History Writing - introduction

Introduction

The dilemma posed in the writing of history is how to pass on the historical experience of one generation to the next in a balanced way - without the myth-making, biases and distortions. Transmission of the historical ‘raw material’ is a delicate process fraught with pitfalls. The task has been traditionally assumed by the ruling elites and their institutions of higher learning. The exploits of the elites may be exaggerated and awkward facts played down while the struggles of the ordinary people for justice may be barely acknowledged.

In particular, colonial history written by imperial scholars tends to glorify the colonial intervention as a civilising mission and leave out the atrocities on the colonised, plunder of their resources and the resistance offered by the natives.

Let's hear what some historians or politicians have said:

AP Newton in his "A Hundred Years of the British Empire" (1940) claimed that "other empires were founded by military force but the British empire has expanded by wholly peaceful means."

David Thomson in his 8-volume Pelican History of England declared: "British imperialism was never racialist."

Sir Keith Joseph, Thatcher's Secretary of State for education, said in 1984:
"The teacher should help the pupil decide what national events, institutions or culture are most deserving of admiration."
But how can people make honest decisions if they do not have access to all the facts?

By distorting the real history of colonialism and writing black people out of British history, the official historians have marginalised and further oppressed the subjects of colonialism. The method, choice of materials and interpretation are clearly aimed at maintaining the existing power structure.
 

N Chomsky, Chronicles of Dissent (Common Courage Press, 1992)

[Language in the service of propaganda, pg14]
History is owned by the educated classes. These custodians of history are to be found in universities and are engaged in constructing and presenting to us the past as they want it to be seen. These groups are closely associated with power – they themselves have a high degree of privilege and access to power. They share class interests with those who control and in fact own the economic system. They are the cultural commissars of the system of domination and control.

The US observes a holiday called Columbus Day. It is like Germany celebrating Hitler’s Day. When the colonists from Spain, England & Holland came to the Western Hemisphere, they found flourishing societies and a total pop of some 100 million, perhaps 80 million south of the Rio Grande and 10-12 million north of it. By 1900, there were just about 200,000 to the north. In the Andean region and Mexico, many were totally exterminated, others succumbed to Euro diseases. In some cases, natives were deliberately infected with smallpox through gifts of infected blankets. These are genocides of extreme proportions but which we don’t recognise. In fact, we protect ourselves from these terrible facts in the most astonishing ways. We (Chomsky & family) during a walk in a nearby national park came across a gravestone, placed by the National Park, as a liberal gesture to the Indians of the past. The inscription read:

“Here lies an Indian woman, a Wampanoag, whose family and tribe gave of themselves and their land that this great nation might be born and grow.’ This statement is so appalling that one doesn’t even know how to respond. This woman and her family were murdered by our forefathers and driven out of their land. It’s like finding a gravestone in Auschwitz saying: Here lies a Jewish woman. She & her family gave of themselves and their possessions so that this great nation might grow and prosper.

This is an example how the criminal aspects of our historical experience are hidden or distorted.

Issues to consider
 Historiography, the role & teaching of history, area covered (national, regional, empire, world) and associated myths make up a huge field for debate & discussion. The ideology/perspective of the historian is crucial.

TERRITORY & perspective used
1) National

- imperial, settler or colonised nation

- writer: establishment/elite, people's (white or ethnic/native)

Examples: Thomson's History of England (where colonial interventions are treated mildly)

                P Spear's History of India 1500-1947 (plays down atrocities and resources looted)
                Howard Zinn's People's History of the US             

2) Regional

- Asian region under Portuguese influence or the Pacific islands

- writer Portuguese or Asian like Subramanyam (Godinho & Boxer both attacked state myths)

  or Cambridge History of Pacific Islands & Wesley-Smith's critique

3) World

- Paul Johnson's Modern World : 1920 to 1980s (1983) [and to 2000, 2nd edition 2005] Joseph's critique

- Chris Harman's People's History of the World (Bookmarks 1999 & 2008)

National myths
- US (see E Martinez; Anglo racist comments on Mexico grab in 1840s; it was defence of Vietnam, not attack)

- UK (Henry V on Sceptred Isle; Churchill & Rhodes on Anglo race; hokum on tolerance, fairness)

- Japan (quote politician glorifying Japanese as special)

- France (proclaimed ideals of Liberty, Equality, etc not for blacks or Arabs)

- Portugal (Vasco da Gama seen as competitor of Columbus)

Raw materials & methodology

- Europeans write on Asian region but ignore native materials (eg Godinho, Boxer or Thomaz on Portuguese Asia)

- written archives, oral histories, fold traditions (see Teo pg `83 in Borges' book on Goa & Portugal

Teotonio De Souza, Portuguese in Goan folklore (Proceedings of the International Symposium 1997)

 Most historians rely mostly on archival sources for their research productions, and only exceptionally on oral sources which they view as methodologically weak and of doubtful value. Written texts are the usual sources, widely used in the western tradition.

Sanjay Subrahmanyam in his introduction to his Portuguese Empire in Asia 1500-1700 refers to a Malay text of the late 17^th/early 19^th century to illustrate the internal logic and utility of such texts based on local native traditions as a source of historical evidence. He demonstrates how, despite the lack of chronological precision or even factual inaccuracies, it succeeds in conveying the native perspective on the Portuguese entry into Malacca. He goes further and draws parallel with the myths accepted in Portugal as historical facts, and concludes: “Separating myth from reality is of course a task that any historian must approach with trepidation, for while history is the stuff from which myth is made, myth-making too is part of the historical process.”

The problem with oral traditions and in particular folk traditions is that of determining their origin in time and of collating the various versions. Utilisation of folk evidence requires advanced linguistic ability and appreciation of the pertinent culture. A foreigner is unlikely to possess these requirements, and in the case of the European, the interest in or respect for the native view of events. As a result, Europeans have discounted fold evidence in historical interpretation. Yet in India at least the rules for oral transmission were quite demanding, assuming even a sacred character that would minimise the chances of corrupting the original.

Nevertheless, the western orientalist has not taken to Indian concepts of time and historical periods. For example, in the Indian classic texts (Mahabharata, Dharmashastras or Puranas) western scholars failed to comprehend the cosmological time scale of yugas and kalpas adopted in the classics. Early British historian James Mill (1773-1836) dismissed the Indian time concept as indicative of a ‘primitive’ phase of social development. Western scholars have only recently begun to perceive diverse philosophical traditions about time. Indian cyclic time does not preclude other time systems.

New approach needed
In the 21st century, with the emerging Asian and Latin American economies, the vision of an invincible West is beginning to fade and revisionist accounts have been appearing that reflect the changing reality. But at the same time, the former imperial powers are sanitising their own accounts.

New way of teaching history needed – as the story of humanity (National Catholic Reporter-Online, Dec 2001)

Our lack of knowledge about the world outside America – and America’s role in it – has caught up with us. Our news magazines must explain to us why they hate us. Let the next generation know that other people live under different values, what those values are. Let us learn to be respectful of other people who live by different values and pledge allegiance to different flags.