In the second episode of my history podcast with Steven Attewell, we talk about historical perceptions and how they are changed based on the culture you live in. Specifically, we talk about the American Civil War and World War II and how Americans and Germans see them, respectively. The differences are striking, and I'd wager you'd be surprised at just how different two peoples can see the same event.
Download here, part 1 here.
Really enjoyed this! As well as the first one actually, you guys have good rhythm and the subject is quite interesting. I had a few questions though, so I'm not a historian and never have been, and I understand intellectually that the great man theory is bonkers, but it's also somewhat difficult for me to reconcile sometimes. Take Napoleon for example, I know you're right and there would have some war regardless, but do you really think that he didn't sort of alter the world around him on a pretty grand scale? Basically, what are your professional historian thoughts on Napoleon? I'd love to have a better understanding of it. Secondly, do you have any other good recs for counterfactual history? And finally, if you ever want to look at a modern country that has chosen to completely fabricate its own history you need look no farther than Russia, I've been living here for a few months now and the common man's understanding of his own country's history is mindblowingly inaccurate.
ReplyDeleteWe don't discount the influence of "great men" (or women). We just put into perspective. There are OTHER things BESIDES the persons that drive stuff. Would there have been war without Napoleon? Yes. Would France have enjoyed some successes? Yes. Would they have been on this scale? Likely no.
DeleteOr look at the American Revolution. Those people shaped the revolution, but without certain factors there wouldn't have been one to start with, and these factors are neglected by "great man" theoriests.
Look for Niall Ferguson for Virtual History.
Hi Stefan, I also enjoyed the podcast. I enjoy history but am but no means an expert. While I was listening to both podcasts I was wondering if the counterfactual history covered things like for example if the Civil War began at the start of James Buchanan's presidency rather than Lincoln's. Buchanan I believe is viewed as one of the worst presidents in American history, would that have had a major effect on the war, or do you think he would have been viewed as a stronger president? I guess it is similar to asking the
Deletequestion would Lincoln have been a good president if he were in office during Buchanan's term or is it more that Lincoln was a man who rose to the occasion because of the war? Those type of questions interest me. I was also thinking while I was listening it could be interesting if one time you guys had on someone with a decent knowledge of history so they could ask some questions that a non historian might have during your discussions. You may not be interested in that depending on the type of listening audience you're targeting, but as someone who was introduced to this podcast through your ASOIAF material I think that could be interesting.
That's a good idea. "Ask the Historians", like that? I could open an open thread?
DeleteRegarding the Civil War, it officially started when the Confederates bombarded Fort Sumter. And that was on Lincoln's watch. However, Buchanan surely attributed much to the outbreak, but he's more or less a moderately capable guy faced with unsolvable problems who doesn't want to go to war, a restraint his successor doesn't share. If you want to throw blame around, you have to look for the Founding Fathers, the guys who draw up the Missouri Compromise, the Supreme Court...you can't really pin it down to one cause.
Yes, that's exactly what I had in mind. I would agree that all of those people share a part of the blame for the Civil War.
DeleteAh that makes much more sense. Thanks Stefan! I've never quite understood that theory, but that seems like the logical interpretation :D
ReplyDeleteThe thing is that people always act within the constraints of their time, which is something I try to teach my students all the time. Hus and Zwingli didn't get through with their reformist ideas and were burned, Luther on the other side did and created the big schisma of christendom. Why did he succeed? Because he nailed his thesis to the church door (he didn't, btw)? Surely not. There were many influences at work he had no control over, like a very favorable political climate, a social crisis that played into his hands, the visible excesses of the Church Catholic and the clever twist in his theology that granted more power to protestant monarchs.
DeleteSee that makes sense. I think people often, when explaining the importance of historical forces, are trying so hard to change popular misconceptions that they overplay their hand and start coming off as very Marxist historical dialectic ish. Which is too far, I think. So thanks again! Looking forward to listening to the next one!
DeleteJust want to say that I have greatly enjoyed both podcasts, and hope you two do more.
ReplyDeleteBeautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #1
ReplyDeleteBeautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #2
Beautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #3
Beautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #4
Beautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #5
Beautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #6
Beautiful young girl with nice breasts and hot body #7
Bat Dong San Noi Bat
Brg Coastal City