Pseudohistory

[DecimusCaesar]

While searching on the internet, I have come across numerous stuff that could only be described as 'pseudohistory'. Whether it's the 'Ancient astronauts' of Von Daniken, or Afrocentrism or even those who claim that the Trojan Wars took place in Britain.

 

Some are mildly strange, such as the idea that the Chinese discovered America in 1421, to the truly bizzare, like the New Chronology hypothesis (I believe that some of these topics have been brought up before).

 

Why is it that these ideas are so popular? The New Chronolgy books have sold over 3 million copies for instance, while many books speak about the mysticism of the Knights Templar (they were, satanists, aliens, descendants of Christ etc).

 

Should the historical community ignore them; listen to what these 'scholars' have to say, or what?

Do some of these ideas present the same problem to history as a few bizzare ideas do for science? (Intelligent design for example?)

 

Is the historical community being undermined and destroyed in an onslaught of false information and ideas, or are these just stuff we should shrug our shoulders at and laugh? Or is there something more dark and sinister in their ideas, such as the Holocaust deniers?

 

What is your opinion?

Edited November 22, 2006 by DecimusCaesar

[Rameses the Great]

You should avoid those sites. Often these people are very opinionated and are after an agenda.

 

As an aside, whenever you find Afrocentrism just make sure you don't infiltrate your mind with that garbage.

 

An exerpt from DC's post.

 

Afrocentrism is a pseudohistorical political movement that erroneously claims that African-Americans should trace their roots back to ancient Egypt because it was dominated by a race of black Africans. Some of Afrocentrism's other claims are: the ancient Greeks stole their main cultural achievements from black Egyptians; Jesus, Socrates and Cleopatra, among others, were black; and Jews created the slave trade of black Africans.

Edited November 22, 2006 by Rameses the Great

[Andrew Dalby]

You should avoid those sites. Often these people are very opinionated and are after an agenda.

 

As an aside, whenever you find Afrocentrism just make sure you don't infiltrate your mind with that garbage.

 

An exerpt from DC's post.

 

Afrocentrism is a pseudohistorical political movement that erroneously claims that African-Americans should trace their roots back to ancient Egypt because it was dominated by a race of black Africans. Some of Afrocentrism's other claims are: the ancient Greeks stole their main cultural achievements from black Egyptians; Jesus, Socrates and Cleopatra, among others, were black; and Jews created the slave trade of black Africans.

 

The trouble is, you can't ever say "I'll ignore pseudohistory totally" because, until it's argued out and the counter-evidence is cited, you don't know how pseudo it is. But I agree that some of it is very pseudo indeed ... I recently helped to write the Wikipedia article Geography of the Odyssey, and one of the problems with that article is continual little additions about Odysseus's explorations in the North Atlantic, his discovery of America, and even his voyage up the Amazon. All these theories are in print, but how much space do they deserve?

[WotWotius]

There are also many cases of pseudo-archaeology: the use of selective archaeological evidence to promulgate non-scientific, fictional accounts of the past (Renfrew and Bahn, 2006).

 

For instance, when Leonard Woolley excavated UR during the 1920s, the discovery of flood mud beneath the ancient city was used as evidence for the biblical flood described in Genesis. However, flood mud dated to a much later period than the assigned date of the biblical flood.

 

Genesis may well have been describing a flood that took place around the city of Ur; but the fact that archaeologists assign these sites so surely to semi-fictional accounts of the past is rather disturbing.

Edited November 23, 2006 by WotWotius

[DecimusCaesar]

I believe that many of the early archaeologists showed an intrest in the middle east, so that they could prove that the Biblical stories actaullu took place. It is, in some ways, no differant to Heinrich Schliemann searching for the city of Troy, when most only believed it to be a Greek Myth.

 

Where does the line between extravagant archaeology and pseudoarchaeology begin? Perhaps many thought that Schliemann was mad to hunt for Troy, but then again it really is mad to claim that the Trojan Wars were fought between the Celts of Britain and then brought to Greece by Minoan traders.

[Andrew Dalby]

I believe that many of the early archaeologists showed an intrest in the middle east, so that they could prove that the Biblical stories actaullu took place. It is, in some ways, no differant to Heinrich Schliemann searching for the city of Troy, when most only believed it to be a Greek Myth.

