Embedded Files
Volume 1 | Issue 7 - Theory
Article by Tom Casey. Edited by Rose Colville. Additional Research by Robyn Hall.
Why am I putting myself through this? What’s the point? These are the questions I tend to ask myself whilst writing essays, or during the long stints spent in the library revising forexaminations. I do however have a sneaky feeling that I am not alone in questioning why I chose to study history and endure the long hours of essay writing. Well fear not, this article shall explain why so that when you descend into those dark hours of last minute revision you can at least console yourself, safe in the knowledge that you are writing and studying for a just cause. History truly is important; as the Roman orator and philosopher Cicero once said, ‘history gives pleasure’ and ‘is actually useful,’ and if the wise, learned Roman said so, it must be true.
For centuries famous philosophers placed great emphasis on the beneficial aspects of delving into the past, yet it wasn’t until the nineteenth century that it became a professional area of study. Since then the debate has raged as to how historians should engage with the past and inform its audience.
In the second century the writer Lucian of Sanosata promoted the idea that the historian must be ‘fearless, incorruptible, free’ and ‘a friend of free expression.’ To summarise he stated that a historian should call ‘a fig a fig and a trough a trough;’ this call for impartiality was popular throughout much of the twentieth century. Lord Acton reiterating this belief that the historian must be a ‘free spirit, whose only concern is truth and stating the facts.’ Therefore those writing history should aim to tell a detailed and accurate account of previous events.
Fast-forward into the second part of the twentieth century and many new forms of history started to emerge. This new phase equated to a ‘modern view’ and departed from the traditional form of narrative. The postmodern thinker would be critical of the social, Marxist and Annales historians, with their histories concentrating on the relatively neglected lower classes, and the fact that much of their work seemed prejudiced to outline these unheard voices. It is important however to note that they have all been influential in how history is written today.
A further hallmark of this new form of history was adding to what had previously been written. Orientalist, gender and anthropological history, sought to provide a new perspective; drawing attention to those who had previously been cast aside and into in the shadows of historical analysis, with the white, European male often being the dominant narrator.
Such writing flourished amidst the upheaval of the 1960s, as repressed groups questioned the existing orders, history was not left unaffected. Since then, women, ethnic minorities and those based outside of Europe have rightfully addressed the one sided story found in the old history books. The overriding aim being to examine the existing chronicles by approaching history on a much smaller scale, in an attempt to question misconceptions and readdress what had become common knowledge, challenging ingrained paradigms.
Postmodernism is the most recent phenomenon and the intellectual climate that we now find ourselves, as historians have come to realise unlike those from the ‘old’ tradition that history could no longer be written objectively. Beverley Southgate stated that ‘it is now widely accepted that all history is inevitably ‘ideological.’ Undoubtedly influenced by the modern view of history, it is now common to realise that historians write with bias, and that it is necessary to accept this as inevitable. It is only after this has been acknowledged that we can make a concerted effort to curb these shortcomings, and remove the ideological preferences that have marred previous historical accounts.
Having provided a brief outline as to the debate on how historians should write about their topics, it is time to discuss the crux of the article. What are the uses of history? To cite a recent example much analysis has been used within the media surrounding the coverage of the general election. Now that a Liberal, Conservative coalition has been announced observers have instinctively looked to the past in an attempt to assess the likely success or failure of the coalition. This is a common method used; we seem instinctively compelled to predict likely outcomes, and history provides a seemingly obvious lens through which we can fuel these speculations. The election coverage has outlined an important use of history as we seek to learn from past experiences. Yet this ‘use’ requires a note of caution; whilst as we have been repeatedly told coalitions have failed in the past, John Tosh adds a significant detail that ‘no one historical situation has been, or ever can be, repeated in every particular.’ Circumstances do change, as never before has a coalition been established under the exact same conditions, and so whilst it is important to be wary of the previous pitfalls that have hindered coalitions in the past, it does not mean that it is destined to fail. History can help to avoid mistakes but ultimately cannot predict the future.
John Tosh notes that history achieves a number of goals, ‘it trains the mind’ which outlines its importance in teaching invaluable skills which are vital to future employers. This aside, perhaps the most important aspect of history is that it helps to explain past events that have combined to make the society and world in which we live today. It is from this that we can learn, and something to which many believe humans are unavoidably drawn. It is an inherent part of human reasoning; we want to know what has come before, it is a rationalising process with an obvious example being in humanities continuing quest to unearth that much debated topic of earth’s very existence. History is thus useful in our mission to unravel the past, something we are all interested in.
As shown, history is important and I’m sure you’ll agree. However, it is a vital message; let it be a reminder during these hard times of revision that all is not futile. We are also left with certain responsibilities, that in recent times have become more prominent as historians have developed an interest in memory, and in particular the notion of collective memory which exists within society and how they as a group recollect events. Events such as The Holocaust have in this instance left a lasting legacy; we need to ensure the knowledge we impart is accurate, so that historians and antiquarians alike are well informed and can learn from the past and avoid such repetitions. This demonstrates the need to write a representative history so that the future is not negatively influenced by the past. This warning aside we must remain aware that none of us can write a purely objective account, yet it is by understanding this that we can learn to curve our most obvious prejudices and write a representative study of the past.
Report abuse