HISTORY
CONCEPT, NATURE, SCOPE AND SIGNIFICANCE

What is History?

History is the study of the past – specifically, the people, societies and events. It is also a study of the problems of the past – and our attempts to understand them. It is a pursuit common to all human societies. History can be a tremendous story, a rolling narrative filled with the tales of the turmoil and triumphs of the lives of great personalities. Each passing generation adds its own chapter to our history while reinterpreting and finding new things in the already written chapters. History gives us a sense of identity. By understanding where we have come from, we can better understand who we are. History provides a sense of context for our lives and our existence. It helps us to understand the way things are and the ways in which we might approach the future. History teaches us what it means to be human, highlighting the great achievements and disastrous errors of the human race. History also teaches us through example. It offers hints about how we can organise and manage our societies for the benefit and betterment of all those who live in them.
Some historians say that "What is History?" This question is very difficult and this question has remained the same from the ancient times till the twenty first century. Charles Firth has rightly said, “It is not easy to define History”.
Various experts have defined History in the following way:-
1. History is a story - According to Henry Pirenne, ‘History is the story of the actions and achievements of the men living in the society’. Mr. Reneiyar has removed the Hi from the word History and presented it as story. He has regarded History as the story of the actions and experiences of men living in a civilized society. Like Reneiyar and Pirenne, Trevelyan, Huizinga/Tuizinga and Oliver etc. also defined History as a story.
There was a time when there was a great stress laid on the political history of kings, queens and their courtiers. Some historical events are very interesting in themselves and seem to be like a story. Since a story has a hero as the main lead, it is related to History, but today, when History based on individual has become obsolete, and a special importance is being laid on the cultural history of the common man, in such a situation, history cannot be accepted as a story. A story has certain elements of imagination, which have nothing to do with History. It has a place in the world of literature, but never in History. Hence we can lessen the importance of History by calling it a story.
2. History is knowledge - Dilthey, Crochet and R G Collingwood have considered History as knowledge and tried to define it accordingly. Crochet has regarded historical knowledge as the highest form of human knowledge and an inspirational force.
It seems to be more meaningful to regard History as a source of knowledge in place of regarding it as a story. To learn a lesson from History has become a famous idiom today. Acting on this idiom, man can find a solution to all his problems in History today. It is indeed the main objective of History to show the way to the future by taking examples from the happenings of the past. But here, the statement of Hegel is also worth considering where he says that, “The greatest lesson to be learnt from History is that no one learns any lesson from History.” Had the countries of the First World War and their leaders learnt a lesson from the destructive results of the war, the world would not have to go through the horror of the Second World War. On the other hand, Sultan Iltutmish, the Sultan of the Delhi Sultanate, was a far sighted man. He was well aware of the cruel history of the Mongols. So he refused to give asylum to the prince of Khvarizm, Jalauddin Mangbarni, who was an opponent of the Mongol ruler Changez Khan. In this way he learnt a lesson from History and saved the Delhi Sultanate, which was still in its infancy, from the wrath of the Mongol ruler Changez Khan.
Hence, indeed, History is knowledge as well as a main source of knowledge. That is why we must learn and take guidance from it at every step and improve our present and build a happy future for ourselves.
3. History is Social Science - Karl Marx connected History with Social Science for the first time by using scientific method in the study of mankind. Wilhem Dilthey was actually the first person who made an effort to make History as a Social Science. According to Prof. A. L. Rouch, “History is mainly an account of man’s relation with his geographical and physical environment. His social and cultural situations started as a result of mutual interaction.” Actually, History is not only a Social Science, but rather, it is one of the first subjects which come under Social Science.
4. All History is History of ideas - Thought is that inspirational power which makes a man to act or do a work. Whether it be Emperor Ashoka or Akbar, Napoleon Bonaparte or Hitler, first they must have had thoughts in their mind, which they transformed into actions, and as a result, events took place and those events became History. It is true that history is created by the minds of men, and not by men themselves. The main source of man’s actions is thoughts only. Therefore, if we study the thoughts of any historical character, we will be able understand his actions easily, because actions are directed by thoughts. In this context, the statement of Mr. R.G. Collingwood seems to be apt that, “All History is History of ideas”.
5. All History is Contemporary History - The famous Italian historian Mr. Benedetto Croce has called the entire History as Contemporary History. His statement means that fundamentally historical writings present the past in the background of the modern problems as seen with the eyes of the present, but in the present times, the history of the present times is called as contemporary history. The beginning of contemporary history is considered to be from the time when the series of the events of the present can be traced.
6. History is a continuous dialogue between the past and the present - A historian writes history on the basis of the facts of the past. If the facts represent the past, then the historian represents the present. In this context, historian Mr. E. H. Carr has defined History very aptly when he writes, “History is the uninterrupted process of the action and reaction of the historian and his facts, and a continuous dialogue between the past and the present.”

History Vision

It is a strong link between the present and the past, which works to connect the present and the past. When the same link is used as a means to see the present and the past, it is called as a History Vision. By using the same history vision, the historian envisions those facts of the contemporary society, which are interesting and useful for the present. Actually past and present are the two banks of the river, and a historian is one who builds the bridge of history to connect the two. Therefore History is that bridge, through which we can study the past in context of the present and improve our present and get direction for a happy future. This definition of History is almost complete in itself and useful.

Origin of History

The philosophers of Sanskrit grammar believe the origin of the word Itihas as ‘iti +ha +aas’. This means that – definitely it has happened like this. The most ancient mention of the itihas has been found in Atharvaveda –

स वृहती दिशां अनुव्यचलत्।
ताम इतिहासश्च पुराणं च गाथाश्च।
नाराशंसी चानुव्यचलत्॥

This means that history, Puranas and those who sing the praises of men follow the progressive nation which moves in the direction of its goal. In Chhandogya Upanishad, History has been called as Paanchva ved, or the fifth Veda. The Satpath Brahmanakar ha named the faculty of History as Itihas Veda. The ruler, in his writings, has mentioned that one of the mantras of the tenth Mandala od Rigveda I a combination of Rik, story and history. In this way we see that the word history, which has been imported from Greece, was present here and there in usage in some context of the history of ancient India in some form or the other.
The word History has been derived from the Greek word Historia. Historia means to gain knowledge. Herodotus of Greece (480-430 BC) propounded the word History for the first time with the intention of test and research and hence laid the foundation stone for historical philosophy. That why Sir Herodotus is considered as the Father of History. It was Herodotus who created History with his sharp intellect and curiosity by seeing the actions of man in a broad perspective. This is the reason that generally the beginning of History is considered to be from the 5th Century BC.

