In a comprehensive summary and analyzation of the history of mankind’s record of affairs, Mark T. Gilderhus tackles the many aspects of the overall biography of human existence. Through scrutiny of the goals of past and present historians, a brief explanation of the origins of historiography, a thorough exploration of the philosophies behind history, and a review of the modern approach to past events, Gilderhus sums up the entirety of historical thought in one hundred and twenty-five pages. His superior knowledge is exemplified through his work which effectively conveys the full extent of historiography. The beginning of Gilderhus book focuses on what he calls the “aims and purposes” of the study of history. Quoting men like Henry Ford …show more content…
The origins of historical consciousness begins with the Jews, Greeks, and early Christians according to the author. Comparing the Jewish belief in Yahweh with Greek mythology, Gilderhus states that, “Religious myths, legends, and fables preserved in oral traditions satisfied the need of ancient people to know about their origins and predecessors.” (13). Other records, such as those of ancient Egypt, Sumer, Assyria, and Hittite Empire, were reserved to bloody accounts of war and brutality. After accusing the Jewish accounts of ignoring rationality for religiosity, Gilderhus continues to comment on the historical thinking of the nation who believed in mythology. Gilderhus accredits Greece with establishing critical thinking as an important part of historical analysis in order to filter the truth from the fiction. He writes about Herodotus and Thucydides, and Polybius, honoring them as quality historical writers before moving onto Christian historians. As Christians gathered the gospels and other writings to compile the New Testament, the study of the Old Testament became very important. In order to prove Jesus as the Messiah, in depth reading of the ancient Hebrew texts was …show more content…
Gilderhus is written well and concisely. Though his explanations were occasionally scattered, Gilderhus’ ability to compact such varied and complicated information into one cohesive work is incredible. The overall set up of the book is reader-friendly, allowing for a comfortably educating experience. He flows throughout different aspects of historiography with ease and clarity. The book begins with an explanation of the purpose of historians. This information guides the reader into the next section, which is a simple overview of historiography. Gilderhus begins referencing common historians at this part of the book. A general knowledge of history in general is needed to comprehend this writing, though Gilderhus does provide brief explanations about the men on which he writes. I disagree with Gilderhus’ belief that the Hebrew accounts were too religious. I believe that the author makes an unfair assumption that parts of the Old Testament are not true, when in fact he has no basis for that claim. Much of the Hebrew writings are historically accurate and it does not make sense to believe only part of Old Testament and entirely disregard the other
Rubenstein Richard, The Cunning of History. Harper and Row, 1975. Retrieved on December 04, 2013.
Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949.
Studying the Old Testament is not as straightforward as some may think. Being able to recall stories of the Bible does not necessarily mean you have a thorough grasp on the history of Israel and the surrounding nations. Some people read and discuss the Bible without a solid understanding of the history and social issues that were going on at the time. Being able to relate to the stories in the Bible and struggle with some of the same problems faced by the people in the Bible gives you a greater appreciation for the works in the Bible. I feel that having a firm understanding of all the related history of Israel gives a student of the Old Testament a far greater understanding of why these stories are in the Bible and what was meant to be learned from them. In this paper I give brief, yet significant, explanations of the Old Testament from the death of King David to the Maccabean revolt.
Heidel, Alexander. The Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1949.
Second, the historian must place himself within the existing historical debate on the topic at hand, and state (if not so formulaically as is presented here) what he intends to add to or correct about the existing discussion, how he intends to do that (through examining new sources, asking new questions, or shifting the emphasis of pre-existing explanations), and whether he’s going to leave out some parts of the story. This fulfills the qualities of good history by alerting readers to the author’s bias in comparison with the biases of other schools of scholarship on the topic, and shows that the author is confident enough in his arguments to hold them up to other interpreta...
Writings of historical scholars, Josephus, Aristotle, and Plato, to name a few, are taken as truth and fact, yet the writings of the Scripture are constantly disputed. Why? Perhaps because of the ethical imperatives imposed to which people do not want to adhere. Perhaps because of man’s ego and pride that disallows them to submit to a Higher Authority. Nonetheless, The Bible has been, and still remains, the most widely read and revered book of all
Iggers opens the book by talking about a revolutionary way that the Western world was taught about history. Throughout the book he ascertains the changes that take place throughout historiography and the nature of history itself. He also examines prior historical notions and the way that historiography was altered after World War II. History morphed from previous antiquarian teachings into a deeper, more evaluated approach. Historians gained a more intimate relationship with postmodern ideas and began looking at history in an objective manner using contemporary discipline. Iggers studies the way postmodernism was changed by new social sciences which allowed more detail into cultural influences and the problems surrounding globalization theories. He also explains the birth of microhistory which replaced macrohistory.
