If History Is Written By the Winner Of Wars, How Can We Trust The Accounts Given In Textbooks?

Answer 1

You need to corroborate the account. If there's no corroboration, then fall back on you common sense. One of the biggest example of a propaganda ploy was by Rhamses the Great in his depiction of the Battle of Kadesh. In reality, it was at best a draw with the Hittites. But looking at all the monuments and depictions in stone, you'd think the god-king was victorious. It was his way of staying in control of his people, for how can a god-king only come away with a draw in battle.

Another classic example is the Battle of Thermopolye. Heroditus (sp) would have us believe that an Ancient empire could support 1 million troops in the field and that the Spartans had only 300 hopilites. The more realistic number is at most 200,000 versus 8-10,000 hoplites.

Answer 2

It's not a question of "trust" when reading history textbooks, it is about understanding what you are reading. Most history textbooks are designed to give the student a very, very general overview of history. Specifics are usually not covered until upper level college courses.

The reason is simply time. Take the Romans for example: most history of the Romans look at Rome as the great and wonderful conquerors, but from the perspective of the Barbarians or Germanics...not so wonderful. If it were a world history class in high school that takes a look at Rome from the perspective of the Romans, Barbarians, Germanics, Gaelics, Macedonians, etc. etc. it wouldn't be a world history class, it would be a Roman history class (and everyone they conquered) Part 1 of 12.

There is much credence to the statement, "History Is Written By The Winners." There are many reasons why this is true. First, the winners often completely destroy the losers by ransacking and burning down their cities leaving much less to survive "history." Second, the loser are often killed or asimilated into the winner's culture. Third, often the winners are the more literate culture and the losers are semi-literate or illiterate (Rome is a perfect example of this), so the losers left alive are less likely to write volumes about their grand loss. Lastly, not only do winners like to tell people about their win, losers don't generaly want to sit down and write about their grand losses, so accounts from the loser's perspective are often pieced together by later historians and archeologists.

The moral of the (hi)story is if you want detailed accounts from the battles between the Romans and the Barbarians, don't buy a textbook on world history...but there are other books out there.

Answer 3

How can there be a winner of any war? Both sides suffer in any conflict. It's more a matter of who suffered the least.

As for trusting the accounts in textbooks, that's debatable. Often there are textbooks that are being used in our classrooms that are biased. If a government was involved with the writing of a textbook, it'll probably be biased to make the government appear powerful and triumphant. It's difficult for any writer to put aside his/her political or philosophical viewpoint. That is one of the greatest challenges for schools when creating a curriculum. How do you select the most appropriate textbook to teach from without offending any particular group or presenting a unbiased opinion, not to mention the teacher injecting their own person opinion of history?

Aloha! =0)

Answer 4

Have you ever heard of Howard Zinn? He certainly does not write in the viewpoint of the oppressor.We can and cannot trust these accounts for various reasons. One of the most important reasons is that history will always be relative to the observer. If you are looking for an impartial viewpoint then maybe you should call God and ask him for a book written by him. Sarcasm of course, but you see my point. The best way to learn history is to purchase a regular textbook, say a textbook on the rise of the United States and then purchase a book like Zinn's A People's History of the United States. Read them, and decide for yourself. Good luck.

Answer 5

It is clear you should not trust the accounts given in textbooks.

The 'Winner of wars' always distorts the facts of war because the loser is powerless to prevent him doing so. An instance: the rules and codes of chivalry are most often broken, if not done away with altogether, in the heat of battle by all sides engaged in it, but only those who finish on the losing side are processed for war crimes.

Worse still, to justify the atrocities of the victors, the losers are depicted as deserving of them.

Where possible, try to get the accounts of the losers too. Then try to get the picture as an impartial 'Earthman' would; better still, as an alien would.

Answer 6

1) there are no winners in war. 2) textbook recounts are not a true entire picture of events that occured. they reflect that cultures views and support the "ruling" group/s that show the best of their evaluation while also showing most of the actual details of the situation that put on "the best light". Case in point: where is there actual complete reported documentation aboutthe involvement of the Black culture as soliders in any war the United States participated in? Where are the accounts of The Native American soldiers in wars the USA participated in. Where is the report of any other cultures members of armed forces in their "History Books" and why are they never looked at in any level of our educational cirriculums?? Trust?? I think not.

Answer 7

History always written by the victors. But that is why most democratic countries have sealed records for x amount of time. An acknowledgment that distance will lend perspective. Let all the poison in the mud seep out, (something like that) , Claudius. AD or ACE.

Answer 8

You can't. History is written by those is power at the time. It is only after those persons have died or are no longer in power do we find out some tidbits of what really happened. Usually by that time it is too late to do anything but try not to make the same mistakes again.