Day 4 After-Class Discussion

JuzhiZheng

Based on our discussion of historiography in today's class, share with us one historical event, period, or figure whose multiple historical accounts contradict with each other. How is the event, period, or figure described by these different accounts? How do you make sense of the discrepancy between these accounts. (175-250 words)

e.g. The Persian king Cambyses was described by Herodotus as an arrogant madman who desecrated the holy Bull of Apis of Egypt and married his own sister, only to kill her. Meanwhile, records by Egyptian scribes portrayed him as a wise monarch who practice religious tolerance in Egypt. Why are these accounts so different, and what are the motivations behind their respective authors?

2020-08-06

分享

喜欢(0) 快速回复

回复

• 

  旖然
  When I saw this question, one person occurred to my mind. He is Hairui, a official in Ming dynasty who is famous for being incorrupt. And in one book published in the 1960s, he was described as a upright and straight person, who fought for justice and worked against corruption, he was described as a kind and generous person, in that book, he protected the farmers' property from the deforcement of some rich and evil officials, and later, they set up Hairui and made him lost his position. This was admittedly touching. Actually I read this when I was 7, and I had put high remarks on Hairui, until I read more authentic version of him. He has never involved in corruption, indeed, but he doesn't seem to be that perfect and flawless-- he can be coldhearted sometimes, he even punished his 7 years old daughter because someone gave her a piece of pancake and she accepted it, and when he worked against some corrupted officials, he didn't do it all for public well-being. There are so many difference between these two version of Hairui. Even the illustrations of his portrait in two books are different----one is a good-looking person, who appear to be righteous, and the other is a man with a rigorous face, as well as an unfriendly personality. Considered the social background of the first book, I decided to take a critical view of its judgement of a historical figure, and include the information in the second book in my understanding of him------BY: Wang Siyi

  2020-08-07 刪除 喜欢(0)

• 

  张雯清
  I want to talk about Indian Mahatma Gandhi. The main stream describes him as Mahatma, somebody who save the India from being colonized with his theory of Non-violent and Non-cooperation. He is a gorgeous figure written on history pages, without doubt. But new ideas raised some criticism over him. According to his theory, he urged the Jews to collectively commit suicide , urged China to give up resisting Japan in order to recall empathy and pity in the aggressors. New ideas doubt whether his theory is the key to save the Indian? Or it was because the decline of England that time? So I believe it’s something about perspectives and criticism. The Western countries heroize Gandhi because people like him may help reduce conflicts in colonies and thus protecting their military power. But criticism rises because people have the nature to get rid of this kind of unfair heroism.

  2020-08-07 刪除 喜欢(0)