11-17-2004, 10:51 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->What Should Be The Principles On Which A History... <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe there are two different things: 1) History the science and 2) The national narrative. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As a dabbler in history, I had long been searching for a conclusive answer to this question. Historical narratives, I felt, will have meaning and depth only within a certain framework of principles. A writer may term this as the search for the "principal axis" along which his/her history aligns itself. Once the axis is established, a piece historical writing would acquire its own distinctive style. However, in the absence of such an axis, one is pulled in different directions by the conflicting views of different historians. The end result is a "historical mosaic" of views of co-opted from various historians (often half-baked).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe there are two different things: 1) History the science and 2) The national narrative. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do believe that this question has been finally set to rest here by lucidly bringing out the dichotomy between "History, the science" & "History, the national narrative". I'm glad that I finally found my answer to this long-standing question which had plagued me so much... its great that you could put it so lucidly. (I always had vague idea of this sort, but I could never crystallize it in words). I think, RR, the forum must owe a lot to you for making this basic point so clear.
With this as the guiding principle historians may embark at the daunting task of framing the ideal history textbooks for kids. I guess both aspects have to be weaved in right quantities: the former is essential to ensure rigor, lest all-and-sundry not pass off as history, while the latter is essential for breeding patriotism/nationalism. The enemies of our nation state will certainly not be enamored and are bound to emit shrill cries "brainwashing of young minds", "Talibanization of history", "Saffronization" etc. But like them, the preservers of a nation's cultural heritage too must have an agenda.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe there are two different things: 1) History the science and 2) The national narrative. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
As a dabbler in history, I had long been searching for a conclusive answer to this question. Historical narratives, I felt, will have meaning and depth only within a certain framework of principles. A writer may term this as the search for the "principal axis" along which his/her history aligns itself. Once the axis is established, a piece historical writing would acquire its own distinctive style. However, in the absence of such an axis, one is pulled in different directions by the conflicting views of different historians. The end result is a "historical mosaic" of views of co-opted from various historians (often half-baked).
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->I believe there are two different things: 1) History the science and 2) The national narrative. <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I do believe that this question has been finally set to rest here by lucidly bringing out the dichotomy between "History, the science" & "History, the national narrative". I'm glad that I finally found my answer to this long-standing question which had plagued me so much... its great that you could put it so lucidly. (I always had vague idea of this sort, but I could never crystallize it in words). I think, RR, the forum must owe a lot to you for making this basic point so clear.
With this as the guiding principle historians may embark at the daunting task of framing the ideal history textbooks for kids. I guess both aspects have to be weaved in right quantities: the former is essential to ensure rigor, lest all-and-sundry not pass off as history, while the latter is essential for breeding patriotism/nationalism. The enemies of our nation state will certainly not be enamored and are bound to emit shrill cries "brainwashing of young minds", "Talibanization of history", "Saffronization" etc. But like them, the preservers of a nation's cultural heritage too must have an agenda.