Tools of History

There are four main tools of History, which are also called as the parts of History. They are –
1. Period
2. Person
3. Place
4. Event
They can be remembered as 3P+E.

Concept of History

History is the record of the important events of the past. For a very long time, the meaning of History was considered as presentation of facts. Facts are lifeless in themselves, and it is the job of the historian to give them life. Mr. E. H. Carr has regarded the historian as a fisherman who chooses his favorite fish of facts from the vast ocean. Since the historian is a person, he might or might not have preconceived ideas. Hence, the narration of the facts could have flaws also. In such a situation, History, ceases to be history and becomes a story, myth or a saga. That is why before studying history, it is important to study about the historian and his historical and social milieu.
It is the duty of the historian to understand his responsibility and rise above his preconceived ideas, because today, history is no longer a mere continuous dialogue between the past and the present. According to Burckhardt, ‘History is the record or remark of those things which one era receives as being worth mentioning in another era.’ Actually, to make the society of the past easy to understand and to strengthen its hold on the present society is the dual responsibility of both History and the historian.
As is clear from the meaning, History means definitely it has happened like this, therefore, there has always been a change in the concept of History also. The concept of History has been related to a large extent to the needs of the contemporary society and its interests. In every age, the nature of the concept of History has been purposeful. Change is the eternal rule of life; therefore there has been a change in the concept of History according to the place, period, situation and the needs of the changed society.

Indian concept of History

It is often said by the Western scholars that the ancient Indian intellectuals were passive towards writing History. The Western scholar Lewis Dinkins has said that Hindus were not historians. Mr. Teelhard has further said, “The reason for the lack of a sense of History in Indians is that the Hindus were steeped in spirituality because of their belief in Maya (illusion) and karma. Spirituality made them lowly and non religious due to which they developed a lack of potential to build the world.” Staying in tune with the Western scholars, Indian scholar Dr. Hirachandra Shastri also has said that, “the ancient Indians did not pay attention to History because they were more interested in the future as compared to the past and present.”
But today we see that all the above opinions are baseless and false. Dr. Ramesh Chandra Majumdar does not accept that the ancient Indian scholars were unaware of the skill of writing History. Prof. A.K. Warder has clearly written that “There is continuity in the Indian History from the Vedic period to the modern times. Even today, the History of ancient India is scatted in the manuscripts.” That is why Mr. Girija Shankar Prasad has regarded the statement of Lewis Dinkins that ‘Hindus were not Historians’ as totally a joke. The ancient Indians never gave the state, wealth and materialistic powers any great importance of supreme value. On the contrary, they accepted spirituality, karma and religion as things of supreme value and tried to preserve in the form of Vedas, Upnishads, Brahmans, and Sutra Sahitya. According to Girija Shankar Prasad Mishra, “It is not right to regard the theories of Karma and illusion as sources of passiveness and non religiousness. The famous expounder of the Theory of Illusion Shankaracharya also did not turn his back on those actions which he considered as his responsibility. Regarding the allegations of Mr. Teelhard as baseless, Mishra writes, “Though the Indians believed in Karma and illusion, yet they built a glorious History and only those who do not have any knowledge of Indian History will be unaware of the significant achievements of the Indian scholars.
Reacting very seriously to the above mentioned statement of Dr. Hiranand Shastri, Mr. Mishra defied it in very strong words. According to him, “Today, India is the only country in this world which has kept a large portion its past safe and secure. The Indians have always believed that we are the heirs of the past, and its security is our foremost responsibility.”
The statement of Prof. Srinivas Iyengar that, “If the dates are the eyes of History, then the ancient Indian History should be considered to be on the top” – does not seem to be appropriate. Today, all the scholars are of the opinion that History is not merely an account of dates. In the present days, special stress is being laid on the cultural history.
The Greek historian Mr. Polybius has regarded truth as the eye of History. A detailed description of the culture of that age (religion, finances and society) has been described in detail in all the ancient Indian Vedas, Upnishads, Brahman texts, etc.

Cyclic Concept of Indian History

The theory of the cyclic concept was expounded considering History as a dynamic cycle in the ancient Indian concept of History. The concept of the creation and destruction of the universe is a very ancient concept, the proof of which can be found in the descriptions of the Atharvaveda also. Probably this concept in the Brahman Sahitya was later related to the cyclic concept. The concept of the following four yugas or ages is found in the Brahman Sahitya –
1. Krita Yuga – The Krita Yuga is considered as the golden age of man’s history. The society of this age was prosperous and filled with all kind of happiness and luxury, and people had mutual affection amongst them.
2. Treta Yuga – In the second stage of the cycle Treta Yuga, a lack of human values and means of luxury is seen as compared to Krita Yuga.
3. Dwapar Yuga – In this third stage Dwapar Yuga of the cyclic concept, the beginning of man’s sorrows is clearly visible. Man has to battle with numerous struggles in this Yuga, which is why this Yuga is also called as the Yuga of struggles. Man starts being troubled with many diseases. Many losses can be seen in the society, and it is in this Yuga that various rules and values were laid down in order to control and regulate the continuous declining condition of the society. This the reason that this Yuga, apart from being called as a Yuga of struggles, is also called as a Yuga dominant with values and rules.
4. Kalyuga – Kaliyuga is the last stage of the Indian cyclic concept. The sorrow which began in the Dwapar Yuga reaches its climax in Kaliyuga. Man entangled in sorrow, despair, injustice and other problems starts ignoring religion. Selfishness and enmity increased in the society.
According to the Indian tradition, these four Yugas combine to make one Mahayuga and many such Mahayugas follow one after the other continuously. One thousand Mahayugas make one kalpa. In the Indian concept, a kalpa is the complete time period between the creation of the universe till its destruction. Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia has written in connection with this cyclic concept that, “This perspective of History considers both rise and decline. It seems to be similar to man’s life, where people win in their battle against evil, reach to the pinnacle of greatness, power, goodness, truth or beauty, and when the soul gets tired, they again start falling into distraction, weakness and lack of purpose, and once again the soul blooms after the darkness through the much needed light and then it becomes possible for it to rise.”
(I) According to the cyclic concept
Nothing is permanent in this world. It is certain that sorrow will follow happiness and happiness also will follow sorrow. So, we should not be too happy in times of happiness, nor should we be too sad in times of sorrow.
(II) The theory of Incarnation
This theory of Indian cyclic concept is very closely related to the theory of Incarnation. Whenever misconduct and tyranny are on the rise on this Earth, man’s life reaches the climax of problems and sorrows, in such times God takes incarnation on this Earth in some form or the other for the welfare and redemption of humanity. In confirmation to the theory of incarnation, Krishna himself says in Bhagvad Gita –

यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लनिर्भवति भारत।
अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य तदात्मानं सृजाम्यहम्॥
परित्राणाय साधुनां विनाशाय च दुष्कृताम्
धर्म सन्स्थापनार्थाय सम्भवामि युगे युगे॥

Meaning – Whenever there is a downfall of righteousness and the unrighteous is on the rise, I take a form and come into this world. In order to protect and liberate the good people and to destroy the evil, and to reestablish Dharma, I incarnate on this Earth in every Yuga.
Just as in Gita, Goswami Tulsidas has also confirmed the theory of incarnation in his ‘Ramcharitmanas’. He has written --

“जब जब होहिं धरम कै हानि।
बाढ़हिं असुर महा अभिमानी॥
तब तब प्रभु धरि विविध शरीरा।
हरहिं कृपा निधि सज्जन पीरा॥

It is clear from this that in every Yuga, God takes incarnation in some form or the other for the welfare for mankind, establishment of Dharma and destruction of the evil.
(III) The theory of Karma (Deeds or Actions) – The theory of Karma also has a special significance in the Indian concept of History. As one’s actions are, so does one reap the results. The four divisions of ashram and varnas of man’s life are based on karma. The theory of karma saves man from escapism and gives a definite direction to History. A special stress has been laid to selfless actions in Gita.
(IV) The theory of Moksha (Salvation) – The fourth concept of Indian History is the concept of Moksha. A great stress is laid in every religion to indulge in good deeds in order to attain salvation.
(V) The theory of Reincarnation – The Theory of reincarnation is the fifth concept of Indian History. The main factor of reincarnation is also considered to be Karma.
Therefore the concept of History had already developed in the Indians in the ancient times itself. They have called History as the fifth Veda. Kautilya told the king that listening to History was a must. Rajtarangini by Kalhan is nothing but complete History. While writing this book, not only did Kalhan introduce himself as a historian and study eleven books written on Kashmir, but rather he rectified many mistakes committed in those books while describing the historical facts.

The Greek Concept of History

The Greek have called the writing of History as a Science. Their History is not a narration, but a research. They not only maintained the family lineage, but also had a keen interest in the impact of History on mankind and in Geography as well. Herodotus gave importance to the rules of nature in History. He also accepted the impact of nature, geographical conditions and environment on man’s actions. The thoughts and ideas of Polyvius are also significant regarding the scope, methodology and objectives of History. He accepted the concept of History on a universal level. It was Polyvius who first imagined bringing the entire world under the control of one emperor through the rise of a world kingdom or the Roman Empire. In Livy’s concept of History, values are more prominent.
Actually scientific method is of great significance in the Greek concept of History. They laid more stress on the reasons behind the event rather than the event itself. Evaluating their concept of History, Prof. Thompson has written, “The Greeks have written all kinds of History. They first learnt the skill of writing the actual History, and explained its objectives, works and its rules. Just like Science and Philosophy, the Greeks are the founders of History also.

The Greeko-Roman Cyclic Concept

The Greeko-Roman CyclicConcept has been given by the Greek poet Hesiod. Hesiod demonstrated great interest in religion and has described the origin of Gods and their relationship with human beings. He imagined four eras or ages on the basis of the names of the four metals as mentioned under –
(1) The Golden Age – In this age, heaven was ruled by Kronos. Human beings worked like gods. The earth provided all the good things to men on its own.
(2) The Silver Age – Compared to the Golden Age, there was decline in the condition of man in Silver Age. He left praying to God and moved towards downfall while facing many struggles.
(3) The Bronze Age – In this age, the buildings and the weapons of man were made of bronze. Man was very powerful, but he did not have any feeling of kindness. Mutual war and animosity were rampant in this age.
(4) The Iron Age – Hesiod has mentioned about the existence of an age between the Bronze Age and the Iron Age, or so to say, at the beginning of the Iron Age where brave men existed. These brave men were more brave and just as compared to their ancestors. These brave men took part in the battles of Troy and Thebes. After that came the Iron Age. In this age, man had knowledge about iron. This age was full of sorrows.
Many scholars recognized this Cyclic Concept of the Greeko-Roman tradition and many amendments have also been made in them from time to time.

Christian Concept of History

Religion has a great significance in the Christian Concept of History. The victory of the Christians over the schismatics had a great impact on the writing of History. Intellect and wisdom was of great importance in the Greek Concept of History, but as a result of the promotion of Christianity, religion became dominant over the intellect and wisdom.
The Christian historians gave the methods and systems of the Greeks and the Romans. They took refuge in religious literature for the explanation deep meaning. They divided the historical documents into two parts – the pure and the impure. We can call them as religious and unreligious also. Out of these two, they focused more on the religious history and gave special place to the divine events in their narrations. In this connection, Prof. Shuttleworth has said, “It is really a very sad state of affairs that divine events were given place in the writing of History. As a result, the scientific methodology was strangulated, which was once again adopted in the 19th century.”
In this way we see that the Christian Concept of History was world-wide, religious, divine, miraculous and age proven. After the reawakening in Europe (1453), there was a change in their concept of History once again, and by the time they reached the 19th century, politics and science had gained prominence in place of religion.

Concept of History in Medieval Age

The concept of history in the medieval age was nothing but an extension of the Greek concept of History. The historians of the medieval age depended only on hearsay for facts. After the decline of the Roman Empire, there was a lot of anarchy and disorganization. At this time, many important ancient works and documents were lost. So the medieval historians were deprived of many priceless ancient works. The medieval Christians priests took advantage of this situation of vacuum and established their monopoly on the writing of History. Hence the medieval concept of History seems to be inspired by religious feelings.

Concept of History in Modern Age

The impact of the age of reawakening in Europe can be seen clearly on the concept of History in the Modern Age. The all round research of the human society once again became the target/goal of History. So the concept of History became more person-oriented than God oriented and tendency oriented. Along with this, interested was now being taken in classic literature. It was at this time that a critical study of the historical documents began. Now the historians were not priests, but diplomatic, truth seeker people. Hence the concept of History of this age was humanistic.

