Summary: The Autobiography Of Harkhuf

When I was in High School, my history teacher once said to me, “history is written by the victors.” In other words, those who win, decide how they will be remembered. For instance, the history of the United States and their interactions with Native Americans. Old (bias) history textbooks will tell us you how the white European “discovered” America and saved the native “savage” from himself or herself. However, this old way of thinking, only allows us one perspective. We never hear the Native Americans’ point of view. This is why historians, and the work they do, are so important to our society. Historians depend on evidence to develop a narrative and arguments about the past. Yet the arguments that they develop are strictly based on the primary

sources they have, these sources in turn can either tell us what we already know, or (even better) they can give us a completely new perspective on how we view historical cultures. For example, the “The Autobiography of Harkhuf,” of Ancient Egypt and the “Debate on Salt and Iron,” of the Han Dynasty. The discovery of these two primary sources not only shaped the way in which historians wrote about these two cultures, but they also gave us a better understanding about the people about whom history is being written about.
In the “The Autobiography of Harkhuf,” of Ancient Egypt, we have the autobiography of Harkhuf.

A man who served during the Old Kingdom, under kings Mernere and Pepi II. Officials carved fifty-eight lines on his tomb to commemorate this man’s life. He was not only the governor of Upper Egypt, but also led four expeditions to Nubia, in which he successfully traded and opened up relations between the two nations. “He majesty of Mernere, my lord, sent me… to Yam, to open the way to that country. I did it in seven months; I brought from it all kinds of beautiful and rare gifts, and was praised for it very greatly.” As we can see, this quote not only shows us that the Egyptians valued trading with their neighbors, but also that those who were able to be trade and have good relations with other nations was something valued and significant to their culture. Similarly, we will see that the ability to trade was not only a quality of importance to Ancient Egypt, but also to the Han Dynasty of

China.
As mentioned above, trade and the ability to have good relations with other Nations was very important, and although the “Debate on Salt and Iron,” of the Han Dynasty, is more about the monopolization of salt and iron, there are tidbits of information that show us that the Han Dynasty of China found trade and the ability to have good relations with others a very important quality as well.

In short, in 81 B.C., Emperor Wu set policies that monopolized salt and iron. Emperor Wu did this because the Hsiung-nu (rebels) was devastating the frontier lands of China, and there was not enough revenue to help defend them. As a result he monopolized salt and iron, and the revenue increased, allowing the frontier lands to be better defended. The argument is between the “Learned Men,” who are followers of Confucianism, and believe that monopolizing salt and iron resulted in ruin of agriculture and thus ruin of moral values. “The Minister,” who enacted these policies, argued the contrary. He believed that by the government monopolizing salt and iron there was a better chance of equality, and of the nation being more productive. Regardless of that, analyzing the articles shows us how trade and relations with other peoples were important. “They should set examples of benevolence and duty and virtuously care for people, for then those nearby will flock to them and those far away will joyfully submit to their authority.” As we can see, like the Ancient Egyptians, there was a belief that good

relations with other nations only lead to good things.
In conclusion, these two primary sources not only shaped the way in which historians wrote about these two cultures, but they also gave us a better understanding about the people about whom history is being written about. The old ideas about societies and cultures being isolated and developing on their own, as we can see, is not the case. And this is why historian, and their work, are so important, new Primary Sources introduce new perspectives, and they give us a whole new point of view that sometimes completely changes the way we believed history to be. In the end, the victors do NOT write history, bur rather history is written by experts who scrutinize sources in order to discover a more impartial view.