 

Where does the line between extravagant archaeology and pseudoarchaeology begin? Perhaps many thought that Schliemann was mad to hunt for Troy, but then again it really is mad to claim that the Trojan Wars were fought between the Celts of Britain and then brought to Greece by Minoan traders.

 

Yes, Schliemann is an excellent example. In his time, most people thought the Trojan War and the power of Mycenae were pure myth.

[Ursus]

In some of the alternative religious circles to which I have been exposed, there are an amazing amount of people who believe the world was once ruled by ancient pacifist eco-matriarchies. The world was a golden age, with people frolicking happily naked through the woods and living in harmony with nature. Then the evil Christians arrived to bring war, patriarchy, and ecological destruction. Atlantis sank in disgust, and Mother Earth wept. To reset the balance, we need to rediscover the secret lore of ancient "withcraft" lost from the Stone Age and empower women to fight the evils of the world (and George Bush is usually the center of all Evil).

 

These people are nearly always on the far-left fringes of political activist groups. Environmentalism, feminism and pacifism merge into a whole, backed by a fabricated religion that was based on some really bad scholarship of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Despite their claims of being pagan, most know nothing of ancient, historical paganism. Their religion is a pseudo-historical fraud which serves as a mask for counter-culture protest mentality. They are merely the flip side of their own mortal enemies, the so-called Religious Right.

 

These pseudo-historical groups are nearly always fronts for radical socio-political agendas. Afrocentrists. Aryan Christians. The list goes on. They should be challenged at every turn. Because it's not just the academic veracity of history at stake - it's about maintaining our liberties and dignity from subversive political groups.

[Marcus Caelius]

Is the historical community being undermined and destroyed in an onslaught of false information and ideas, or are these just stuff we should shrug our shoulders at and laugh? Or is there something more dark and sinister in their ideas, such as the Holocaust deniers?

 

What is your opinion?

 

Not destroyed, but certainly undermined and perverted. Pseudo-anything is dangerous because it can, and demonstrably does, distract attention, resources and effort from reality and, in extreme cases, can be used to rationalize, justify and inspire virtually any action. Since this is a forum for historical discussion I'll leave aside other disciplines and just mention the state-sponsored pseudohistory of the Third Reich as the most outstanding example. Although an extreme example, it actually did happen, it is still a living memory, and it is completely possible that it could happen again.

 

Should historians ignore the pseudohistorians? Humans are gullible and the tendency is to believe what they are told. If they're only told one thing, that's what they're going to believe.

[Kosmo]

Whenever I go to a library I'm disgusted to see that at the history section most books are of pseudohistory. Templars, cabala, Mossad and the Wise Man of Sion, etc.

Even worse is the use of history for political agendas. I will say that a large majority of true history books are not scientifical views, but try to prove or combat something for some other motif.

National histories in schoolbooks are often outright forgeries. Goverments invested in historical research to create evidence for wild theories not to really find what happened. This is because many political regimes or parties use history as means of legitimation or propaganda (national states and nations as myths, historical ideologies like marxism etc).

For example Ceausescu used history to promote strong leadership and national independance. So, romanian historians placed a lot of interest in dacians, as a national opposition to the corrupt West, and some Middle Age rulers that fought against the ottomans and the aristocrats like Vlad Tepes (the Impaler), Stefan the Great and Mihai the Brave.

The historians that ate a lot of brown stuff making a life chasing wild ideas found new support from extreme right nationalists like Iosif C-tin Dragan, a pal of Ceausescu and Romania's richest man. He owns an university and sponsors historical studies whith mindblowing conclusions. This books are writen by history proffesors with official credentials and they give for this type of works doctor degrees etc.

They carved a collosal face of Decebal in Danube Iron Gates.

I could keep like that for ages with examples from all countries and all eras.

[Andrew Dalby]

Whenever I go to a library I'm disgusted to see that at the history section most books are of pseudohistory. Templars, cabala, Mossad and the Wise Man of Sion, etc.

Even worse is the use of history for political agendas. I will say that a large majority of true history books are not scientifical views, but try to prove or combat something for some other motif.