Humanistic Concept of History

The Humanistic Concept of History was developed in Italy. During this time, the achievements of the local princes were being recorded. In due course, the humanistic historians started writing national and classic literature also. At this time, along with the history of the current times, the history of the ancient times also was written. The ancient manuscripts were searched and their analysis was done. As a result, the scientific methodology of editing and criticism began. Therefore, the greatest contribution of the Humanistic concept of History is that the ancient and classic history could also find an appropriate place in it.

Marxist concept of History

The credit of presenting the Marxist concept of History goes to Karl Marx and Hegel. Both Karl Marx and Hegel were influenced by the Theory of Dualism and they presented the Marxist Theory of history on the basis of this theory. According to them, the main basis of the building of history is the battle among the classes. Marx accepts the continuous change in the social organization as the momentum of history. According to Marx, there are three stages of production organization and social change: the slave tradition, feudalism and the capitalism. Capitalism is the climax of this change. Hence all the social changes begin with the processes of production. This is the fundamental theory of the Marxist concept of History.

Scientific Concept of History

The Scientific Concept of History is the outcome of the 19th century. Just like Science, History is also centered on facts. By the time it came to its present form, various different processes being constantly developed polished history to a large extent. The modern system of minute criticism under history forced many scholars to think of providing a scientific level to history. Just like science, the investigation of accuracy has become the main specialty of history also. The main objective of Science is to investigate the nature and unravel its deep secrets. Similarly the main objective of giving a scientific form to history is also to bring about the rules which control the human conditions and situations. Generally, these rules are fundamentally the reason for the social development, progress and decline, and as a result, social, political and economic changes take place. The solution to such problems can be found by keeping History in scientific cover. Hence, the Scientific Concept of History has definitely given a vast perspective to History.

