The so called “Great Man History” model of viewing historical events has become more and more unpopular in modern times, being replaced with the view that historical events are merely a product of the social and political trends of the time. While I do believe that the new model is for the most part correct, it is important not to take the denial of “Great Man History” so far as to ignore the importance of certain figures throughout history. That is why I deem the statement, “history is not made by great men” to be too broad and frankly incorrect. To make it more accurate, it should read, “history is not primarily made by great men” since while “great men” are not the primary movers of history, the contributions to history by extraordinary
…show more content…
There are some people that have such a remarkable (remarkable in the sense that they possess traits that few others do, not that they were necessarily good people in any sense) character that if they did not exist their part in history could simply not be filled by anybody else (or at least by a very few amount of people). There are countless examples of these people, the Celtic Queen Boudicca, Napoléon Bonaparte, Julius Caesar, Caesar Augustus, Adolf Hitler, and Alexander the Great, to name a few. For the purposes of this essay I will focus on two individuals, Julius Caesar and Charlemagne. Julius Caesar was both a great military leader as well as a charismatic politician and was considered the greatest leader of his time. This is reflected by this passage written by the historian Suetonius, “In eloquence and in the art of war he either equaled or surpassed the fame of their most famous representatives [representatives meaning the other public figures of time such as senators] (Beatty, 170).” Not only did Suetonius show admiration for Caesars skills as a leader (both politically and militarily), but also for his skill on the ground as a soldier. According to the ancient …show more content…
This should be obvious as leaders are frequently making decisions that affect millions of lives. Imagine how differently the history of the American continents would be if it was not Christopher Columbus who stumbled upon them first, but perhaps an English or French sailor. As a result of his actions leading the mission across the Atlantic, the Spanish were able to be the first in contact with the New World (Beatty, 319). Spanish is the dominant language of the two continents, but without Columbus it could have very well been English, Portuguese, or French. One person can have the ability to impact history on an extensive scale, from starting wars, to passing laws, to even changing what religion a society practices and what language a society speaks. A close analysis of the statement “history is not made by great men” reveals that while in spirit it is largely correct, it is not entirely correct since there have been many irreplaceable “great men” throughout history who have influenced historical trends and whose actions have had great historical ramifications. If one wishes to fully understand the paths that history has taken, it is important to realize that while history is made up of the collective of all humanity, certain people shape history to such a degree that they must be
There are some people that have such a remarkable (remarkable in the sense that they possess traits that few others do, not that they were necessarily good people in any sense) character that if they did not exist their part in history could simply not be filled by anybody else (or at least by a very few amount of people). There are countless examples of these people, the Celtic Queen Boudicca, Napoléon Bonaparte, Julius Caesar, Caesar Augustus, Adolf Hitler, and Alexander the Great, to name a few. For the purposes of this essay I will focus on two individuals, Julius Caesar and Charlemagne. Julius Caesar was both a great military leader as well as a charismatic politician and was considered the greatest leader of his time. This is reflected by this passage written by the historian Suetonius, “In eloquence and in the art of war he either equaled or surpassed the fame of their most famous representatives [representatives meaning the other public figures of time such as senators] (Beatty, 170).” Not only did Suetonius show admiration for Caesars skills as a leader (both politically and militarily), but also for his skill on the ground as a soldier. According to the ancient …show more content…
This should be obvious as leaders are frequently making decisions that affect millions of lives. Imagine how differently the history of the American continents would be if it was not Christopher Columbus who stumbled upon them first, but perhaps an English or French sailor. As a result of his actions leading the mission across the Atlantic, the Spanish were able to be the first in contact with the New World (Beatty, 319). Spanish is the dominant language of the two continents, but without Columbus it could have very well been English, Portuguese, or French. One person can have the ability to impact history on an extensive scale, from starting wars, to passing laws, to even changing what religion a society practices and what language a society speaks. A close analysis of the statement “history is not made by great men” reveals that while in spirit it is largely correct, it is not entirely correct since there have been many irreplaceable “great men” throughout history who have influenced historical trends and whose actions have had great historical ramifications. If one wishes to fully understand the paths that history has taken, it is important to realize that while history is made up of the collective of all humanity, certain people shape history to such a degree that they must be