For many old ages. historiographers have argued among themselves on how history ought to be seen and studied. There is a batch who consider that the fact refering history is that history does non narrate accurately. There are besides those who disagree to such a view- including Clayton Roberts. the writer of “The History of England. ” Clayton Roberts published his Hagiographas at the clip wherein the prevailing idea was that history is “nothing but a reenactment of past ideas in a historian’s mind” ( Collingwood 282 ) .
His plants instead stood out because in these. non merely does he boldly assert that history Tells truth. but even explains past events causally ( qtd. In PSU Press 1 ) . His belief was that. historical geographic expedition is non hopelessly subjective. non irremediably comparative and that every adult male is non his ain historiographer. The objectiveness of history prevarications in the fact that historians widely agree upon the cogency of these canons of grounds and regulations of logic” ( Roberts x-xi ) .
For Roberts so. history is non simply a description of a sequence of events ; instead these events are causally linked together in an orderly manner. as if following a certain regulation or jurisprudence ( George and Bennett 225 ) . Such a position of history of his is really much evident in his work. “The History of England” . The mode by which he had arranged and discussed Britain’s experiences. the type of linguistic communication he had used. and his overall authorship manner conveyed his theory on the effectual manner of continuing to a historical enquiry into a capable affair. such as Britain’s history.
Well-regarded as one of the more sure resource stuffs for pupils or merely about anyone who wished to acquire a general instruction of Britain. this writer concurs that Robert’s attack does supply for a better apprehension and grasp of history. Subject As earlier discussed. Roberts held that events in history are non merely a series of events that happen without any cause or ground. These are linked together in a cohesive mode and understanding how these are inextricably related to one another provides for a thorough treatment of history.
This can be visibly seen in his book. In “The History of England. ” he discusses different parts of the country’s history supplying for smooth passages in between to demo that each and every event that happened has led to the ulterior happenings. Before he put in the portion detailing the Protestant-Catholic faith. a subdivision demoing the growing of Protestantism preceded such. Catholicity still being regarded the primary faith at that clip. to supply for the account of the impending colloquy between cantonments from the two aforementioned faiths.
He ever answered the inquiries. “how” and “why” in every important incident that he explained in his book. In Chapter Two of the book for illustration. he vividly describes the death of the Roman regulation. The subsequent chapter so goes on to discourse the conquering of Britain and the transition of the people to Christianity- all end point of the autumn of the Roman Empire.
Roberts besides spoke of the wars in the 1300s and the 1500s and the important events therein. But anterior to discoursing those difficult times. he explained the systems of authorities and provided a descriptive history of the type of life that the people had. every bit good as the tensenesss and minor cases wherein people displayed their dissent with respect to those types of systems that governed them and their dissatisfaction with their current province of lives.
The demoing all these struggles bing before undertaking the waging of full-on wars provided the necessary “build-up” for readers to understand the true nature of wars- that they are non simply caused by an stray event. but a combination of political and societal factors that converge at a clip. that which can non be contained any longer or settled amicably. The mode by which Roberts organized the events in Britain’s history and the major subjects he assigned them under besides demo his absolute subscription to the theory that events in history are constantly associated under a common factor or regulation.
In the Chapter of the Elizabethan Rule for illustration. he non merely relays the events that happened under the adult female monarch’s regulation merely because these happened at the clip she sat on the throne. he specifically included the events that he discussed under the said subject: Queen Elizabeth and her relationship with the Church and Scotland. the War against Spain. the Queen and the Government of England- all to qualify and capture what was meant by the Elizabethan regulation and its long-run effects to the events thenceforth. moreover. the bing English civilization as a whole.
Finally. the writer used a assortment of primary and secondary resources that were up-to-date. appropriate and equal in the treatment of the subjects he had set to give the reader a broad position of Britain’s societal. economic. cultural. rational and political history from every bit early as the Paleolithic phase to 1714. One must take note that although he stressed dominant subjects in every Chapter. he ne’er espoused any individual reading to such. and even provided suggested ‘Further Reading’ lists at the terminal of each chapter.
Such is still maintaining in line with his belief of the possibility of objectiveness in history because he ne’er asserted his history or reading to events that transpired as the Gospel truth. The abovementioned state of affairss are merely some of the specific illustrations that show Robert’s consistence in keeping his thesis that there is so a causal nexus between the assorted events that transpired in history.
Though he has ever been careful to observe that in footings of major events. these causal links are non every bit pronounced as in the minor events. there is a relationship between them however. a lesson that people must non bury in analyzing history. Critique Robert’s “The History of England. ” though drawn-out and descriptive. is easy to read.
Therein. it becomes clear that the author’s primary purpose in utilizing descriptive but simple linguistic communication is to do his work easily accessible to people coming from different parts of the academia from the few extremely specialised bookmans to the wide popular audience who said that it is non surprising that this book is being used by a batch of pupils and professors who wish to acquire a general position of England’s history. Overall. Robert’s work is well-written and organized. chiefly thanks to Robert’s painstaking attending to demoing the links between the events that transpire in history.
Not merely has it taught me to size up historical informations from his work. but Hagiographas by other writers as good. To be rather honorable. as a pupil of history who has read legion history books by different writers who possess different manners in composing. I appreciate history more when my attending is focused in cognizing and understanding why and how an event in history happened in a certain mode. instead than memorising a battalion of names of celebrated people or important day of the months in history.
Robert’s manner which was mindful of the relationships between events in clip changed my position on analyzing history and has made making so easier and more gratifying. History for me became more than merely a field of survey wherein memorisation of events. day of the months and names of people were of primary importance- that which was hard for me to make. Now. non merely do I happen history more absorbing. I am besides able to retain factual informations with less clip and attempt than earlier. Analyzing the significance of cognizing the relationships between the events. which Roberts espouses. has greatly contributed to such.
