Carl Becker's 'What Are Historical Facts?'

2. Skeptics question the authenticity of Marco Polo’s account, citing his omission of such things as the great wall, tea, and calligraphy. How important is the veracity of the narrative to our overall assessment of its value to history.

In The Death of History is Bunk, Patrick Watson argues that the decrease of historical content in the curriculum does not indicate that history, as a subject, is declining. While many complain about the decreasing prominence of history classes in Canadian schools, the content of those classes is excessively dull as it consists of memorizing lists of facts. Despite this, there are still protests that knowledge of “defining events” is required to contribute to “the National Conversation”. However, history is not so simple as a list of events—it is the sum of the small happenings in society around the events. A whole variety of factors influence history, which is created by the common people. Unlike Americans, who turn to their constitution for

Is History True? Handlin argues yes, while McNeill argues no. I am not one to decide for someone else if they think it is or not. However, I do believe most history is. Although, a great deal of our history went unrecorded, the amount we have can suffice to show that what’s happened in the past can happen again in a contemporary situation.

Studying history can be an active, often arduous process, dependent on making assumptions with the evidence available and proving those assumptions to be correct or otherwise. But it can also be an easy task if done incorrectly, one of cutting corners and assuming falsehoods to be true for the sake of convenience. This is the way that many historians, amateur or professional, approach history. Not only does this approach exclude any possibility for well-constructed conclusions to be made, it can also leave the populace ignorant of the truth. In “The Strange Death of Silas Deane”, James West Davidson and Mark Hamilton Lytle argue that history is not merely the act of collecting data-rather of making assumptions about the data-through the use of countless rhetorical questions, paragraph organization, and a sardonic tone.

I do not know if there is any other field of knowledge which suffers so badly as history from the sheer blind repetitions that occur year after year, and from book to book.

Most events and places of historical value nowadays holds little value in our lives. We confine ourselves to our interstates and highways, following the long line of motel chains stopping for maybe two minutes to take a picture just to say we were there. We take nothing away from these sites that is of real value. We barely scratch at the surface of information and true meaning of what happened at these historical sites. Rinker Buck explains his own experience with removing himself from this cultural norm

The idea of the exclusion of important narratives is a common theme amongst many of the historians involved in the discussion. The omission of such narratives would only stand to present an unfinished version of history from which one cannot grasp the lessons history intends to teach. Catherine Emerson would be the first to

In Telling the Truth About History, three historians discuss how the expanded skepticism and the position that relativism has reduced our capacity to really know and to expound on the past. The book talks about the written work of history and how individuals are battling with the issues of what is “truth.” It likewise examines the post-modernist development and how future historians

[4] That is a lot to consider, but with good cause. Only by asking the tough questions and demanding accountability can a nation hope to correct its past wrongs, learn from its mistakes, and prevent similar injustices from occurring again. This process must begin by taking a new, more responsible look at history. Only when the “facts” are gathered from every possible perspective can one begin to truly comprehend history and its importance. What, then, are the “facts” behind the Daniel Boone legend? (To learn more about Daniel Boone’s life, click here to visit the Historical Context page)

Chavez uses the “Latino Threat Narrative” to compare the Hispanics to the “German language threat, the Catholic threat, the Chinese and Japanese language threat, and the southern and eastern European threats.” He suggests that “each was pervasive and defined “truths” about the threat posed by immigrants that, in hindsight, were unjustified or never materialized in the long run of history.” Chavez was trying to explain that the Hispanic would pattern these other threats by upsetting the America people. He states that “… the Latino Threat Narrative is part of a grand tradition of alarmist discourse about immigrants and their perceived negative impacts on society.”

To know the past is to know the future. In his essay Knowing History and Knowing Who We Are, David McCullough argues about the importance of studying and teaching history. In his essay, he explains that there are three main points about history: character and its effect upon destiny, our failure of teaching the future generation, and the importance of learning and listening to history. David McCullough strongly advocates that audience should start to listen to and teach about the past in order to learn about the way a person’s character can affect their destiny.

I don’t know how to drive, but I’ve heard that your rearview mirror is extremely important, as is history. It’s like looking behind you, or that phrase, “How do you know where you’re going, if you don’t know where you’ve been?” History can be boring, but generally when it’s boring, it’s probably being told wrong. People and stories are interesting and they make up who we are, and we need them. If we toss out that mirror (our history), we’re likely to back-up into something nasty or get rear-ended. The moral is, if we know our history we can avoid making some large mistakes, because we’ll be able to see a little

Kenneth C. Davis, the author of Don’t Know Much about History, claimed that the true discoverers of America were the people whose cultures and societies were well established here while Europe was still in the Dark Ages, the so-called Indians. For all the diversity of the First Americans, they inherited certain common traits from their old world ancestors. Reflecting their Asiatic heritage, they were generally short to medium stature, with straight black hair, light brown skin, had epicanthic fold, and prominent cheek bones – features that in 1492 reinforced Columbus’ mistaken conviction that he had reached the East Indies and prompted him to assign to the inhabitants the inaccurate yet enduring title of Indians.

In “Gryphon,” Miss Ferenczi specifically calls her wronged math answer a “substitute fact” but also tells the class many other things and myths that are true. For example, she tells the class a great deal about Egypt and that “features of the Constitution of the United States are notable for their Egyptian ideas.” (145) Her whole lecture was complete fact about Egypt, a country she had a passion for. However, it left the kids wondering if what she said was false, for she misled them earlier that day.

How does the way history is told have power in our understanding of the past and present?