My teacher gave us last term an extract by Morley with the question, "Reading through Morley's chapter on 'What is History' and with specific reference to the above extract, explain why he thinks the very word, concept or idea of history is a controversial one to define precisely."
The ideas I've extrapolated from the extract are:
- the definition of history isn't concrete
- it's swayed by popular opinion and 'professional' historians' ideas
- it's limited by bias and human error
Please help... I have no idea where to start.
Hey hey Caitlin! That's looking pretty good so far! It's a little bit difficult to help without having a look at the source, is there any way you could link me to the extract if its online? (if its not do not post a picture for copyright reasons haha). But from what I can see so far, those ideas sound great! I'd defs have a look at the arguments made by these historians:
EH Carr - What is History (The first chapter should do you for now, but imo the whole book is a must for this course)
John Vincent - An Intelligent Person's Guide to History
Anything Hayden White or Keith Jenkins.
From what I can see with the ideas you have presented, other things you could touch on is history's purpose - is it the search for truth, or can it be a tool used for social change/social stagnation? You could also look at the multi-faceted nature of history and historiography, and how it is ever-changing (is it adaptable to the present needs of society? role of technology? discipline for the elite or for the people?) I feel like this question is also screaming for a mention of postmodernism and the postmodernist/linguistic interpretation of history. Not a must to include these, but just some more ideas.
What are you mainly struggling with in terms of starting your response, do you just mean organising your ideas or your intro?