What Makes A Good Historian?

Many historians build up historical profiles on a certain person, place, idea, or event. Once they have their research done they look at the work of other historians

Why is history important? It is both necessary and helpful to the study the context of prior history because it reveals who we are in relation to other people, cultures, and countries. History influences the way people can process information viewed from other races, and cultures, and even speak, “The old saying is, if we don’t know where we came from then we don’t know where we are going.” By studying history we can take what others’ have done and build on it.

To begin with, what is history? The answer to this question varies depending on whom is being inquired. Predominantly, history is regarded as the study of the evolution of ideas or events in chronological order. History is frequently applied to study topics such as economics, culture, politics and society. However, it can also be utilized to clarify alternative topics such as science, ideology, technology and more. The challenging aspect of history is to obtain documents and sources that are not biased or are coherent enough to trust.

Many of you might be think what is a class historian, a class historian writes a narrative of activities and events; maintains a scrapbook of documents and memorabilia; coordinates activities with newspaper and yearbook teams; and publicizes activities. The student council historian is responsible for keeping a record of all student council activities. Historians are usually responsible for taking photos and keeping a scrapbook that includes newspaper clippings, printed programs, tickets and other items.

Historians produce knowledge for us to learn from in the form of written documentation showing what people have done in the

No matter how far we try to remove ourselves from our biases, it is impossible, because history forces us to develop bias. We are always attempting to compare an event with another, or a person with another, and these comparisons often result in the most interesting and thoughtful discussions. I don’t think the field of history would exist without comparisons. We need to look at ideas, people, and events in context in order to truly understand their meaning, and that requires us to compare.

Historians, as we normally perceive bear the responsibility as scholars who record and research about past events and compiled them together in order to benefit the future generations as an authoritative channel for them to understand and study the past of human kind. Nevertheless, these missions were hardly the main

I would use a morally just ethical standard. The president and the U.S. government needed to push the issue to intervene as quickly as they could. They needed to have a meeting and working every issue out even if it took three days straight. Their top priory should have been stopping this work of evil.

Recorded history is nothing but the belief or bias of the man who wrote it. Often when discussing history, people us the popular phrase, “the winner writes the history books” or something along the lines. But nevertheless, the phrase does hold true. All history that is written is biased, but it is up to the reader to find the truth in within history. No matter what history is written, there will always be a different perspective, a different society, and a different perception of what is truly going on. History does not tell us the absolute truth, but it gives us a morphed version of the truth that we, as readers, must interpret to find the truth.

History writing has evolved much over time with the contributions of many people. In the modern sense, it can be traced back to ancient Greece and China, where historians Herodotus and Sima Qian began keeping records of human existence. Although they were not literally the first people to write history, together they are named the first great historians of the Western world and the East because of their individual innovations and extensive work that has long affected history writing up until this day. There is much to debate when it comes to the greatness of these ancient historians, and although some believe they were both important and successful in what their works, The Histories and The Records of a Historian, accomplished, others

A historian picks and chooses what information to analyze. By leaving out some information it is also a form of manipulation and twisting the past. I think that this shows a direct link between a historian and a mythologizer, whose job it is to twist history for another purpose.

“The Headstrong Historian”, a short story among a collection of stories written by Chimamanda Adichie in the novel, The Thing Around Your Neck talks about a woman who gives her only son, who was born after several miscarriages, off to foreigners to train him in the English language in order to be a better public speaker, so he could win a property acquisition case against her in-laws in court, following her husband’s death, but instead, he gets completely transformed by the statutes of the white man and she has no choice but to accept him even when he tries to impose the white man’s practices on her. In this paper, I’m going to be using the concepts of Ambivalence and Hegemony, and Bechdel Test and Gender

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.

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