Through examining these texts, it is evident that the advantages historians have when drawing on evidence such as this is that they can easily reveal certain social and cultural values of the society from which the authors came from, just as easily as it shows social and cultural values of the society of which it was written about. The limitations for historians when collecting written evidence is that some key features of the complex civilizations written about were often left out or could be easily misinterpreted or
John Lewis Gaddis, in his book, The Landscape of History, generates a strong argument for the historical method by bringing together the multiple standpoints in viewing history and the sciences. The issue of objective truth in history is addressed throughout Gaddis’s work. In general, historians learn to select the various events that they believe to be valid. Historians must face the fact that there is an “accurate” interpretation of the past ceases to exist because interpretation itself is based on the experience of the historian, in which people cannot observe directly (Gaddis 10). Historians can only view the past in a limited perspective, which generates subjectivity and bias, and claiming a piece of history to be “objective” is simplistic. Seeing the world in a multidimensiona...
It is often said that those who do not know history are doomed to repeat it. It is true that technology has changed civilization and wars have shaped the earth, but, loosely speaking: the duties of man, the importance of knowledge and our morals are still almost the same as they were since the dawn of civilization. For the last 8,500 years man has harvested, learned and practiced righteousness. Yet, man is always progressive. We seek to find the most efficient means of working, learn as much as we can and search for what is meaning of “good”. Man has learned a lot from the past successes and past mistakes making written history possibly our greatest invention. What has happened in written history that we might have overlooked or forgotten? What can we see happening to our nation now that should be avoided due to past failures? And where have we progressed? Our time is compared to many times in history but in this paper we will compare it to Europe in the Middle Ages. How are the Middle Ages in Europe like the U.S. today and how is it different? How is this good and how is this bad?
Throughout time, people of all cultures have told stories of heroes and kings. The most ancient story we have on record is the tale of King Gilgamesh. This story is an account of the King's journeys and accomplishments. Although it was written over four thousand years ago, many comparisons can be made between the society in which the story was written and our own modern society. In this essay, differences and similarities between the two societies will be examined.
Little did the world know before the mid-1800s that an expansive, detailed work of literature from the Third Dynasty of Ur was about to be discovered. Described as the world’s first great work of literature, The Epic of Gilgamesh is normally thought an applicable document to portray the first inklings of humanity. As history tells any careful reader, clearly this is not the case. The Epic of Gilgamesh and the characters within the epic poem are instead descriptive representations of a certain time period documented once for lore. This instance and the epic story brings forth many questions: what does it mean to be a god? A friend? Most importantly, what does it mean
First, Appleby, Lynn, and Jacob discussed the ideas concerning history. The first idea described how Newton and Darwin became chief examples of the Heroic model of science. Then, in a later chapter, the authors’ show how Newton and Darwin fell from grace and the effect this had on history as a discipline. Nevertheless, early historians felt that the way to find the truth was though science. Early historians felt that through science they could become neutral and reconstruct the past exactly as it happened (241). I analyze tha...
Irenaeus’ Against the Heresies contains a profound exposition of Gnosticism and other heresies. In refuting heterodox systems he gives important testimony regarding the common beliefs of the early Christian Church. He writes: “The Church, though dispersed through the whole world, even to the ends of the earth, has received from the Apostles and their disciples this faith…” He then records Catholic belief in the genuineness of the Gospels, in the Real Presence, and in a certain pre-eminence of the Church of Rome, the precise nature of which can be determined only from the whole context of Irenaeus’ writings.
Carr approaches the subject of history from an educated and clear standpoint. He makes the reader think about all the history that has been read while growing up (Carr 595). Carr, whether directly or indirectly, points out that so much of the history we receive is prejudiced by the historians (594). Another issue that the essay brought to mind and examined was the issue of the historians themselves (Carr 596). They also have many different preferences and prejudices. Some of those prejudices and points of view are very influential and very set. Historians have their own ideas of how great or wondrous a person or event was in history and therefore they will easily influence their accounts of the information provided to them. The historians themselves must be as unbiased and unprejudiced as they can be in order to give an accurate account of the information and present it to the student and researcher of history in a truthful manner.