Nicholas Miller History 100 History: Why It Matters By Lynn Hunt

Nicholas Miller History 100 History: Why it Matters is a book by Lynn Hunt. In her book she outlines how history becomes more mainstream year after year and the advent of twisting historical narratives poses a threat to modern society. Hunt argues that to combat these dangerous interpretations of history, we need to dig deeper into historical evidence. Whether they are right or wrong, interpretations of history come in many forms and from many different perspectives, and it’s important that historians continue to dig into ideas so they can discover historical truths. And after reading through some of her arguments for that point, I found myself agreeing with her. Her strongest points that she has for that argument come from when she relates

What did Bonaparte intend when he came to power? Did he establish a military dictatorship? Why did he fall from power eventually?” (Hunt 33). The difference is in how they interpret and view Napoleon. Some may be more focused on his military achievements due to their bias while others are more focused on how he used the family to control the people of France due to hers. They both are examining Napoleon’s rule, they just focus on different parts of it due to their own biases (Hunt 34). She then wraps up the section by writing about how the historian Alexis de Tocqueville explained how Napoleon was able to take power from the people of France. He looked deep into France’s archives and interpreted those sources and concluded that the monarchy lay the groundwork for Napoleon taking power (Hunt 35). Hunt believes that his process was the way to go, gathering information and making a coherent argument is how you find historical truth. And the fact that interpretation can cause doubt in the minds of critics, that’s more reason to really dig into historical sources. “When my hypothetical critic objects

She gives more examples of other nations around the world doing the same and asks the reader if this means that finding a historical truth is even possible if all these wrong interpretations of history persist in the world. The answer to that question is no. Those narrowly viewed interpretations of history “facilitate criticism” and make people ask, “Have all the relevant facts been considered” (Hunt 34). The idea that interpretation creates criticism was an idea presented in the last example from Hunt. In this case, instead of someone digging deeper after their ideas are criticized, it’s the sceptic who notices that more needs to be discovered about a topic due to the narrow minded interpretation of another individual. Hunt writes, “Historical interpretations are by their nature fragile constructions, always subject to new discoveries and new notions of completeness” (Hunt