![OPINION: History and gossip](https://mindanaotoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/RAI-Bollozos-Sanchez-1.jpg)
RAI Bollozos Sanchez | Historyahe! | History and gossip
Mindanaotoday.com | History and gossip
BY: RAI Bollozos Sanchez | Historyahe!
Recently, a young star compared history to gossip, claiming that it is filtered and exaggerated.
To the celebrity, the general public does not know “real history,” though it has the idea, it is still biased.
The young celebrity’s statement has raised many eyebrows (including mine) and caught the ire of academic historians and historical researchers.
In layman’s terms, “history is a study of past events, especially in human affairs.”
While gossip is seen as a suspect of historical perceptions. That cannot be verified as “true” or “false.”
Though many perceive gossip may have a relation with History which would lead to the question, do History and gossip the same?
Though gossip can be a source of historical data, it lacks integrity and is hard to substantiate.
Though many followers tried to defend the celebrity’s statement. Their claim is that her statement is a prerogative of historical exaggerations borne out of prejudice, sympathy, or to create confusion.
Nonetheless, a historian may have his own biases. Still, again, it undergoes a series of investigations, gathering primary and secondary sources to validate if the “historical fact” exists or not.
Essentially, History is a narrative of human and social evolution regardless of whichever experience it may recount.
Many did not know that History is an intellectual and academic discipline following a rigorous process of systematically studying facts, not opinions.
Though History may have been prejudiced, the method of writing History involves deep scrutiny of primary and secondary sources, and its corroboration involves historical investigation.
What may be factual is based on a series of historical criticisms. A study of human and social nuances, in fact.
What the historians are trying to negate against the statement is in ‘gossip,’ it does not entail the entire process of “historical criticisms.”
In his book, What is History? E.H. Carr argues that History consists of a quantity of ascertained facts.
“The facts are available to the historian in documents, inscriptions, and so on, like fish in the fishmonger’s slab. The historian collects them, takes them home, and cooks and serves them in whatever style appeals to him.”
History does not recreate the past but is a lifelong process of initiating validated discourses to put the essence of the past.
Thus, it entails a deep study of a historical fact that undertakes a deep study of “content and context” analysis; with the use of validating “authenticity, provenance, and credibility” of the “historical fact.”
Hence, History is a systematic study while gossips are not, and the historian’s role is summarized through writing after gathering enough data after the “historical inquiry.”
One thing that many would not recognize is that History is not about what is written but is all about the “historical process” of following the correct “historical method,” scrutinizing “historical criticisms.”
Since I began teaching History, I always ensured that my students could distinctly draw the line between “gossip” and “History.”
Unfortunately, it is easy to defend a celebrity about their blunders. At the same time, if an academic, such as a historian, reacts to what the celebrity said, it is also simple to say, “they are smart shaming.”
In defense, we do not. Because historians educate the public to argue in context and base the propositions on facts and pieces of evidence.
We never smart-shame but reach out to use concrete arguments as a tool for historical knowledge.
Though the truth varies from one opinion to another, in writing History, the narrative you read are products of lifelong investigation in pursuit of the eternal truth.
Nonetheless, the scheme of a historical narrative is an art. But investigating the past also involves the science of scrutiny.
History can never be “chismis” because finding the truth would entail a lifelong process to find it. (MT)
###