Which HISTORIANS are you all covering???? (1 Viewer)

[Halba]

I have no idea which historians to cover for the First Part: WHAT IS HISTORY? question.

I just want a general concensus of which ones are the easiest to do!

I've been studying for my EXT HIST trial, which is on Thursday coming week. I think i'll do:

HERODOTUS "Father of History"
THE VENERABLE BEDE "Father of English History"
LEOPOLD VON RANKE "Father of Objective History"
CARR VS ELTON Debate "Postmodernism"

Is that enough to cover in 1 hour? I am thinking of a few more like THUCYDIDES but i dunno whether i'll have enough time. Are there any good ones you people can recommend?

Thanks!

 

[sif not 99]

JUST know a nice assortment of historians so you can pick and choose the best parts of them to use in answering the question.

my lineup includes

herodotus
thucydides
polybius
livy
tacitus
bede
von Ranke
Elton
Carr
Windschuttle
Blainy
Reynolds
McGuinness

remember u can always use historians from your assignment

 

[Halba]

ahh yes

thanks mate. Who is Windshuttle? I've heard of him.;.can't place him.

You think my list is OK for 1 hr? i don't have a lot of time to study/understand them hehe. As long as i can crap on for an hour..

 

[Halba]

yeah we got some stuff on reynolds

He's the Aboriginal history writer eh?

I got some notes on him, but didn't pay attention in class so know nothing.

 

[philbert_frog]

Halba: The question almost always asks for THREE historians, so know 3 really well, and then some to either support/contradict their view, and some that wrote around their time to name-drop.

Sif: As if you wrote about half of them in your essay, you just listed every historian we studied!

 

[fluke]

Keith Windschuttle is Henry Reynolds' arch-nemisis. Bwa ha ha ha ha. Windschuttle believes Reynolds' "Why weren't we told" is a black-arm band veriosn of history - similar to a particular pm i know... - and states that oral history is invalid as it is just a collection of stories passed and changed over centuries, sbuject to "chinese whispers". (ie. the aboriginal oral histories used by Reynolds).

 

[Halba]

ah thanks

now i know where i heard it. In class! but i like most ppl sleep in class.....

 

[Halba]

Philbert : When u say historians to support/contradict their views do you mean just "normal" historians which outline their view on say "Herodotus" e.g. "According to LEWIS (fake name) Herodotus's sources were highly questionable"

Something like that???

 

[sif not 99]

I'm a bit of a right wing SK so I love windschuttle and mcguiness =)

yeah I did an assignment on aboriginal history so I'm up with all of that black armband and aboriginal history stuff so thats why its in my lineup

 

[francisblue]

!!!

I'm gonna concentrate on the four major historians who reflect the different ages and periods in history:

Thucydides
Venerable Bede
Leopold Von Ranke
E H Carr

I think four is good enough. You just need to remember their purpose and perspect in writing history as well as their key quotes and you'll do just fine

 

[Halba]

yeah cool Francis

Yep thanks , i think 4 is OK. Nice to know somebody else is doing similar historians!

 

[fluke]

sif:

You're what! Windschuttle is an idiot! His righty crap gives me the shits!

 

[sif not 99]

unlike others, noteably you, I wont put down your particular political viewpoint

although there are plenty of flaws in right and left wing rhetoric I for one am against the trade union movement, period. Secondly this whole aboriginal issue, saying sorry isnt gunna do jack all apart from the introduction of a "sorry tax" because believe me it will cost hundreds of millions in compensation, and thirdly border protection, can u come up with a better idea?

the left is always quick to criticise yet there ideas of recent times have had little substance or any sense of cohesion behind them

but if your a lefty i dont care its up 2 u, i wont put u down better to believe in something than nothing, in fact one of my best mates is treasurer of the hornsby branch of young labor so just dont put me down for believing in something

 

[philbert_frog]

Halba: It doesn't have to be a "normal" historian, for example you could say "Thucydides agreed with Herodotus' view on objectivity in history for he incorporated many of his ideas on objectivity into his historical writings"

So you can incorporate name-dropping as well as knowledge of both historians and historical thought in one sentence

Hope this helps

Sif: My god you sound just like my dad!

 

[sif not 99]

yeah well whats wrong with your dad

as far as dads goes your dad is pretty kewl

 

[philbert_frog]

sif: i agree, its just your views (which appear quite outspoken at normo) are identical to those of my dad's

 

[Peakin@Bondi]

historians

The historians that I used in the trials were:
1. The Venerable Bede (social context)
2. Von Ranke (purpose)
3. Michel Foulcault (social context, purpose)
4. Marc Bloch, of the Annales School (Methodolgy)
5. Karl Marx (social context, purpose)

For the Case Study of the American Revolution:
1. George Bancroft
2. Louis M. Hacker

The source from my trial was from the John Vincent book about history, but if your still got saturday's paper look at spectrum, there is a great article about the debate of history by the top modern historians.

 

[sif not 99]

yeah peakin that article was pretty kewl in the spectrum

 

[Ishmael]

For historiography in the trials I used: Bede, von Ranke, Marx, Namier and Herodotus (that I can remember : >)

For our Appeasement case study: Namier, Gilbert and AJP Taylor.

Ish

 

[fluke]

sheesh

u people hav gotta relax! sif etal i do respect your opinions - theyre just wrong.