold government office or who run important businesses. This school of thought holds that these are the people who actually affect history. By contrast, others believe that real history has to do with the stories of the masses of people who make up the vast majority of human society. I do not have a strong position of my own on this issue.
There are, then, different ways to define “real history.” Perhaps you should ascertain what your instructor thinks on this topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment