Precedence means "the fact of being above or ahead of another or others in order, rank, or importance" (at least according to dailywritingtips.com). So what would be a historical precedence?
Well, since Google keeps autocorrecting my question (precedence to precedents), I'm going to assume it's not actually a "thing".
Alright, historical precedence is not an actual English phrase, why am I still making it the topic of this blog post?
Because someone(s) out there is deciding what is taught in our schools, picking out the content for the (used-to-be) History Channel, and organizing the algorithms that make it easier to search for things on the Internet. It's why niche book markets exist. Who is deciding what is important enough to be recorded and saved for future generations (or alien life after we go extinct).
The "winners" of course.
Now, there's only so much history one can learn in their life time. Most US school children get a very general pre-columbian Native American history lesson, an in depth lesson on the founding of the US up until today, and a few short segments on world history (including religion and changes in geography). The "winners" in this case are the school board members who get to determine what's in the curriculum.
That doesn't mean history can't "change". Alright past events don't change, but new evidence can be presented that highlights a new perspective on those events. In ancient times (and even still today, but I'm not about to comment on current events), history was often changed as a result of a new government coming in (conquest). The old gods and heroes were tossed out or absorbed to fit the new regime's narrative in the hopes of solidifying their claim to power.
So if the old civilization was forced to adopt into their new leader's history, did that completely erase what had been there previously?
No, not at all. It might have stopped being mainstream information, but it wouldn't just disappear overnight (unless they were scrolls being stored at the Great Library of Alexandria). Tombs and burial grounds hold many key artifacts that archeologists use to piece together "lost" history. People would be buried in clothes they wore, maybe a few pieces of jewelry or pottery, and possibly a weapon. Some people still do this today (you get buried in your favorite suit/dress with a cell phone).
This morning I was watching Mysteries At The Muesum which was featuring an episode of King Tut. For many years historians thought he might have been murdered because of how his skull looked, but new evidence has come to light that he might have just suddenly died of an illness and that the skull fracture happened postmortem. Does it change history? Kind of. It changes how we interpret a historical event.
These types of things happen all the time. If you were to open a history book from the 1920s it would look very different from a history book published today. It's not just because of how much has happened since then, it just shows how we prioritized our history and which events we feel take precedence now.
One of my favorite quotes about history comes from the movie/play 1776. Around the middle of the film John Adams is speaking with Ben Franklin and bemoaning about history will judge them for this moment and Franklin relies that "they will be long gone" and that they wouldn't be remembered as infallible demigods, but men, no more nor less.*
What I took away from that quote, was that no matter who you actually were and what you actually do with your life, someone else will be telling your story to future generations. It's up to the next story teller to portray you as a hero or villain, a revolutionary or a crackpot fool.
So what's historical precedence? It's whatever information deemed is important enough to remember and pass on to future generations. After all people are making history everyday.
If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me. Until next week.
*As I haven't seen the movie 1776 in a while and can't find a solid transcript for the quote, I'm choosing to paraphrase it.
No comments:
Post a Comment