DS Forums

 
 

History; Fact of Fiction?


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 27-12-2016, 12:10
Flash525
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,798

History is something that we all hear about, and are taught about in schools. Some people even take a profession in it through study and research, but I was thinking over Christmas (which is still, I guess, ongoing), how much of history that is actually true?

We've all heard the phrase history is written by the victor, and for a good portion of history, that's true. WW1 & WW2 will always be remembered Evil Germany, but ultimately I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days. We're told about all the terror and torture they undertook, but you can bet the allied forces undertook some of their own.

We're always hearing about the trouble coming out of the middle east, but now what (some) of our troops get up to over there (though a few stories have come out which don't paint them in a very good light).

You can take an ancient tablet, scroll, book or whatever and translate it, but that translation is only a translation of one persons account (or in some cases, opinion) of events. I'd say that photographic or video evidence is the only true source of proof, but firstly that wasn't available back 1000, 2000, 5000 years ago, and secondly, in our present day and age, photos and videos can be edited to add/remove content.

How much of History can (or should?) realistically be thought of as fact? A few significant events maybe? The Dinosaurs dying, the death of Caesar, the rebellion of Spartacus, the Hiroshima Bomb, the attack on Pearl Harbor, 9/11, but what transpired at all these events, as far as history is concerned shouldn't be taught (or thought) as complete truth, surely?
Flash525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 27-12-2016, 12:30
Raquelos.
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 6,745
I have always found that the interesting thing about history is that there is rarely one accepted version of the facts. Sure at GCSE level you just get taught the most 'accepted version' of events, but even at A level a lot of time was spent on how reliable various contemporary sources of information were. (I studied medieval history at A level so the answer was always that they were bloody unreliable)

That said there are some events that we have enough info on that we can make reasonably certain statements about them. The more ancient the events the more scant the evidence we have to work with. However, the more modern the event the more likely we are to lack objectivity about it regardless of the evidence.

Conclusion: only ever believe history conditionally
Raquelos. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2016, 12:58
mushymanrob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,740
History is something that we all hear about, and are taught about in schools. Some people even take a profession in it through study and research, but I was thinking over Christmas (which is still, I guess, ongoing), how much of history that is actually true?

We've all heard the phrase history is written by the victor, and for a good portion of history, that's true. WW1 & WW2 will always be remembered Evil Germany, but ultimately I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days. We're told about all the terror and torture they undertook, but you can bet the allied forces undertook some of their own.

We're always hearing about the trouble coming out of the middle east, but now what (some) of our troops get up to over there (though a few stories have come out which don't paint them in a very good light).

You can take an ancient tablet, scroll, book or whatever and translate it, but that translation is only a translation of one persons account (or in some cases, opinion) of events. I'd say that photographic or video evidence is the only true source of proof, but firstly that wasn't available back 1000, 2000, 5000 years ago, and secondly, in our present day and age, photos and videos can be edited to add/remove content.

How much of History can (or should?) realistically be thought of as fact? A few significant events maybe? The Dinosaurs dying, the death of Caesar, the rebellion of Spartacus, the Hiroshima Bomb, the attack on Pearl Harbor, 9/11, but what transpired at all these events, as far as history is concerned shouldn't be taught (or thought) as complete truth, surely?
erm.... evidence?... some things are quite easy to prove beyond all reasonable doubt, other things arent. but like any science, its only as accurate as the current evidence suggests.

many historical events have been re-appraised and altered as new evidence is discovered.

so yes, they should be taught as 'the truth' when there is no reasonable doubt about an event. where there is some doubt, phrases like 'this is what we believe to have happened' would be correct.
mushymanrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2016, 13:22
swingaleg
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 76,816
I have a History degree and a Masters and was particularly interested for a time in Historiography, which is the branch of history that studies how history is written, ie the history of History............which is fascinating, honest.

As a general rule History is the story of the past, the interpretation of historical evidence, written and otherwise, as seen through the prism of current thought

So for example 19th century English historians were inordinately proud of the 'English' parliamentary democracy as the apogee of human achievement and they tend to write history through the prism of the establishment of Parliament against royal power, it's mainly political and administrative development.

Then later you had the huge influence of the Marxist economic analysis of society and historians tended to write history as much more based on the economic structure and relationships between classes

So for example the establishment of parliament might now be seen as a consequence of 'the rise of the Middle Class' and the class struggle between the middle class and the aristocracy

Each generation has their own pre-occupation and they revisit history in the light of that and re-write it from their contemporary perspective

Nowadays the writing of history is no longer confined to a small academic elite and we have numerous histories throwing light on the past. For example the growth of Feminism from the 1960s onwards led to an explosion of 'Women's History' .......looking at the role of women in society which had largely been ignored.

