The Value of History (1 Viewer)

hApPy1

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2005
Messages
145
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2005
How do i explain "how the writing/contruction of history has changed over time" in an article that discusses- largely- the psychological need for history among humankind?
 
Last edited:

Carnivour

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
216
Location
asylum
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
Is it with respect to any particular culture? If its Australiana, then the quest for public/national identity comes to mind.
 

studynoob

Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2005
Messages
273
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
where's PwarYuex when you need him? lol for ANY history question he's the man for you!!! :)
 

ameh

dirty trick
Joined
Oct 21, 2003
Messages
2,688
Location
The Ludovico Centre
Gender
Female
HSC
N/A
The psychological need for history is to perhaps to confirm our existence through perpetuation of myth, national identity and diversity in various mediums. How this has changed over time can be traced to the historian's aims, purposes and constructed by their specific methodology. Through events, ''facts'' are constructed which accrue to what Marwick states as ''the body of knowledge'' we call history, ok and here you can include the historians such as Jenkins, in comparison with say Herodotus and write what their purpose was in their context. I.e. was it to entertain, or was it more of a popularising mission to bring awareness to that area of debate.

Sorry I'm rambling =P

So in layman's terms: mention why that historian wrote that particular interpretation, their purpose and how that relates to the needs of their context.
 
X

xeuyrawp

Guest
amoz_lilo said:
The psychological need for history is to perhaps to confirm our existence through perpetuation of myth, national identity and diversity in various mediums. How this has changed over time can be traced to the historian's aims, purposes and constructed by their specific methodology. Through events, ''facts'' are constructed which accrue to what Marwick states as ''the body of knowledge'' we call history, ok and here you can include the historians such as Jenkins, in comparison with say Herodotus and write what their purpose was in their context. I.e. was it to entertain, or was it more of a popularising mission to bring awareness to that area of debate.

Sorry I'm rambling =P

So in layman's terms: mention why that historian wrote that particular interpretation, their purpose and how that relates to the needs of their context.
That's exactly what I would have said... I really can't think of anything else atm, I have a history essay on Black Hawk Down due tomorrow morning :(
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top