Beginning of the Modern Historiography

The History of Ancient India was written by the European scholars with a modern perspective. The modern research on the history of ancient India began in the second half of the 18th century. The European scholars started taking interest in the Indian history and culture with the establishment of the East India Company. With this began the modern historical writing of ancient India. The main traditions of this modern writing of history are as follows:
1. Orientalists Historiography
The Orientalists are those European scholars who took interest in the study of Indian history and culture. On 15th January 1784, Sir William Jones (1746-94) established an organization called Asiatic Society with the help of the then Governor General Warren Hastings. This organization set its objective as doing research with respect to topics like the history, literature, establishment, religion, society and Science of the Asian sub continent. Sir William’s name is considered to be one of the pioneers among the Orientalists. He translated the famous drama ‘Abhigyan Shakuntalam’ by Kalidasa into English in 1789. Prior to this, a translation of Manusmriti had been done in English under the title ‘A Code of Gent’s Lodge’. This increased the interest of the European scholars in the study of the entire ancient Indian Sanskrit literature. Many Indian books were translated on a large scale by the efforts of the German scholar Maxmuller (1832-1902).
2. Imperialist Historiography
The fundamental objective of adopting the Imperialist historiography by the British Imperialist historians was to provide stability and strength to the British Empire in India. The seeds of Imperialist writing of history were already present in the Orientalist historiography. It had become necessary for the rulers of the East India Company to study the Indian traditions, customs and laws in order to solve the administrative and judicial problems. The translation of the Indian book of Law, Manusmriti, in the year 1776, proves this fact. Colonel Boden established the post of Boden Acharya for Sanskrit in the Oxford University, London. The main objective behind this was that the English people should be able learn Sanskrit and understand the Indian traditions. Horace Hayman Wilson was the first person to be appointed as the chairperson of the Boden Chair of Sanskrit. It was on the request of the East India Company and with its financial help that the England based German scholar Maxmuller accomplished the job of translating a large number of ancient Indian religious texts.
The prime objective of all these translations was to study the Indian culture minutely and to take advantage of its short comings. We consider Mr. Maxmuller as an Orientalist as well as an Imperialist writer. In 1868, Maxmuller wrote to The Secretary of State for India, The Duke of Argyll that, ‘The ancient religion of India is about to be destroyed, and if Christianity does not take its place, then who is to be blamed.” In a letter written to his wife also, Maxmuller mentioned the objective of his works as uprooting the basics of Indian traditions. The Boden Professor, Monier Williams of the Oxford University, presented the intentions of Maxmuller even more clearly in the following words, “When the strong fort of the Hindu religion of India will be besieged, they will be weakened and finally when they will be attacked by the soldiers of the Christain religion (Cross), then definitely the victory shall come to Christianity alone.”
One of the objectives set for the Imperialist Historiography was to prove the British Civilization to be better than the Indian Civilization. This was necessary because the British citizens who came to India were coming under the influence of the Hindu civilization and Brahmanism.
Vincent a Smith is considered as the main pillar of the tradition of the Imperialist Historiography. He was an FICS officer in India. Apart from Smith, among the other imperialist historians who became a historian from a ruler are mainly H H Wilson, Mountstuart Elphinstone, etc. the objective of their writing was to state that the people of the Indian society could be destroyed only by the British rule and its laws. It is in the best interest of India that it should progress under the British rule.
Vincent Smith was a great imperialist historian who wrote ‘Early History of India’ in 1904. He utilized one third part of his book in describing the attack of Alexander on India in order to illustrate the weakness of the Indian army. Commenting on the political mismanagement after Harsha’s reign, Smith writes that whenever India became free from the control of a strong power, it reached a state of anarchy and mismanagement. Hence now also, if it becomes free from the British rule, then there can be anarchy and mismanagement once again. Smith found it appropriate to describe only the great rulers and empires of India. Small time-periods, where local states were established, have been called as the Dark Age, considering them as a representation of misrule and anarchy. eacting to the imperialist historiography, R S Sharma writes – ‘The main objective of the narration of the Indian history by the British Imperialist historians was to look down upon the moral character of India and its achievements, and to prove the British rule as justified.’ In this way we see that the main objective of the imperialist historiography was to provide security and stability to the British Empire in India. Perhaps they wanted to say that the British Empire was necessary for the progress of the Indians. The imperialist historians have mostly used only those evidences in their writings which confirm and prove their imperialistic concept.
3. Nationalist historiography
The image of India, which was tarnished by the writings of the imperialist historiographers, was reestablished and restored to dignity by the nationalist historiographers. The nationalist historians proved the greatness of the ancient Indian culture and diplomacy. The nationalist historians argued that – If the imperialist historiographers can misuse the Indian history in favor of imperialism, then we also can put it to good use in favor of nationalism. The main objectives of nationalist historiography were as follows –
1. To rectify in a logical manner the baseless and misleading presentation of the Indian history written by imperialist historians like James Miller, who did not even come to India.
2. To prove in a logical manner with evidence that the greatness of the British political organizations in comparison to India attested by the imperialist historians like Vincent Smith is misleading.
3. To bring in to light the period between the Kushanas and the Guptas, which was termed as the Dark Age by Vincent Smith.
4. To prove the greatness of the ancient Indian monarchy and democratic ruling systems.
5. To rebuild the history of ancient India in such a logical manner so as to reestablish the dignity of Indian culture and civilization.
6. The nationalist historians made tireless efforts to rebuild the ancient Indian history in view of the above mentioned objectives. They studied the manuscripts, writings on palm leaves, coins, monuments and various other literary sources and presented a proud Indian history.
The nationalist historians gave a very great challenge to the imperialist historiography in the early decades of the 20th century. The prominent nationalist historians engaged in the writing of the history of ancient India were D. R. Bhandarkar, K.P.Jaiswal, R.C. Majumdar and Radha Kumud Mukherjee etc. these nationalist historians played a very significant role in enriching the ancient Indian history.
Pandurang vaman kane (1880-1972) – P.V.Kane was an eminent scholar of Sanskrit and a great social reformer. He wrote ‘The History of Dharmashastra’ in five volumes. It is an encyclopedia of the laws, social rules, religious rules and codes of conduct prevalent in ancient India. It gives information on the social processes of ancient India.
In this way, the nationalist historiography played a significant role in completely erasing the misleading and false image about ancient Indian history and culture created by the imperialist historiographers.
4. Marxist historiography
The credit of the Marxist narration of history goes to Karl Heinrich Marx (1818-1883). Karl Marx had a keen interest in History and Philosophy from the very beginning. The impact of the Dualism of G.W.F. Hegel (1770-1831) and the scientific concept of the positivists can be seen in the Marxist concept of History. In History, Marx presented the Marxist Philosophy in place of the Idealist Philosophy. Hegel’s philosophy of History is called as the Dualistic Idealism. Plekhanov has called Marx’s philosophy of History has Dualistic Marxist philosophy. F. Angels has named the Dualistic Marxism of Marx as Historical Marxism. Sebine has written –‘The Dualist ideologies were standing upside down in Hegel’s thoughts. Marx removed the confusions and made them stand on their feet in their natural condition.’
While Hegel open’s the locks of the historical ideologies with the key of Dualistic Idealism, Marx opens it with the key of Dualistic Marxism. Hegel has regarded the building of History as a process of ideas and intellect, while Marx considers the role of economic factors as the main in the building of History. According to Marx, the social, political and spiritual elements in the history of man’s life are decided by the means of production in his materialistic worldly life. Marx explains the economic scenario through the battle of the classes and regards the entire history of the world as the battle of the classes.
According to Marx, one class of the society works hard for production and the other class being the owner of the means of production enjoys the extra benefit. In this way the battle between the exploited labor class and the exploiter capitalist class gives momentum to History. The end result of this battle of the classes is seen as the Marxist revolution. After this revolution, a struggle free rule of the proletariat class and a classless society will be established. This is the ultimate goal of the historical Marxism of Marx.
The Marxist historians determine the universal movement of History based on the means of production or the economic condition by the following five stages –
1. Age of the Primitive Communism
2. Age of the Slave Society
3. Age of the Feudal Society
4. Age of the Capitalist Society
5. Socialist Society
Marx calls the three stages between the Primitive Communism and the Socialist Society as the history of struggles.
The Marxist historiography started in India after India’s independence. The Marxist historian tested India’s history in context with the above mentioned stages. The stages defined by Marx and Angels were applied on the Indian history. The prominent Marxist thinker Mr, Paad Amrit Dange, in his book ‘India from Primitive Communism to Slavery’ has tried to prove that just like other Western countries, India also has passed through the various stages of development like slavery and feudalism. He has claimed that the slave society rose in India after the community set up of the Aryas came to an end.
Among the Indian Marxist historiographers, the name of Damodar Dharmanand Kausambi (1907-1966) holds the most significant place. Kausambi’s Marxist view is brilliantly evident in his two major works—‘An Introduction to the Study of History (1956)’ and ‘Culture and Civilization of Ancient India (1964)’. Kausambi believed that the non Aryan slaves were collectively exploited by the Aryan tribes. He has tried to present the history of the Indian society, economy and culture as an integral part of the powers of production and development of relationship.
In the tradition of the Indian Marxist historiography, after Kausambi, the name of Ramsharan Sharma is taken in a very prominent manner. A glimpse of the Marxist view can be seen in his major works ‘Pracheen Bharat mein Rajnitik Vichar evam Sansthayen’, ‘Bharatiya Samaj evam Sanskriti’, ‘Pracheen Bharat mein Bhautik Pragati aur Samajik Sanrachna’ and ‘Bharatiya Samantvaad’. In this tradition of Marxist historiography, D.R. Chanana’s ‘Slavery in Ancient India’, Romilla Thapar’s ‘Bharat ka Itihas’, L Gopal’s ‘The Economic Life of North India (700-1200) and B.N. Yadav’s ‘Land System and Feudalism in India’ hold a significant place. All these works present the ancient Indian history from the Marxist perspective. The Marxist historians have regarded the age after the Gupta Age till the 12th century as the Age of Feudalism in India.
In this way, the Marxist historian did a very minute and factual study of the Indian history. They brought history out of the courts of the kings, queens and courtiers and focused it on the common man. They studied minutely the archeological and literary sources like the archives, manuscripts, writings on palm leaves, monuments, coins etc and gave a wide context to history.

The Nature of History

In the present times, when he political, social and economic conditions are changing at a very fast pace, in such a situation, it is a very vital question worth reflecting as to what should be the nature of History. In the nineteenth century, the concept of introducing Social Sciences and then including History in Social Science developed gradually. Since then, the systematic method of studying human actions just as Science does to know the deep secrets hidden in Nature.
The main question to be considered today is whether a scientific method should be used in writing History or should Art be included. Is History a Science or an Art? Since a very long time, the main topic of debate among the scholars has been the nature of History; that History is an Art or a Science.

Is History a Science?