The other thing to bear in mind is the huge explosion of university education churning out students looking for 'new' topics to do their PHD's on............ one result of this is a massive growth of 'local history' . The recognition that for example the Civil War took place in thousands of towns of villages and each has their own particular story which can shed light on the national story. The same for every other period of history.

Another aspect of this is the horizontal spreading of what historians write about. Women's History would be an example of this but also esoteric things like the history of Chairs which someone will no doubt be writing about and trying to draw some conclusions about Society from the development of the chair
swingaleg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27-12-2016, 14:46
Chris Frost
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Cheshire
Posts: 6,450
History is something that we all hear about, and are taught about in schools. Some people even take a profession in it through study and research, but I was thinking over Christmas (which is still, I guess, ongoing), how much of history that is actually true?

We've all heard the phrase history is written by the victor, and for a good portion of history, that's true. WW1 & WW2 will always be remembered Evil Germany, but ultimately I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days. We're told about all the terror and torture they undertook, but you can bet the allied forces undertook some of their own.
Very few people study history beyond school leaving age, and so the syllabus is geared towards teaching facts for GCSE to make it easier to standardise exam answers and the marks they receive. The kids are taught to check multiple sources especially when referencing internet for information, but if all the books say the same thing then what can you do? e.g Who discovered America.... Columbus, Vespucci or a bunch of drunken Vikings 500 years earlier playing 'last on to fall off the edge of the world is a sissy ' ? The kids aren't taught to question everything because the syllabus doesn't have the scope to deal with that.

You can take an ancient tablet, scroll, book or whatever and translate it, but that translation is only a translation of one persons account (or in some cases, opinion) of events. I'd say that photographic or video evidence is the only true source of proof, but firstly that wasn't available back 1000, 2000, 5000 years ago, and secondly, in our present day and age, photos and videos can be edited to add/remove content.
One doesn't even need to doctor photos and video. Just shooting from a certain angle can change the viewers interpretation of what's going on. Here's a good example. It's the Guardian "Points of View" advert from 1986: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SsccRkLLzU
Chris Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 10:53
mushymanrob
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: derby
Posts: 14,740
I have a History degree and a Masters and was particularly interested for a time in Historiography, which is the branch of history that studies how history is written, ie the history of History............which is fascinating, honest.

As a general rule History is the story of the past, the interpretation of historical evidence, written and otherwise, as seen through the prism of current thought

So for example 19th century English historians were inordinately proud of the 'English' parliamentary democracy as the apogee of human achievement and they tend to write history through the prism of the establishment of Parliament against royal power, it's mainly political and administrative development.

Then later you had the huge influence of the Marxist economic analysis of society and historians tended to write history as much more based on the economic structure and relationships between classes

So for example the establishment of parliament might now be seen as a consequence of 'the rise of the Middle Class' and the class struggle between the middle class and the aristocracy

Each generation has their own pre-occupation and they revisit history in the light of that and re-write it from their contemporary perspective

Nowadays the writing of history is no longer confined to a small academic elite and we have numerous histories throwing light on the past. For example the growth of Feminism from the 1960s onwards led to an explosion of 'Women's History' .......looking at the role of women in society which had largely been ignored.

The other thing to bear in mind is the huge explosion of university education churning out students looking for 'new' topics to do their PHD's on............ one result of this is a massive growth of 'local history' . The recognition that for example the Civil War took place in thousands of towns of villages and each has their own particular story which can shed light on the national story. The same for every other period of history.

Another aspect of this is the horizontal spreading of what historians write about. Women's History would be an example of this but also esoteric things like the history of Chairs which someone will no doubt be writing about and trying to draw some conclusions about Society from the development of the chair
indeed history is not being written solely by historians..

as a metal detectorist there is a self taught group who created a finds database. these amateurs have interpreted finds, catalogued them, and furthered the understanding of ordinary metallic artifacts.

i myself am discovering the history of 2 of my sites i detect, the way settlement moved, and making educated guesses at what the land / site was used for by understanding and identifying the finds i make - most of which are broken/incomplete which makes identification harder.
mushymanrob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 11:22
Jellied Eel
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 31,678
indeed history is not being written solely by historians..
Cool thing about the modern age is history's more accessable to the curious than ever before. So a while back, I stumbled across this, in connection with Thanksgiving-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Of_Plymouth_Plantation

A journal written by the Plymouth colony's 2nd Governor. For a while, it was lost on account of being culturally appropriated by a British squaddie, but then found. And now available online-

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/24950

In a variety of convenient formats. Or there's a version from the 1800s that was scanned from Harvard's library by Google. Which means proper historians may not get as many air miles going to study dusty manuscripts in libraries, but curious types like me can read it and poke fun at lefty socialist Americans. The colony started out with lofty socialist ideals, but soon ran into problems with the division of labor, but after introducing a bit of capitalism.. survived.
Jellied Eel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 12:20
Aetius_Maralas
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 719
History is something that we all hear about, and are taught about in schools. Some people even take a profession in it through study and research, but I was thinking over Christmas (which is still, I guess, ongoing), how much of history that is actually true?

