Changes in the Objectivity of Written History, and the Continuance.
of Two Major School's in Written History.
All human actions make up history. Indeed everything that has been done in the past has influenced our future in some way. However, while there are some coincidences and likenesses found in history and our present, it is impossible to say that the present is based on the past. One thing that can be certain is that the written history of man is based on one thing: perception. Depending on the author, whether you are Herodotus, Ptolemy, Machiavelli, or Van Ranke, history has always been written from the perception of the author who has written it. It is these perceptions that influence the way we view history today, and even formulate perceptions of our own. One of the major trends in written history that must be looked upon is not in the way histories were written, or even what they were written about, but the manner of objectivity they were written. In other words, one of the greatest trends, and most changing, is the change in the reasons for writing the histories of man in the first place. Whether a history was written to tell a story as Herodotus is guilty of, or writing in support of an ideology as Engel or Marx have done, one thing is apparent. History has never been written to inform, but to influence.
From the Ancient times two great authors have been quoted time and time again as the fathers of history. Each of these authors spawning two different schools of thought that exist still today. For simpler purposes these two schools of thought shall be termed as the Story school, and the Fact school, each in turn contributing and expanding on the purpose of written history. The first of these two writers is Herodotus. "The subject of his book is the confrontation of East and West, of barbarism and civilization; the book ends with the salvation of this civilization through the heroic efforts of the Athenians.