Science lays stress on observation and experiments, and it does a methodical study of any object. Similarly, History also tests all the evidences and undoubtedly, there is a method of studying in History. From this perspective, History can be considered as a Science. Prof. Seale clearly states, ‘History is a Science, it has nothing to do with literature.’ According to Spengler, ‘Just as Zoology sees living beings pass through definite stages, similarly a historian also sees civilizations and cultures pass through definite stages.’
Along with the above mentioned similarities, there are certain differences also between Science and History. A historian describes events, but Science does deduction on the basis of theories in place of description. History generalizes an incident while describing it, as to how, why and when the incident took place. It does not demonstrate any rule in connection to it. Another difference is that due to the availability of advanced technology and developed techniques, Science is capable of predicting about the weather etc., while History can guide us towards the future, but cannot make any predictions. Scientist have their own methods of searching for solutions for the topics under dispute, but no definite rules have been laid yet for the solutions regarding the problems related to History. Hence, on the basis of the above mentioned facts, we can say that History is not a Science. Bluke also has refused to accept History as a Science.
When there is so much of difference of opinion between Prof. Seale and Bluke regarding the nature of History, then it is best for us to take the middle path and that is to regard History as a Science only in limited sense. The historian adopts the scientific method in the field of testing of sources, their explanation, and objectivity and presents the facts/truth, but the historian cannot test his decisions or vision in the laboratories. Hence history can be considered as a Science only in limited sense. In this connection, Collingwood also agrees that, ‘History is a special kind of Science. It studies the events, but it is not possible to test them. These events are studied on the basis of assumptions, which are based on certain evidences.

Is History an Art?

If science is concerned with knowing, art is concerned with doing. ---
There are two mutually contradictory concepts prevalent whether History should be accepted as a branch of art or literature. It is important to do a minute study of these concepts. In spite of being processed by scientific methods, many historians regard History to be a branch of art or literature. In this connection, G. R. Elton states that, ‘Even though historiography is polished by scientific methods, artistic style is very necessary in its presentation and narration.’ Actually, whatever a historian writes, he writes for the sake of others. So according to Govind Chandra Pande, ‘In History, special care is taken regarding the skill of description, readability, choice of citation and character sketch, along with the facts. In this deep meaning, History is definitely an art.’
The historical facts are generally very dry and lifeless. But the historian makes available a live and interesting History on the basis of these dry and lifeless facts by using his artistic and interesting writing skills. The main objective of the historian should be the participation of the common man in the knowledge gained and earned by him. By presenting the lifeless facts by merely polishing them with scientific methods will not only make History dry and difficult, but also people will not like to study it. Hence it is necessary that the dry and lifeless facts be wrapped in the cover of art and make them lively, readable and interesting, while keeping them within the limits of History.
The dry and lifeless facts of History should be wrapped in art only while being in the circle of History, otherwise it will no longer remain History. The modern historians have recognized only the History which has been processed by scientific methods while being in the cover of art. This is the reason why Machiavelly and Carlyle have been accepted as successful historians, because there is artistic style in their writings, but the scientific methods are visible everywhere.
Hence art should be included in History only to the extent that the limits of History are not encroached upon. Too much inclusion of art can destroy the very existence of History. In the absence of facts, History will certainly lose its existence and remain only an emotion dominant literature.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we can say that there should be combination of art and science in the nature of history, so that lifeless and dry facts can be processed with scientific methods and present in an artistic manner in front of the people. G M Trevelyan also has regarded History as both art and science and said, ‘The method of searching the facts should be scientific, but it should be presented in front of the readers with the help of art.’

Scope of History

The trends of writing History change according to the personal needs of every society. Along with this, the nature of the scope of History has always been continuously changing from the prehistoric times to the modern times. The only basis of the developing nature of History is the social values and the contemporary social conditions f different ages.
The founder of History, the Greek historian Herodotus regards the incidents as the scope of History. Thucydides also supported this view. But Polyvius made the scope of History even vaster. According to him, the description of incidents, the analysis of the cause for the events to occur and the thoughts of the historian related to the incident come within the scope of History. The thoughts of Polyvius regarding the scope, method and objectives of History are significant.
We have seen in the Christian concept of History that in the medieval Europe, the job of writing History came into the hands of the Christian priests. Therefore, the scope of History shrank down and remained limited only to God. But the reawakening of Europe freed History from the shackles of religion. According to the Humanistic concept of History developed in Europe, all the activities of man came under the scope of History.
The philosophers Montesquieu and Voltaire etc, who gave birth to the French Revolution, expanded the scope of History. The tradition of the Buddhist History also began. Nature, Geography and values were also included in the scope of History. In the Darwinian Theory of Development, environment was also included in the scope of History.
The relation of History of the 19th century was primarily limited to political events and political organizations, but today, all the activities of man have come under the scope of History. So the scope of History also has expanded.
In the field of knowledge, History is the only subject which has a very wide scope. History is related to man and the origin, development, activities and the problems of man are studied in History. The social, economic, political and religious, all the aspects of man are included in the scope of History. From the regional point of view, the local history, the state history, the national history and world history are also the extensions of History. According to Maitland, ‘What men has done and said, and above all, what they have thought, that is History. ’The vastness of History can be imagined from this statement of Henry Johnson, ‘History is broadly every incident which took place at some time or the other.’ In the words of Dr. K. S. Lal, ‘History may be defined as the study of mankind in the extra-ordinary business of life. It comprises of the great and extraordinary achievements of mankind.’
The scope of History is wide because in every age, the society asks certain questions to the historians, and the historians seek the answer from the past in the light of new evidences and present them in front of the society. Since the curiosities of man can be related to any field of knowledge, the historian has to incorporate all those fields in his History. Initially, historical thought began with the objective of satisfying the thirst of incomplete knowledge. Motivated by this objective, the Father of History Herodotus gave a story or narrative form to the description of the development and scattered works of man and serialized it in 500 AD. Even today, Herodotus id regarded as the pioneer and ideal of narrative history. After Herodotus, Thucydides stressed on the educational aspect of History with the concept that, ‘The future generation will get a chance to learn from the true description.’ After that, Ranke gave the scientific form to History. In this way, as the concept of History developed, the scope of History also continued to develop according to the needs of society.
From the Father of History in 500 AD to the historian Toynbee of the 20th century, not only the nature of historiography, but also the scope of History has expanded according to the needs of the society. Collingwood has regarded History as a question-answer, because all the problems of man are solved through History. All the questions related to society are important. Looking at the vastness of the scope of History, today’s historian is an expert in a particular field of History rather than the complete history, so that the curiosities of the society related to that specific subject can be answered satisfactorily. This is the reason that in the present days, the scope of History has been classified. Under the scope of History, we study the following different Histories –