We've all heard the phrase history is written by the victor, and for a good portion of history, that's true. WW1 & WW2 will always be remembered Evil Germany, but ultimately I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days. We're told about all the terror and torture they undertook, but you can bet the allied forces undertook some of their own.

We're always hearing about the trouble coming out of the middle east, but now what (some) of our troops get up to over there (though a few stories have come out which don't paint them in a very good light).

You can take an ancient tablet, scroll, book or whatever and translate it, but that translation is only a translation of one persons account (or in some cases, opinion) of events. I'd say that photographic or video evidence is the only true source of proof, but firstly that wasn't available back 1000, 2000, 5000 years ago, and secondly, in our present day and age, photos and videos can be edited to add/remove content.

How much of History can (or should?) realistically be thought of as fact? A few significant events maybe? The Dinosaurs dying, the death of Caesar, the rebellion of Spartacus, the Hiroshima Bomb, the attack on Pearl Harbor, 9/11, but what transpired at all these events, as far as history is concerned shouldn't be taught (or thought) as complete truth, surely?
Bolded part -

A standard line by Holocaust deniers.

Just saying...
Aetius_Maralas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 12:35
MAW
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,525
Bolded part -

A standard line by Holocaust deniers.

Just saying...
Given the history of DS, that was my first thought too.
MAW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 14:08
Flash525
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,798
A standard line by Holocaust deniers.
Well to put your mind at ease, I don't deny the Holocaust.

I'll reply to the larger posts later when I've more time.
Flash525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 14:23
Watcher #1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Here <-------------
Posts: 6,644
I always find the 'facts' of history (this thing happened) are less open to interpretation than the narrative that is overlaid, and that the impact of the individual is often overstated. Mostly because a good story makes the whole thing more interesting
Watcher #1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 14:23
RobinOfLoxley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Devon
Posts: 12,838
History is Bunk

(it is fascinating too, of course)
RobinOfLoxley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 14:34
Dan Fortesque
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 25,820
Bolded part -

A standard line by Holocaust deniers.

Just saying...
I think the poster probably just meant that bad things the allied military might have done were glossed over. Same with regards to the blitz. No-one ever hears much of the dead being robbed and such like.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/...urish-blackout
Dan Fortesque is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 15:14
MAW
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,525
Well to put your mind at ease, I don't deny the Holocaust.

I'll reply to the larger posts later when I've more time.
Just pointing out that you can take things too far. There are historical facts, and there are historical theories, and there's legends. Making sure you know what type of history you are dealing with is important. A trip to the battlegrounds of WW1 and 2, and taking in the death camps is something anyone who can afford it should do, for instance. You can, like doubting Thomas himself, stick your fingers in the wounds. The rationale behind it is less clear, perhaps.
MAW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 16:05
Arcana
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 🖥⌨🖱
Posts: 29,243
Rightly or wrongly I tend to bracket history with other humanities characterised by methods which are primarily critical or speculative in nature.

As long as students are aware of the different categories of academic discipline and where history fits, I don't see why there should be a problem.
Arcana is offline Follow this poster on Twitter   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 16:17
Laurel1ne
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London Town
Posts: 160
History is something that we all hear about, and are taught about in schools. Some people even take a profession in it through study and research, but I was thinking over Christmas (which is still, I guess, ongoing), how much of history that is actually true?

We've all heard the phrase history is written by the victor, and for a good portion of history, that's true. WW1 & WW2 will always be remembered Evil Germany, but ultimately I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days. We're told about all the terror and torture they undertook, but you can bet the allied forces undertook some of their own.
One great aspect of the modern digital age is that we're no-longer confined to one country's view of the news, we can find-out what the UK thinks. We can easily see how the same "truth" is viewed in Germany, France, the USA, Russia, the Middle East, China and Japan

Also History isn't just written by the victor, but it's also written by the loser too. If you can speak a few other languages over the past year it's been interesting to read a few books published in Germany and Austria over their analysis of the First World War.

