How should history be taught in schools?

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Many remember from childhood what a boring subject history was at school. A huge list of dates, wars, unnecessary facts and names, moreover, unreliable, as shown by recent studies. But it’s not at all difficult to make History become an interesting and fascinating subject, showing the grandiose process of the development of civilizations …

The Positive History of Civilization

The situation with school textbooks is similar to the well-known experience with concentration. While we follow the words of the detective author of the textbook and concentrate on the imposed point of view - "well-known facts", others remain out of our attention:

There was an idea to try to implement the concept "Positive story", as a subject that gives positive knowledge, helps understand connections between antiquity and modernity, the impact of technology and social structures on the life of mankind and the surrounding nature, etc. In general, the prevailing should be history of discovery and creation, not a history of wars and destruction. Somehow, there is a common understanding, but the terminology has not yet crystallized.

In the summer of 2014, an important question was asked in the article "Answers to Readers' Questions": “If the whole story is a complete lie, should it be taught at school? How would you write a history textbook? "

My answer: History should be obligatory, but not as an instrument of propaganda of current politics turned into the past, but as a link between all other subjects. That is, instead of the history of wars, revolutions and other raisins of dates, names, appearances and passwords, we need a history of the consistent creation of the structure of civilization.

How the change in the power supply (this is not only firewood, coal and other fuel, but primarily agriculture!), Mechanisms, transport and communications change the human environment, how did these changes affect the way of life of different groups of people? How did the colonization-civilization change the face of the world, and who lived at whose expense, how did he get the resources he needed, changing relationships in the regional division of labor?

In fact, much can be summed up in a short and accessible way, for example, see the somewhat abandoned "Logistic History of the United States". It is already possible to attach particulars to this general scheme. A minimum of dates + knowledge of geography and do not care what some statesman thought on Friday evening three thousand years ago, the main thing is what they actually did (for advanced people, you can additionally explain how real goals are masked, how they explained their actions to the people).

The adopted scheme of dividing into periods according to rulers should be left, since the dates are more difficult to remember, and so it is easier: "under Nicholas-2", "under Stalin", "in the Victorian era", etc.

It is very important to observe the rule of integrating training, that is, to program interdisciplinary connections in advance. This is easy to do even with modern programs. For example, we ask the simplest question: "What did the ancient Romans and Greeks eat?" and a connection with physical geography and biology is already emerging.

If history tells about the construction of Egyptian pyramids of unknown purpose, then in the mathematics textbook of the corresponding class, instead of the problem of the loads transported for some unknown purpose, problems can be given to calculate how much food the builders needed per day and per year, what areas of fields with such yields could provide this. The numbers must be real. Here is history, algebra, geometry, and biology in one bottle. At the same time, show the ancient structures for measuring the level of the Nile flood, which served to calculate the flooded (that is, fertilized areas) to calculate the amount of future taxes …"

Ancient and modern (connection of times)

In the summer of 2014, a small note was written "Why study history?" with answers to readers' questions, for example, this one: “If the whole story is a lie, should it be taught at school? How would you write a history textbook?"

The beginning of the answer is as follows: “History should be obligatory, but not as an instrument of propaganda of current politics turned into the past, but as a connecting link between all other subjects. It is very important to observe the rule of integrating training, that is, to program interdisciplinary connections in advance. This can be done even with modern programs. For example, we ask the simplest question: “What did the ancient Romans and Greeks eat?”, And a connection with physical geography and biology already appears. That is, instead of the history of wars, revolutions and other raisins of dates, names, appearances and passwords, we need a history of the consistent creation of the structure of civilization …"

The skeleton of history can be figuratively represented as a crystalline structure, where two-dimensional layers in XY-coordinates represent the state of civilization at a certain moment, the lower layer is antiquity, and the upper layer is modernity. The logistic theory of civilization is based on city nodes and edge-links between them, moreover, the pattern of connections is determined by geography, needs and transport capabilities. Within the limits of one plane, a very useful comparative study of history is obtained "and what happened at the same time in other localities?"

In history, the third, Z-coordinate, time, chronology creates the biggest problem. In the diagram shown, the nodes-balls “from the bottom up” are the same cities (phenomena, technologies, etc.), the change of which shows the dynamics of the process and allows “stringing on the time axis”, revealing inconsistencies and questionable data.

The study of the vertical chain "from top to bottom", from the present to the past, is a retrograde method of historical research, which allows one to find the limit of the reliability of the available information about the phenomenon.

So that's it. When the enormous period of human existence, the "Stone Age" / "primitive society", is actually thrown out of the study / sphere of attention, as in a textbook for grade 5, then there will be no understanding of the unity of the historical process, the connection between the past and the present, and, consequently, knowledge will remain fragmentary and amorphous.

As we, together with the youngest, study school history textbooks, I will try to lay out those "vertical chains" of the connection of the Stone Age and other eras with the present, for the design of which there is enough time and effort. It is quite possible that adults will be interested too.

To begin with, a subpage "Grade 5" was created, where my amendments and additions to the textbook will be posted "Ancient world history" … Maybe I will write something ahead of time, as far as possible I will create new subpages. The task for the next 5-6 years.

Answers to readers' questions

Some of the questions asked, the answers to which may be of interest to many.

If the whole story is a lie, should it be taught at school? How would you write a history textbook?

History should be obligatory, but not as a tool of propaganda of current politics turned into the past, but as a link between all other subjects. That is, instead of the history of wars, revolutions and other raisins of dates, names, appearances and passwords, we need a history of the consistent creation of the structure of civilization.

How the change in the power supply (this is not only firewood, coal and other fuel, but primarily agriculture!), Mechanisms, transport and communications change the human environment, how did these changes affect the way of life of different groups of people? How did the colonization-civilization change the face of the world and who lived at whose expense, how did he get the resources he needed, changing relationships in the regional division of labor?

