what do interpretation differ in history ?give an example to support your answer
Answers
The interpretation of history depends on the perspective, mindset and lineage of the observer. For example,Let's look at colonization of India,The British believed that they were making the colonies civilised while we Indians believed that they were ruining our culture and destroying our glory.This was simply because the colonisers thought differently than the people of the colonies.
How historians interpret historical events is reflected in their ideas about the past and how they demarcate their differences. Imperialists historians and political philosophers like James Mill divide Indian history into arbitrary categories of ‘Hindu’, ‘Muslim’ and ‘British’. According to this idea of history, before the arrival of British, Hindu and Muslim despots ruled India and religious intolerance, casteism and superstitions dominated Indian social life.
However, such characterization of a nation's history is highly subjective and historical epochs cannot be characterised through the religion of the rulers of the time. Moving away from the British classification, historians have divided history into ‘ancient’, ‘medieval’ and ‘modern’ period. This classification is borrowed from the West where the modern period was associated with the growth of all forces of modernity. Medieval was a term used to describe the society where these features of modern society did not exist.
Also, how historians view individual historical events is also of significance in understanding the concept of interpretation. An event like the Civil Disobedience Movement was seen as a genuine expression of nationalist sentiment by the nationalist historians.