Publisher's Synopsis
History is a fragile subject. It is easily corrupted by omission, counterfactual, selective content, and selective emphasis. Since human events always have multiple points of view, it is probable that pure objectivity in historical interpretations cannot be obtained. Of course, writing on history is only one example of a condition that holds true for all human actions and interactions, there is always a subjective element. This book is divided into two parts such that the first contains several interpretive essays on significant historical events, which are followed in part two by commentary on contemporary trends in both historical writing and in social testimony as influenced by current social agendas.More specifically, part 1 is a diverse selection of short essays that discuss historical events that have been written about and discussed many times and surely will continue to be written about in the future. The choice of topics for these essays was partly based on prior personal interest or were suggested to me by contemporary events. The essay on Custer is an example of the first kind, while the essay on the historical beginnings of Christianity and Islam is an example of the second kind. Although, the subjects of these essays vary considerably, they all have the common problem that in the retelling, frequently there is intentional or un-intentional misrepresentation. My goal has been to present these topics as objectively as possible, while offering some new explanations and insights. Part 2 begins with a miscellany of topics that are relevant to the following discussion on contemporary historiography and the social factors that are influencing writing on history in particular, and influencing contemporary society, in general. That is, what is now become prevalent in historical commentaries, has also become prevalent within our society. When these historical records are commentaries, they always have agendas, public and hidden, that are present in some form, either tacitly or overtly. In either case, they await the historian who has the task of uncovering these agendas and presenting their own interpretations and explanations of these records with an open mind and a minimum of personal agenda. However, no matter how hard a person might try, no one is completely objective, there is always a subjective influence motivated either consciously or unconsciously by personal agendas and prejudices (Yes, we all have them). Some of these writings have, over the past few decades, had an unfortunate amount of influence on history in general, and US history, in particular. These writings offer a negative revisionist point of view. Of course, sometimes, the opposite is true, and historical presentations are modified in order not to blame, but to remove blame or, perhaps, just to show favoritism regarding certain historical events, individuals, or groups.In attempting to avoid either extreme, what I have strived in these essays is to be as objective as possible by avoiding omissions or modifications based on personal bias, present a balanced historical commentary, and minimize subjectivity. Notice, As stated above, I said minimize because I do not believe anyone can truly eliminate subjectivity completely. The goal has been to present the circumstances of these events in a manner that allows the reader to reach their own conclusions and, hopefully, to provide an interesting and unique narrative concerning the selected topics.
