Wednesday, March 16, 2011

food for tought

I once had a history professor who said, "Recording history is like watching the clouds, everyone looks at the same subtsance, but sees something different and later, recalls something even more different.
History, especially events before the time of written history, is subject to the writer's perception and interpretation. That has been never so true as with the history of the dark ages."

My notebooks full of contradicting information and I agree, wholeheartedly! 


  1. Very true! Sometimes though, I think people only want to see a certain side of history. I think it is beneficial to read into both sides, especially with war subjects.

  2. In war, both sides believe they have a good reason for their cause, both side believe they are right. Each leader is convinced that thier God/Goddess supports them in their endevour. In Bernard Cornwell's book 'Agincourt', about Henry V's famous battle in France, one of the charactor's replies to the comment of another charactor which the phrase "God doesn't take sides." To understand the big picture one must objectively consider the motives behind both causes. That was as true in the time of the Crusades, especially Richard I, as it is for today's conflict in the Middle East. Storytellers of the time and those of later years used bits and pieces of events and waeved them into a tale that fit their needs at the time.Hence so many different versions of King Arthur, Robin Hood, Beowolf, Ali Baba, ect.

  3. I think I have researched myself into a hole and am buried in a sea of notebooks and printouts- anybody got a ladder?
    Arthur, Lancelot? can ya'll help my out of here?