Some of the important sources of history are as follows: All the material which has a direct bearing or can be any assistance in constructing the history of a particular period are called as historical facts or sources. The historical sources can be of two types, i.
Summary Answering two objections to History One common objection that historians encounter is the instant put-down that is derived from Henry Ford I, the impresario of the mass automobile.
In he stated sweepingly: Actually, Ford's original comment was not so well phrased and it was a journalist who boiled it down to three unforgettable words. Nonetheless, this is the phrasing that is attributed to Ford and it is this dictum that is often quoted by people wishing to express their scepticism about the subject.
Well, then, what is the use of History, if it is only bunk? This rousingly old-fashioned term, for those who have not come across it before, is derived from the Dutch bunkum, meaning rubbish or nonsense. Inwardly groaning, historians deploy various tactics in response.
One obvious reaction is to challenge the terms of the question, in order to make questioners think again about the implications of their terminology. To demand an accountant-style audit of the instant usefulness of every subject smacks of a very crude model of education indeed.
It implies that people learn only very specific things, for very specific purposes. For example, a would-be voyager to France, intending to work in that country, can readily identify the utility of learning the French language. However, since no-one can travel back in time to live in an earlier era, it might appear — following the logic of 'immediate application' — that studying anything other than the present-day would be 'useless'.
The A discussion on why history is important utility' formula is a deeply flawed proposition. Humans do not just learn gobbets of information for an immediate task at hand. And, much more fundamentally, the past and the present are not separated off into separate time-ghettos.
Thus the would-be travellers who learn the French language are also learning French history, since the language was not invented today but has evolved for centuries into the present.
And the same point applies all round. The would-be travellers who learn French have not appeared out of the void but are themselves historical beings.
Their own capacity to understand language has been nurtured in the past, and, if they remember and repeat what they are learning, they are helping to transmit and, if needs be, to adapt a living language from the past into the future.
Education is not 'just' concerned with teaching specific tasks but it entails forming and informing the whole person, for and through the experience of living through time. Learning the French language is a valuable human enterprise, and not just for people who live in France or who intend to travel to France.
Similarly, people learn about astronomy without journeying in space, about marine biology without deep-sea diving, about genetics without cloning an animal, about economics without running a bank, about History without journeying physically into the past, and so forth.
The human mind can and does explore much wider terrain than does the human body though in fact human minds and bodies do undoubtedly have an impressive track record in physical exploration too.
Huge amounts of what people learn is drawn from the past that has not been forgotten. Furthermore, humans display great ingenuity in trying to recover information about lost languages and departed civilisations, so that everything possible can be retained within humanity's collective memory banks.
Very well, the critics then sniff; let's accept that History has a role. But the second criticism levelled at the subject is that it is basic and boring.
In other words, if History is not meaningless bunk, it is nonetheless poor fare, consisting of soul-sapping lists of facts and dates. Further weary sighs come from historians when they hear this criticism. It often comes from people who do not care much for the subject but who simultaneously complain that schoolchildren do not know key dates, usually drawn from their national history.
Perhaps the critics who complain that History-is-so-boring had the misfortune to be taught by uninspired teachers who dictated 'teacher's notes' or who inculcated the subject as a compendium of data to be learned by heart.
Such pedagogic styles are best outlawed, although the information that they intended to convey is far from irrelevant. Facts and dates provide some of the basic building blocks of History as a field of study, but on their own they have limited meaning.
Take a specific case. It would be impossible to comprehend 20th-century world history if given nothing but a list of key dates, supplemented by information about say population growth rates, economic resources and church attendance.
And even if further evidence were provided, relating to say the size of armies, the cost of oil, and comparative literacy levels, this cornucopia of data would still not furnish nearly enough clues to reconstruct a century's worth of world experience.
On its own, information is not knowledge. That great truth cannot be repeated too often. Having access to abundant information, whether varnished or unvarnished, does not in itself mean that people can make sense of the data.
Charles Dickens long ago satirised the 'facts and nothing but the facts' school of thought.
In his novel Hard Times, 1 he invented the hard-nosed businessman, Thomas Gradgrind, who believes that knowledge is sub-divided into nuggets of information. Children should then be given 'Facts' and taught to avoid 'Fancy' — or any form of independent thought and imagination.
In the Dickens novel, the Gradgrindian system comes to grief, and so it does in real life, if attempts are ever made to found education upon this theory.The discussion is amplified under the following headings: as noted right at the start of this conversation.
When asked 'Why History?' the answer is that History is inescapable. it is the ability to keep a firm footing within history's rollercoaster that is so important.
Another way of putting it is to have secure roots that will allow. Nov 13, · A family medical history is a record of health information about a person and his or her close relatives. A complete record includes information from three generations of relatives, including children, brothers and sisters, parents, aunts and uncles, .
Article shared by. Some of the important sources of history are as follows: All the material which has a direct bearing or can be any assistance in constructing the history of a particular period are called as historical facts or sources.
The importance of group discussion is told to every final year student as this is one of the most important criteria in an interviewing process. In order to understand why group discussion plays. AHA Condemns Polish Law Criminalizing Public Discussion of Polish Complicity in Nazi War Crimes; Why Study History?
Questionnaire: Why Study History? Teaching Resources for Historians. These categories are important—indeed vital—to keep the basic enterprise of history going, but most people who study history use their training for. Studying history is important because it allows us to understand our past, which in turn allows us to understand our present.
If we want to know how and why our world is the way it is today, we.