2006-11-24 03:57:43 · 13 answers · asked by yemi b 1 in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
The Academics.
Our view of how historical events unfold changes ever so slightly with newly discovered evidence and sound theories. A historian tends to specialize in one or two periods of antiquity and they will have a considerable background knowledge in respect to their chosen field. They will also be aware of most of the previous academic writing by other historians who research similar avenues. They also have access to valuable primary source evidence which was created during the period in which they are interested and they have the mental tools with which to dissect it fairly. I've lost count of the number of times on here that I've seen the old chestnut, 'History was written by the winners' and is thus one sided, well maybe so, but a proper Historian is aware of this and can find other evidence to compensate or show up the story of the 'other side'.
In the case of the causes of the French Revolution, historians have read and dissected each others work on this subject, poured over thousands of primary sources and have come to some agreement of the probable causes for the revolution. They make informed and educated statements according to the evidence that they have. Nothing is certain but a lot is probable.
The same is relevent for any other decent theories abound
2006-11-24 05:32:34 · answer #1 · answered by samanthajanecaroline 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well the word is defined in local dictionaries,
however, the victor typically defines the event. Over time, conflicting answers can arise and the loser often has a say, but it also depends on your locale. For example, the A-bombs were viewed SIGNIFICANTLY different by the Japanese and the Americans. Over time, both sides have reached some mutual ground, but not by much.
2006-11-24 04:23:08 · answer #2 · answered by ms.chic 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The history is a version of events which people agreed to accept. So masses and rulers define it.
2006-11-24 04:10:29 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Those who write it down.
Simply that. I think the people who document and comment on events are the one's who eventually get into the history books.
2006-11-24 04:07:41 · answer #4 · answered by wrathofkublakhan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We the people define and shape history, since man exist, htere had been oral, painting, carving and written records all did by men
2006-11-24 04:18:31 · answer #5 · answered by pelancha 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No one...either that or I don't get your question.
History is all that has past. Everything.....that is over and done...in the past. No one defines what is historical. Everything from the past is historical...history.
2006-11-24 03:59:41 · answer #6 · answered by nottashygirl 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The victors always get to write the history...
2006-11-24 04:35:24 · answer #7 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Certainly the winners have a big say in it, but if you have an "agreed on" approach, governments can dictate what is and what isn't
2006-11-24 03:59:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The people who make it.
2006-11-24 04:04:44 · answer #9 · answered by I want my *old* MTV 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Winners... those who come out victorious on conflicts.
2006-11-24 04:18:45 · answer #10 · answered by morganna_f 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