Classification of Scope of History

From the point of view the convenience of the study of the wide scope of History, the classification of History is the dire necessity of time and society. According to Davy, the classification of History is useful and natural. The only objective of this is to acquire knowledge about the special and the converted incidents. The present age is the age of specialization. Today, the common man also prefers to go the specialist for the treatment of his illness. Similarly, the society also prefers to study the related branch of History for the solutions to his curiosity in various special fields, and in view of this fact, the historian also acquires specialization in his specific field and writes the history of that field. The scope of History has been done as follows –
1. Political History
2. Cultural History
3. Social History
4. Economic History
5. Religious History
6. Constitutional History
7. Military History
8. Diplomatic History
9. History of Ideas
10. Intellectual History
11. Local History
12. Regional History
13. National History
14. World History
15. Co-ordinative History
With a view to understand, we are presenting the description of the first and the last classification of History.
Political History
The branch of History under which the political activities of man are studied is called the Political History. All the political activities of man come within the premises of Political History. Aristotle has given great importance to the political activities of man in History. In Political History, along with the rise and decline of various dynasties, we also study the life philosophy and activities of such historical giants who have given momentum, direction and meaning to Political History. In the context of the world, Machiavelly, Russo, Voltaire, Napoleon, Hitler and Alexander and in the context of India, Ashoka, Akbar, Chanakya, Mahatma Gandhi, etc are some of such political personalities. The political organizations are the stage of the society where great people demonstrate their works. This is very important in the life of the society. That is why A L Rouch has regarded History as the backbone. The early historians laid stress on the writing of political history. Many historians like Thucydides, Gibbon and Macaulay etc created political history.
In the present times, political history has become obsolete. Today, the history of the kings, queens and the courtiers holds no special importance. Nowadays, more stress is being laid on social and economic history. The common man also plays a significant role in the rise and decline of various dynasties, various revolutions and in the rise of various great people.the time has now come when that role of the common man should be brought within the purview of History.
Co-ordinative History
In the present days, looking at the growing horizon of the field of thought and the shrinking form of the world, the writing of history is being challenged. According to this school of thought, stress is being laid on writing of history by considering a wide area as a unit. The truth is that today, in order to understand the history of any nation, we have to view its regional history in context of its national history and national history in context of the world history. If we study the very ancient history of India minutely, we will find that it has hidden in it the seeds of the history of not only the Western Europe, but also of the other European regions of that age. This is the reason that today, seeing the regional, national and world history in a coordinated form, a lot of stress is being laid on the coordinative writing of history.
From the perspective of coordinative writing of history, ‘Madhya Asia ka Itihas’ by Rahul Sankrityayan is very important. In this connection, Rahul himself writes, ‘The modern historical events should be viewed in the background of the past history. As I moved in this direction, I came to know that the history of Central Asia has a deep relation to the history of our country…… after the numerous generations of the Aryans, the Greeks also ruled over some part of Bactria. The Shakas and Kushanas also came from there. The so called Huns-Heftals also moved towards India via Central Asia. The Turks and Islam also came to India from there. A part of the history of these rulers and their tribes lay hidden in Central Asia, and without knowing about it, we misinterpret our history. From this view, I got the inspiration to write this book.’
The above statement of Rahul Sankrityayan seems to be very apt in the direction of coordinative writing of history. Not only in ancient India, but in the medieval and modern history as well, the coordinative writing of history is very much needed. If we consider the First (1746-48) and the Third Battle of Karnataka (1758-1763), on the one hand, their causes lay in the form of the The War of Austrian Succession (1740-48) and The Seven Years War (1756), and on the other hand their results affected the contemporary Indian politics. Therefore, in order to understand them clearly, we will have to understand not only the Indian history, but also the European politics of that time.
In this way we see that the regional history and the national history should be viewed in the world scenario and seeing them in a coordinated form, stress should be laid on coordinative writing of history.

Conclusion

Hence we see that the scope of History is very wide. History might have been classified according to convenience, but a historian should have all kind of knowledge. The political, economic, social, religious, constitutional, diplomatic history etc are all very closely related in some way or the other. Similarly, only when we the local, regional, national and world history in a coordinated way, can we get the correct picture of History. Hence, History cannot be bound in limits. Reneyar writes in this connection that the historical expertise of any region is the enemy of History. A historian should be an expert in the subject, but he should also have a hold on the general and all time writing of history.
Therefore the society expects from the historian that he should consider the specific history in context of the other extended areas of history and write while viewing it in a coordinated manner.

Significance of History

‘History is that study of the past in context of the present which reforms the present and guides us towards the building of a golden future.’ From this statement, it is clear that be it man, or society, or nation, History has a special importance in the all round progress and development of all the three. In this connection, the statement of Prof. Sheikh Ali seems to be very apt that ‘The nation which ignores History has no future.’ The seeds of the progress of the future are embedded in the past in some form or the other. The present and the future can be reformed only by learning lessons from the mistakes of the past. Whether it is the field of politics or administration, economic reforms or social reforms, people who were connected to history achieve great success in these fields.
Trevelyan has called History as the abode of all the subjects. Johnson also called History as the background or the meeting place of all the other social sciences. Jiller has regarded History as a central subject. In the earlier days in England and America, the studying and teaching of History and Political Science were done in a common department in the universities. Later with time, Political Science became an independent subject. As an independent subject, Anthropology also has emerged from History. In view of the vastness of the scope of History, it is such a pure subject that all the subjects get incorporated in it. Seeing the expanding horizon of History, it is becoming necessary to do research in History by adopting the Interdisciplinary Approach.
Seeing the importance of History, the film industry is also making films with historical background and earning great success. The top actors are also working in films with historical background and earning fame and popularity. There is age long relation between films made on historical characters and disputes. These disputes play a significant role in increasing the importance of History in the hearts of common man. As a result, the common men and the representatives of the newspapers and magazines are forced to read the original books on History, so that they can reach to the core of History. The newspapers publish interviews of the history experts in context of the disputes in order to increase the popularity of their newspaper. The films are made considering the importance of History, and the disputes which arise from these films further increase the importance of History.
The importance of History is clearly evident from that fact that today, History has attracted the students preparing for competitive exams very much. The graduates with Science, Engineering and Medical background also have appeared for the greatest competitive exam, the Civil Services, with History as their subject, and achieved great success. General Studies is generally compulsory in all competitive exams. A great part of General Studies is the subject History.
The ancient intellectuals of India also accept the importance of History. The oldest mention of the Itihas is found in Atharvaveda. History has been regarded as the Fifthe Veda in Chhandogya Upnishad. The great scholar Kautilya of the ancient age also has stressed on the importance of History. He has mentioned that listening to History is compulsory in the daily routine of a king. We can see the importance of History under the following points too –