As someone who grew up with Dutch Parents but mainly German Grandparents I never viewed the First World War as "Evil Germany" it was a war in which my Grandfather's fought and that the British Empire were equally as bad as all the others

And as for I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days there were just as many good Germans in both wars as there were on the Allied Side
Laurel1ne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 16:39
MAW
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,525
The unfortunate thing about the digital age is the amount of deliberately untrue 'facts' and stories to be found on the wonderful www, let alone the number of morally and intellectually bankrupt interpretations.
MAW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 17:05
andy1231
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,464
The problem with history is that the further back in time you go, the more history becomes myths and legends.. An example is the Trojan wars and the fall of Troy, some historians now believe this (the fall of Troy) never took place but I would guess that most people believe it is true.
andy1231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 17:45
RobinOfLoxley
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Devon
Posts: 12,838
No horse!!???

Devs
RobinOfLoxley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28-12-2016, 22:51
Keyser_Soze1
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,185
indeed history is not being written solely by historians..

as a metal detectorist there is a self taught group who created a finds database. these amateurs have interpreted finds, catalogued them, and furthered the understanding of ordinary metallic artifacts.

i myself am discovering the history of 2 of my sites i detect, the way settlement moved, and making educated guesses at what the land / site was used for by understanding and identifying the finds i make - most of which are broken/incomplete which makes identification harder.
Is this you and your mate?

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/images/ic/480x270/p027q4n1.jpg
Keyser_Soze1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 15:37
Flash525
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucestershire, England
Posts: 4,798
erm.... evidence?... some things are quite easy to prove beyond all reasonable doubt, other things arent. but like any science, its only as accurate as the current evidence suggests.
But can some evidence not be kept back? Just because there is proof of something, doesn't necessarily mean it's widely acknowledged, shared, or accepted.

One great aspect of the modern digital age is that we're no-longer confined to one country's view of the news, we can find-out what the UK thinks. We can easily see how the same "truth" is viewed in Germany, France, the USA, Russia, the Middle East, China and Japan.
Aren't we? The media (where we typically get our news from) reports on what it deems to be important, and that isn't necessarily what needs to be reported.

As someone who grew up with Dutch Parents but mainly German Grandparents I never viewed the First World War as "Evil Germany" it was a war in which my Grandfather's fought and that the British Empire were equally as bad as all the others.

And as for I suspect there were a lot of good Germans back in those days there were just as many good Germans in both wars as there were on the Allied Side
This was my point. How often do you hear about the atrocities by the Allied troops, compared to those of Axis troops? In my lifetime, regarding WW1 & WW2, everything I've ever been taught has painted the Allies as all good, but (now) I find that hard to believe.

Just think back to those reports of European/American troops raping and torturing Afghan/Iraqi civilians; it's likely said incidents only came to light because a decent human being was present at the time, and decided to speak up. I dare not think of all those incidents that aren't reported.

War brings out the worst in some of the best people, and people will be subject too, and do things that they normally shouldn't have to endure.
Flash525 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 16:08
SULLA
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Black Country lad in Yorkshire
Posts: 118,047
The problem with history is that the further back in time you go, the more history becomes myths and legends.. An example is the Trojan wars and the fall of Troy, some historians now believe this (the fall of Troy) never took place but I would guess that most people believe it is true.
Or that it just wasn't as described by Homer
SULLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:05
Laurel1ne
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London Town
Posts: 160
Also History is written to reflect Societies views of the time, I'm sure British History pre-20th Century was written to show Britain's colonialism in a much better light than it was in late 20th Century Britain

Thus to believe History as a stable would be wrong, the facts remain but the interpretation of those facts change with each generation and hindsight
Laurel1ne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:10
andy1231
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,464
Several ancient poets and scholars wrote about the Trojan Horse including Virgil, Homer and Euripides but the "Horse" could also be a metaphor for something else, some suggest that it wasn't a statue of a horse at all but a battering ram with the carved head of a horse others that it was actually an earthquake that breached the walls and of course there were estimated to be at least Nine Troys more or less on the same site, Troy VII being of about the right age for the Trojan wars. Difficult to determine if the siege and fall of Troy was an actual historic event.
andy1231 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 29-12-2016, 17:12
Laurel1ne
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: London Town
Posts: 160
This was my point. How often do you hear about the atrocities by the Allied troops, compared to those of Axis troops? In my lifetime, regarding WW1 & WW2, everything I've ever been taught has painted the Allies as all good, but (now) I find that hard to believe.
.
This is discussed a lot more in Germany, this may be of interest

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...-a-692037.html

Brad Pitt's film "Fury" elicited more interest in the rape of German Women by American GI's

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...a-1021298.html
Laurel1ne is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:54.