The British Imperialism

735 Words 3 Pages
In dealing with the British history, historians have published many treaties on the history of British imperialism. However, when historians try to unfold the history of the imperial period, controversies arise. The historians have heated debate over what content of the imperial history they should present, the purposes of writing it and in what ways of they should write.
One concern that the historians have raised is the imperial historical content. To some historians, the British imperialism represented atrocities and brutal oppression that the British Empire imposed on his colonies across the world. It also revealed the selfishness and greed that the British Empire concealed under the robe of the Christianity. To others, the history epitomizes
…show more content…
Although the universal purpose of writing history per se is to reveal the facts, it is still under the serious debate over how to interpret the revealed information. Each historian has his or her own way to decode the history; therefore, the various interpretations lead to new controversies. By the same token, it is agreeable to the historians dedicated to the writing of the British history that telling the facts concerning the British Imperialism. Nonetheless, they have not reached an agreement on how to interpret the British Imperialism. That is, each historian has his or her own agenda when writing the imperial history. For example, certain historians believe that writing the imperial history is a way to expose the dark and evil side of the British Imperialism, while other historians hold that writing the imperial history is to disclose the glories of the British Imperialism.
The other heated debate raised among the historians is the ways of writing the imperial history. The imperial history is a complicated topic to write about since it covers a wide range of areas such as geological locations, cultures, politics and economies. Therefore, some historians have written it from one single perspective, while others have written it from other perspectives based on newly developed theories, causing serious disagreements among the
…show more content…
The answer is obviously no. Historians, like other social scientists, cannot agree on the important issues although they all agree on one of the main purposes in writing history is to learn from the past according to the facts they can find. Consequently, it is quite gloomy for the historians to come to conclusions on these controversies while writing the imperial history because they differ over almost everything indicated above. Modern countries such as Japan and Germany still have difficult time facing their imperial past. So does Britain. However, it is not constructive at all to stay in the past and feel melancholic all the time. What really significant and necessary for the historians is that they should jump out of their thinking box when they write about the imperial history. They only need to present the facts about the imperial history objectively and leave the room for those interested in the history decide how to interpret them. History per se is the presentation of the facts happened in the past. These facts greatly contribute to the advancement of the human civilization. People should learn from history, no matter how glorious or atrocious it was, and have freedom to interpret what they know according to the uncovered facts. With an impartial way of writing the British imperial

Related Documents