In fact, much can be summed up in a short and accessible way, for example, see the somewhat abandoned "Logistic History of the United States". It is already possible to attach particulars to this general scheme. A minimum of dates + knowledge of geography, and I don’t care what some statesman thought on Friday evening, the main thing is what they really did (for advanced people, you can additionally explain how real goals are masked, how they explained their actions to the people).

The adopted scheme of dividing into periods according to rulers should be left, since the dates are more difficult to remember, and so it is easier: "under Nicholas-2", "under Stalin", "in the Victorian era", etc.

It is very important to observe the rule of integrating training, that is, to program interdisciplinary connections in advance. This is easy to do even with modern programs. For example, we ask the simplest question: "What did the ancient Romans and Greeks eat?" and a connection with physical geography and biology is already emerging.

If history tells about the construction of Egyptian pyramids of unknown purpose, then in the mathematics textbook of the corresponding class, instead of the problem of the cargo transported for some reason, it is possible to give problems to calculate how much food the builders needed per day and per year, what areas of fields for such and such a yield could provide it. The numbers must be real. Here is history, algebra, geometry, and biology in one bottle. At the same time, show the ancient structures for measuring the flood level of the Nile, which served to calculate the flooded (that is, fertilized areas) to calculate the amount of future taxes.

So, I got carried away. I recommend asking adults and children a test question: "Why don't polar bears hunt penguins" and time the time until the correct answer.

Why did you switch to "Novochronologi"? Why strive to shorten history?

The publication of the "Chronological forgery of the Romanovs-Oldenburgskys" is the current investigative version, a warning to those who trust me, a kind of "minefield map" of historical facts. That is, until a certain time I thought that it was possible to fully rely on information from the 17th and 18th centuries, but now I myself treat them with great caution. I have no predetermined task, except how to figure everything out with the utmost impartiality. The Romanovs needed the lengthening of the history of Muscovy, so in this case I am forced to shorten the history. And in general, if someone claims that the city is a thousand years old, I will not argue, the main thing for me is: what was really there in the 19th, 18th, 17th centuries and why?

Why change, change, rewrite history? Why carry out a sufficiently large, labor-intensive work on bypassing monasteries, seizing documents, redoing them, rewriting, adjusting to each other. What were the goals? Why?

Why a story is needed - in the next answer. The labor costs of retrieving documents are immeasurably small compared to the military costs, but they provide control over the future … Most of the documents did not rewrite, did not adjust, did not alter, just the whole history of Muscovy "left" in the past for 200 years, the history of St. Petersburg controlled by the Romanovs also remained as it is, but the 200-year-old hole in the history of Muscovy cities is filled very weakly, there are fires and "Reconstruction" in the 19th century.

I draw your attention to the following: the Romanovs did not change history, did not rewrite, they first wrote their story, used to write chronicles, the chronology of events of individual principalities, the Romanovs connected them as they needed.

Let's say the Oldenburgs captured the neighboring state. They established control over the territory, subjugated the population, began to drain resources. The mechanism is clear. What about the motive? Why do you need all this? What is the use of this for the Romanovs?

The motives are the same now, in order to subjugate, it is necessary to inculcate into the consciousness that there are no signs: junta / impostor, falsification of election results / adjustment of chronicles, therefore the ruler is the best possible. And in those days, the main thing was generosity, the nobility of the family (see the term "localism"). Therefore, in the stories of the Romanovs, there are many all sorts of genealogical tables, in order to confirm their, albeit not direct, but kinship with the noble families of Muscovy + The Romanovs supported their right with "democratic elections" + this 16-year-old Misha Romanov was allegedly almost on his knees persuaded to reign the myth of Susanin.

If you do not drive your right to steer into the brains of the people, then it is more difficult to cope with it, as in animals, "the authority of the leader of the herd." Therefore, they create the necessary story: "first you work for the authority, then the authority works for you."

Imagine that everyone from childhood at school is given such information about the Oldenburgskys, who were simultaneously kings of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Greece and the Russian Empire?

Moreover, Oldenburg - the closest relatives of the British royal family, which was first called the Hanoverian dynasty (the Duchy of Oldenburg and the Kingdom of Hanover in Germany were neighbors).

Then the British were renamed Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, and although from 1914 they were renamed by the name of the suburb in Windsor, but in fact they remain so until the now reigning Elizabeth II. On it, by the way, Saxe-Coburgs end, because Prince Charles on his father's side is from the Danish-Greek royal house Glucksburgs … Who are the Glucksburgs? This is just one of the Oldenburg branches. The circle is complete.

But where did these Saxe-Coburgs come from on the throne of Britain? From the husband of the last English queen from the past, Hanoverian, dynasty - her name was Victoria, from her husband and father of all children - Albert von Sachsen-Coburg-Gotha.

But, if you dig further, it turns out that the founder of the Hanoverian dynasty George the First (for the British, he was George, and so he was from all sides George) was in his place only because of her mother, the English princess Sophia, who was from the last dynasty, from the Stuarts. That is, George the First in England is like Peter the Third in Russia, relatively speaking. And the famous Queen Victoria has a double name - Alexandrina Victoria, and the first in honor of her godfather - the Emperor of the Russian Empire Alexander-1. Etc. etc.

A-a-a, so this is one Big Family-Grande Mafiayou say. And you will be right. You will no longer be surprised why many of the most important issues were resolved in London and Paris … So after that, your perception of history will not change at all?

These are just two aspects of the question.

Personally, I have nothing against the Oldenburg and Hanoverian. They moved civilizational development in their own interests, and others got a lot. In the end, even the ability to distribute information around the world, which is implemented, including the Internet, was laid just then, but in any case, people should know their heroes … As it is. You decide.