History is a word that has been in our vocabulary for many years. It is defined as events that happened in the past. Elizabeth Boone defines history as having different meanings and layers that relate to particular subjects, places and time. She also believes that history should be defined as the selected and arranged past.
History comes from the thoughts of people from the past. The history of someone or something can be seen as a story. When telling a story you decide what should be put in the story and what should not be put in it. Along with deciding what goes into the story you also decide what point of view or perspective the story will have. Because of history being like a story it can sometimes be bias towards certain people or events. Sometimes history does not mainly matter on the truth but on the value of the story. A sum of historians see history as being a Western tradition. This definition of history might discredit or dispute some history. An example of this might be the Mexican annals. Mexican annals which was a yearly record of events in chronological order. This view of history can cause problems with cultures that did not have a form of narrative or writing.
…show more content…
As well history is also being rewritten. These writings are directed by a set of principles that helps historians decide what might be acceptable and what may not be. The principles create a hierarchy, that decides what is more important to a story (history) and what can be less important. There are always different sides to every story (history).For one group wining a war could be a triumph, something to celebrate, and for the losing party it could be seen as a devastation. When the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima they saw it as a victory, something to be proud of, but the people of Japan saw it as an attack on their home from the United
The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were a turning point in WWII. They led to the surrender of the Japanese and the victory to the Allies. The day that the Japanese surrendered will forever be remembered. However, the destruction and casualties in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki cannot be forgotten. Hiroshima and Nagasaki experienced massive destruction, and it led to years of disease and misery for the Japanese people following the war. After WWII and the creation of the atomic bomb, the world lived in fear of a nuclear attack ("The Atomic Bombings"). George Orwell’s 1984 references to the atomic bomb and to the society and life after WWII. Nevertheless, one must fully know and understand the bombings and the destruction
History is happening all around us, whether it is affecting us positively or negatively. History is an occurrence of events that have made an impact so big that we emphasize them today. From the Sumerians, to the latest recorded history, we are creating history within. History is happening every day, but it is up to us the retreat back the occurrences of the past life. It is because of history that we function the way we do. For example, through the 15th century, occurrences happened, for example the diversity of people seen throughout the new world. You’ll see that conflict and tension led to experiences with self-government and that the questioning of authority of the church led to diverse religions. Everything that happened in the past has led us to have the history we do today.
One of the most controversial and heavily scrutinized issue of the twentieth century was President Harry S. Truman’s decision to unleash atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945. The motives behind Truman’s actions are shrouded in controversy as top military officials publicly denounced the use of such a disastrous weapon. There is overwhelming evidence supporting both sides of the decision, as historians are split in opinion. The United States had been using conventional bombing to try to push Japan over the edge to surrender, but with countless Japanese civilians loyal to their country, invading Japan proved to be more problematic than first thought. Harry S. Truman made the ultimate decision of dropping the atomic bomb in hopes that it would end the war, but the amount of casualties caused by it has historians questioning if it was morally right, “The bomb was unfortunate, but it was the only means to bring Japan to a surrender,” historian Sadao Asada states (Bomb 9). Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were justifiable because they would ultimately lead to the end of the war and would demonstrate U.S. supremacy.
In reading a Little History of the World by E.H. Gombrich you realize that history seems so much less complicated when you are the one standing back and reflecting on the past. You realize how easy it is to often forget that every single new idea, religion and war was a struggle that lasted generations upon generations. History is more than just a page or a story, its our account of the world. That goes to show how short life and history is, you realize that history is always repeating, war after war, peace then war. There are good and bad periods in history and its up to us to learn from them. In a way history is much like a human being it goes through stages, learns about life, and has inner struggles or wars about their ideas and their beliefs.
History, a collection of the past, holds a lot of information about events and society to help inform us in the present as it is the only data
The importance of our world's history is huge, because it teaches us about our past and how we came to be in the world we live in today. History can help you learn about our ancestor’s origins and cultures.
The fatal atomic bombings of the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during the end of World War II are written down in history books today. This is because they had a drastic story behind them that changed the world and the lives of many civilians. The United States decision to drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II had both positive and negative results.
Is history always the way it has been told, or are there multiple truths that meet in one point and intersect? Presentism is what modern historians do to the past. The way in which presentism reveals and formats information about history is simplified and modified. This, for the most part, is not the exact way these events took place. Important parts and concepts are changed in order to fit into modern views and interpretation. Many historians are accepting of either the victim's or perpetrator's side. Sometimes picking one particular side may skew the hard facts of the situation or event. Failure of telling the accurate past can lead
According to Merriam- Webster dictionary, history is defined as “a chronological record of significant events (such as those affecting a nation or institution) often including an explanation of their causes.” History is data driven and depends on concrete evidence, such as primary and secondary sources. Without the use of sources, there is no confirmation that the event is has ever happened, meaning it is not considered history. For instance, the tale of the Willie Lynch Letter, has been passed around for many of years now. There are no primary or secondary sources that confirms that a William Lynch ever existed, so if he never existed how could there be a letter written by an imaginary person? It may be shocking to some because the Willie Lynch letter is so popular and controversial, especially in America. Therefore, history is important because it helps us in today’s society. Through the study of history, we are able to learn from people that came before us, compare similarities, and learn from mistakes made in history.
When President Harry S. Truman ordered the nuclear attack on Hiroshima on the 6th of August, 1945, most people were supportive of it because it ended the war before an invasion became necessary. Seventy two years since the first and last nuclear attacks, many 'traditionalist' historians still believe that Truman made the best possible decision in the given circumstances. However, in the 1960's, Truman's critics, who reinterpreted history began to believe that the bomb played no significant role in ending the war and was thus unnecessarily used. These revisionist historians have gone so far as to characterize the use of nuclear weapons as “the single greatest acts of terrorism in human history” (Awan, 16). On the other hand, traditionalists argue that the bomb was an important
History is defined as the study of the science of humanity in the past. It's a broad subject that spans over countless people groups throughout the years that the world has been around. Even before the times we have written word history was still being made, and it is still extremely important. We tend to forget that in our average day to day lives we are still making history. That all over the globe everyone is taking part in what might be in a history book someday.
Firstly, I agree with speaker that there are a lot of storytellers who are wrongly considered as historians, although this is an improved translation of the speaker’s statement. Many so called historians try to disguise the historical events so as to implicate what they want to be believed as truth for the aims of their party and so forth. They change the truth of events and in this way they
It was a common saying of the past that the history of a conflict was told by the victors. That was true then, the losers of the conflict had to rebuild after their defeat and the winners could share their side of the story, twisting it so it would seem that they did no harm and the losers deserved defeat because they were the villains. This is not true today. With the wealth of information at one’s finger tips and the available research opportunities the stories can be untangled and both sides of the story can be told. However, some have held strong to the truths that their side proclaimed and refuse to admit that their victory was tarnished by lies, deceits, and omissions. This very idea is what shaped how
History is the study of past events leading up to the present day. It is a research, a narrative, or an account of past events and developments that are commonly related to a person, an institution, or a place. It is a branch of knowledge that records and analyzes
What is History? This is the question posed by historian E.H. Carr in his study of historiography. Carr debates the ongoing argument which historians have challenged for years, on the possibility that history could be neutral. In his book he discusses the link between historical facts and the historians themselves. Carr argues that history cannot be objective or unbiased, as for it to become history, knowledge of the past has been processed by the historian through interpretation and evaluation. He argues that it is the necessary interpretations which mean personal biases whether intentional or not, define what we see as history. A main point of the chapter is that historians select the facts they think are significant which ultimately