In a modern world gone mad over materialism and obsessing over technology and gadgets, history seemingly plays an unimportant role. The global culture is forward looking. It denigrates the old over the new. The advice that older people can give is ignored as being from the fossilized knowledge of the past. History is regarded merely stories of old; of no relevance to the present and certainly not affecting the future. What is past is past right? No use crying over spilt milk after all.
This is a general view held by people at large. Governments know better. He who controls history controls society's perception of itself in the present. This is why governments have carefully controlled the presentation of history taught to students. The same events can result in wildly differing interpretations. Take the partition of India into two countries in 1947. Was it a step that gave Muslims in India a homeland or was it the division of Mother India? Similarly, was Gandhi a peace loving man who defined a new method of resisting colonialism or was he a cynical manipulator who knew how to push the right buttons to get what he wanted? Going back in the past, who was Mahmud of Ghazni: a staunch Muslim who shattered idolatry or a power mad, money grubbing invader who destroyed temples indiscriminately for the sake of booty? As we can see, one man's villain can be another man's hero.
The point that governments realize is that society's and individual's view of themselves is strongly rooted in their history. Every single nation to a certain extent mythologizes its past. Indeed every single religion has also done so. Christianity is a prime example of this. For almost 300 years after Jesus, there were massive debates within the community on how to present Jesus. Was he the son of God? Was he a prophet sent by God? Was he sent only to the Jews or was he sent to all the peoples of the world? Countless gospels, letters, epistles, acts etc., nearly all purporting to come from the disciples of Jesus circulated during this period. Each presented Jesus in a specific light in an attempt to address these and similar questions. Eventually one point of view won out over the others. Books which supported this point of view were deemed to be scripture while the rest were condemned as apocrypha. The fact remains that for almost 300 years, people who considered themselves to be pious and sincere Christians believed in these other books and yet today any Christian who professes belief in such books is considered to be heretical.
So history instead of being a dull subject; mere stories from the past is actually crucial to a society's view of itself. The same phenomenon also operates at an individual level. People who do well at their chosen careers tend rewrite their history in a more heroic light. People who do not do so well also tend to do the same. A recent interesting (albeit somewhat extreme) case has been that of Howard Manoian, an American WWII veteran who claimed a more heroic role in the war than had actually been the case. On a more prosaic level, people rewrite personal histories to justify and minimize perceived failure and highlight perceived successes.
So we see that history is actually an extremely important subject. The present is composed of decisions made in the past just as the future will be molded by decisions being made in the present. Our sense of who we are and where we come from stems from our understanding of our history at each level: personal, local, regional, national and religious.
This is a general view held by people at large. Governments know better. He who controls history controls society's perception of itself in the present. This is why governments have carefully controlled the presentation of history taught to students. The same events can result in wildly differing interpretations. Take the partition of India into two countries in 1947. Was it a step that gave Muslims in India a homeland or was it the division of Mother India? Similarly, was Gandhi a peace loving man who defined a new method of resisting colonialism or was he a cynical manipulator who knew how to push the right buttons to get what he wanted? Going back in the past, who was Mahmud of Ghazni: a staunch Muslim who shattered idolatry or a power mad, money grubbing invader who destroyed temples indiscriminately for the sake of booty? As we can see, one man's villain can be another man's hero.
The point that governments realize is that society's and individual's view of themselves is strongly rooted in their history. Every single nation to a certain extent mythologizes its past. Indeed every single religion has also done so. Christianity is a prime example of this. For almost 300 years after Jesus, there were massive debates within the community on how to present Jesus. Was he the son of God? Was he a prophet sent by God? Was he sent only to the Jews or was he sent to all the peoples of the world? Countless gospels, letters, epistles, acts etc., nearly all purporting to come from the disciples of Jesus circulated during this period. Each presented Jesus in a specific light in an attempt to address these and similar questions. Eventually one point of view won out over the others. Books which supported this point of view were deemed to be scripture while the rest were condemned as apocrypha. The fact remains that for almost 300 years, people who considered themselves to be pious and sincere Christians believed in these other books and yet today any Christian who professes belief in such books is considered to be heretical.
So history instead of being a dull subject; mere stories from the past is actually crucial to a society's view of itself. The same phenomenon also operates at an individual level. People who do well at their chosen careers tend rewrite their history in a more heroic light. People who do not do so well also tend to do the same. A recent interesting (albeit somewhat extreme) case has been that of Howard Manoian, an American WWII veteran who claimed a more heroic role in the war than had actually been the case. On a more prosaic level, people rewrite personal histories to justify and minimize perceived failure and highlight perceived successes.
So we see that history is actually an extremely important subject. The present is composed of decisions made in the past just as the future will be molded by decisions being made in the present. Our sense of who we are and where we come from stems from our understanding of our history at each level: personal, local, regional, national and religious.
