The Subjective Nature Of History

Napoleon Bonaparte once said, “History is the version of past events that people have decided to agree upon. ” What Napoleon was trying to say is that history has a subjective nature to it. Subjective is defined as the philosophy of relating to the way a person experiences things in his or her own mind. It is based on feelings or opinions rather than facts. In order to understand the notion that history is subjective, one must first recognize its very definition. In its simplest form history is the story of the past. This statement alone presents a biased interpretation of the term. Some historians prefer “account” to “story” but I believe the latter to be more accurate. As a single recorded event can be described in several different ways and take on an entirely different meaning dependent on the person giving the account. The concept of history is much more complex than many realize. It is more than just memorizing information, and is very much a scientific process. Historians must use critical thinking to analyze data, and form a hypothesis about the past.
History is often regarded as “absolute truth” but this too is not always correct. To me truth is the closest possible accord of what actually …show more content…
The government, to a degree, controls the laws, which are used to control society. Laws set up what should be seen as right and inaccurate activities. When all is said in done, if a law says to act a certain way, individuals will follow that law. People have a profound trust that the laws they follow are in place for a reason. Presently, in view of the changing laws actions that may have been viewed as just before are now seen as wrong. This prompts a conflict in societal norms with regards to history, as something can 't be both right and wrong. Because of this history is reworked, retold and taught with a new attitude than it was