History Past And History The Present

1. History the past is what has actually happened, its history as a reality. It’s non- bias as no personal views and opinions have been added. Its not reconstructed uses sources as I said previously it’s what has actually happened and therefore is more accurate. History the discipline on the other hand is a reconstruction of events to create history; this is done by using sources which are interoperated. History the discipline can be very bias as the historian’s views and perceptions can influence the history. Another problem with history the discipline is that the historian can only work with the source he has so he can’t always recreate what actually happened. The main difference between history the past and history the discipline would be firstly be the accuracy history the past is far more accurate as no sources have been used another difference is the bias as history the discipline often has the historians personal views and also a another difference would be that history the discipline can only bass things on sources so it doesn’t necessarily get a full view on the historical.

2. History is broken down into many specializations; a historian firstly chooses an area of interest and expertise they wish to research. With knowledge on these topics they create questions which they research to help them understand and recreate history. They then gather sources which could include photos and documents written at that time. They carefully scrutinized the sources they use to ensure that they are factual. They also look at remains of people and places. With all the information they have gathered the historians are able to get an understanding on the specific events on how it started or the cause depending what they are researching. The historians are then able to construct an analysis on the event allowing it to be received by other historians and the public.