Caribbean Civilisation is not based on the truth. Historians gave us ideas about the history of Caribbean Civilisation and culture which were the bias of historical history. These ideas came to us via books or through oral history in stories and songs. The Cambridge Online Dictionary refers to civilization as “human society with its well-developed social organisation, or the cultural and way of life of a society or country at a particular period in time. ” Truth is the creation of human interaction and is based on our beliefs.
It gave us a sense of legitimacy and a source of belief structures whereas revisionism gave new versions of the region’s history based on more detailed insights and evidence. Historians collected the facts about the Caribbean region which were made into a story or narrative for everyone to understand. The meanings of the story were put together by people telling the story which led to the bias of historical history. The bias of historical history was as a result of human factors such as gender, sex, age, nationality, class, religion, education and economies.
The Europeans for example, arriving in the region in 1492, saw the area as an uncivilised one with no culture. This idea was wrong as it was written only from a male perspective. As a result, present day historians are actively engaged in overcoming much of the biases of the earliest recorded histories of the Caribbean. It is unscientific to believe written stories about Caribbean Civilization without substantial evidence. The first Caribbean story was written by non-Caribbean people.
The Research paper on History Story Teaches Us That History Teaches Nothing: Discuss
1.0 INTRODUCTION All human cultures tell stories about the past, deeds of ancestors, heroes, gods, or animals. Songs sacred to particular peoples were chanted and memorized long before there was any writing with which to record them. Their truth was authenticated by the very fact of their continued repetition. History which can be considered as an account that purports to be true of events and ...
These historians wrote about what they knew from written evidences but what was written cannot be proven to be a factual unless there is archaeological or genetic evidence to prove it. No one will write or say anything unscrupulous about him or herself. Historians were writing about the history but were not alive to witness the facts. The historian weaved a narrative of the past into a sequence that makes sense. As historian Becker points out, historians gave society an “artificial extension of social memory.
”This artificial extension became a collective experience as the entire society then shares these memories. ‘Carib’ Cannibalism was a myth which was put forward by the Europeans to justify their destruction of the native people who resisted them. Caribbean historians no longer see the term “Carib” as a valid one. Revisionism is the process by which historians gave new versions of the region’s history based on more detailed insights and evidence. By testing the stories, the early
androcentric and Eurocentric focus of the Caribbean is being changed. ‘History’ is perspective driven and subject to change based on the available evidence. The use of tools of other sciences and disciplines such as archaeology, linguistics, forensic sciences, anthropology, social sciences and natural sciences proves that Caribbean Civilisation was not based on the truth. History today is becoming more accurate as the tools of academia allow us to overcome many of the initial biases of the early historians.