‘History’ and ‘the past’

Those starting out in history often believe history and the past to be the same thing. This is not the case. The past refers to an earlier time, the people and societies who inhabited it and the events that took place there. History, on the other hand is our attempts to investigate, study and explain the past. This is a subtle but an important difference. What happened in the past is fixed in time and cannot be changed. History, in contrast, changes regularly. The past is a factual certainty while history is an ongoing conversation about the past and its meaning. The word “history” and the English word “story” both originate from the Latin word historia, meaning a narrative or account of past events. History is itself a collection of thousands of stories about the past, told by many different people. Because there are so many of these stories, they are often variable, contradictory and conflicting. This means history is subject of constant revision and reinterpretation. Each generation looks at the past through its individual perspective. It applies different standards, priorities and values and reaches different conclusions about the past. The study of how history differs and how it has changed over time is called historiography. Like historical narratives themselves, our understanding of what history is and the shape it should take is flexible and open to debate. For, as long as people have studied history, historians have presented different ideas about how the past should be studied, constructed, written and interpreted. As a consequence, historians may approach history in different ways, using different ideas and methods and focusing on or prioritising different aspects.
The following paragraphs discuss several popular theories of history:

History is the study of great individuals

According to the ancient Greek writer Plutarch, true history is the study of great leaders and innovators. Prominent individuals shape the course of history through their personality, strength of character, ambition, abilities, leadership and creativity. Plutarch’s histories were written almost as biographies or ‘life and times’ stories of these great individuals. They explained how the actions of these great figures shaped the course of their nations or societies. Plutarch’s approach served as a model for many later historians. It is sometimes referred to as ‘top-down’ history because of its focus on rulers or leaders. One advantage of this approach is its accessibility and relative easiness. It is often much easier to research and write about individuals than more complex factors, such as social movements or long-term changes. The Plutarchian focus on individuals can also be more interesting and accessible to readers. The main problem with this approach is that it can sidestep, simplify or overlook historical factors and conditions that do not emanate from important individuals, such as popular unrest or economic changes.

History is the study of the ‘winds of change’

Other historians have focused less on individuals and taken a more thematic approach, looking at factors and forces that produce significant historical change. Some focus on what might broadly be described as the ‘winds of change’: powerful ideas, forces and movements that shape or affect how people live, work and think. These great ideas and movements are often initiated or driven by influential people – but they become much larger forces for change. As the ‘winds of change’ gain momentum, they shape or influence political, economic and social events and conditions. One example of a notable ‘wind of change’ was Christianity, which shaped government, society and social customs in medieval Europe. Another was the European Enlightenment, which undermined old ideas about politics, religion and the natural world; this triggered a long period of curiosity, education and innovation. Marxism emerged in the late 19th century and grew to challenge the old order in Russia, China and elsewhere, shaping government and society in those nations. The Age of Exploration, the Industrial Revolution, decolonisation in the mid-1900s and the winding back of eastern European communism in the late-1900s are all tangible examples of the ‘winds of change’.

History is the study of challenge and response

Some historians, such as the British writer Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975), believed that historical change is driven by challenges and responses. All civilisations are defined not just by their leadership or conditions but by how they respond to difficult problems or crises. These challenges take many forms. They can be physical, environmental, economic or ideological; they can derive from internal pressures or external factors; they can come from their own people or from outsiders. The survival and success of civilisations are determined by how they respond to these challenges. This itself often depends on its people and how creative, resourceful, adaptable and flexible they are. Human history is filled with many tangible examples of challenge and response. Many nations have been confronted with powerful rivals, wars, natural disasters, economic slumps, new ideas, emerging political movements and internal dissent. The process of colonisation, for example, involved major challenges, both for colonising settlers and native inhabitants. Economic changes, such as new technologies and increases or decreases in trade, have created challenges in the form of social changes or class tensions.

History is the study of dialectics

In philosophy, dialectics is a process where two or more parties with vastly different viewpoints reach a compromise and mutual agreement. The theory of dialectics was applied to history by German philosopher Georg Hegel (1770-1831). Hegel suggested that most historical changes and outcomes were driven by dialectic interaction. According to Hegel, for every thesis (a proposition or ‘idea’), there exists an antithesis (a reaction or ‘opposite idea’). The thesis and antithesis encounter or struggle, from which emerges a synthesis (a ‘new idea’). This ongoing process of struggle and development reveals new ideas and new truths to humanity. The German philosopher Karl Marx (1818-1883) was a student of Hegel and incorporated the Hegelian dialectic into his own theory of history – but with one important distinction. According to Marx, history was shaped by the ‘material dialectic’: the struggle between economic classes. Marx believed the ownership of capital and wealth underpinned most social structures and interactions. All classes struggle and push to improve their economic conditions, Marx wrote, usually at the expense of other classes. Marx’s material dialectic was reflected in his stinging criticisms of capitalism, a political and economic system where the capital-owning classes control production and exploit the workers in order to maximise their profits.

History is the story of the unexpected

The killing of Franz Ferdinand in June 1914 triggered enormous change. Some historians believe history is shaped by the accidental and the surprising, the spontaneous and the unexpected. While history and historical change usually follow patterns, they can also be unpredictable and chaotic. Despite our fascination with timelines and linear progression, history does not always follow a clear and expected path. The past is filled with unexpected incidents, surprises and accidental discoveries. Some of these have unleashed historical forces and changes that could not be predicted, controlled or stopped. A few have come at pivotal times and served as the ignition or ‘flashpoint’ for changes of great significance. The discovery of gold, for example, has triggered gold rushes that shaped the future of entire nations. In June 1914, Archduke Franz Ferdinand’s car took a different route through Sarajevo and unintentionally passed by Gavrilo Princip, giving rise to a series of events that led to World War I. American historian Daniel Boorstin (1914-2004), an exponent of this fascination with historical accidents, claimed that if Cleopatra’s nose had been shorter, thus diminishing her beauty, then the history of the world might have been radically different.
Finally we see that in every field of life, the importance of history is more in comparison to other subjects. Actually history is a very important subject which makes a person mature, intelligent, self dependent and experienced. That is why Hegel has said –‘man gains that knowledge from History which is unavailable in other subjects.’