National histories in schoolbooks are often outright forgeries. Goverments invested in historical research to create evidence for wild theories not to really find what happened. This is because many political regimes or parties use history as means of legitimation or propaganda (national states and nations as myths, historical ideologies like marxism etc).

For example Ceausescu used history to promote strong leadership and national independance. So, romanian historians placed a lot of interest in dacians, as a national opposition to the corrupt West, and some Middle Age rulers that fought against the ottomans and the aristocrats like Vlad Tepes (the Impaler), Stefan the Great and Mihai the Brave.

The historians that ate a lot of brown stuff making a life chasing wild ideas found new support from extreme right nationalists like Iosif C-tin Dragan, a pal of Ceausescu and Romania's richest man. He owns an university and sponsors historical studies whith mindblowing conclusions. This books are writen by history proffesors with official credentials and they give for this type of works doctor degrees etc.

They carved a collosal face of Decebal in Danube Iron Gates.

I could keep like that for ages with examples from all countries and all eras.

 

Writing from 'Bucharestdava', Kosmo, you are well placed to know about recent Romanian re- (mis-) interpretations of ancient and medieval history! But indeed there's a lot of this from many countries: a while ago I visited Thailand, having previously studied Thai history, and was shocked by the nationalistic propaganda that seemed to inspire the exhibits in the National Museum etc.

 

I didn't know about the statue. Thanks to your posting I have just found a photo of it here and seen the Latin inscription attached, which names Dragan just under Decebal!

 

[Can you tell me the name of that university? I like to keep track of these things ...] Later edit: It's OK, thanks, I've found the university now.

Edited November 27, 2006 by Andrew Dalby

[Kosmo]

Dragan's story it's worth a movie. He studied law in Bucharest and in 1941 started to sell romanian oil to Italia (some say he run away with the money of the extremist Iron Guard defeated in a coup attempt then).

He made a fortune in lichefied metan gas with Butan Gas a very important company In Italy and other Western European countries. He was a respected (I think) character in the study of marketing, publishing books and heading international conferences.

In the same time he was interested by the pseudoscience of tracology and with this he befrended Ceausescu and convinced him in the study. So, a capitalist billionaire with far right simpaties and a proletarian almost iliterate dictator joined toghether to create a new fake science: tracology.

I remeber that the only history magazine then ( of course named History Magazine) had the first page with a picture of C. (like all books) then some behind liking from cronies. After that it was a serial of articles by a univeristy proffesor, Ion Popescu-Puturi, about dacians. They used the confusion that Jordanes made between geti and gothi to prove that dacians lived in Scandinavia and conquered the roman empire.

After revolution Dragan continued to support and promote this kind of ideas.

He married at the age of 78 a young romanian named Gus(h)a. She is the daughter of army general Gusa that ordered the repression in Timisoara in december 1989 and was Chieff of Staff of the romanian army. Some say that the conflict between general Gusa and another general, Stanculescu, for the office of Ministry of Defence was one of the factors behind the violence in Romania between 22-28 december 1989. The so called terrorist attacks.

Back to Dragan, he desapaired in the last period being rumoured that his wife and other people from her anturage, including former military intelligence officers, have secluded him taking advantage of his senility in order to drain money from his fortune.

His fortune it's estimeted at 1,5 billion euros.

[Pantagathus]

Should historians ignore the pseudohistorians? Humans are gullible and the tendency is to believe what they are told. If they're only told one thing, that's what they're going to believe.

That is exactly why pseudohistory should be confronted. However, a good bit of 'psuedohistorians' just want attention & now with the Internet and easy self publishing avenues, there is sooooo much more to confront.

 

However, I just hate it when reputable scholars loose their cool with psuedo-academics.

[Marcus Caelius]

However, I just hate it when reputable scholars loose their cool with psuedo-academics.

 

However, it's difficult to not feel sympathy for Buzz Aldrin.

[Pantagathus]

However, I just hate it when reputable scholars loose their cool with psuedo-academics.

 

However, it's difficult to not feel sympathy for Buzz Aldrin.

How true... ^_^

[Pertinax]

Correct me if I misquote , was it not G K Chesterton who said (as regards Catholicism, but I suggest he hit a wider mark (an unintended witticism there as regards "catholic "), "People do not cease to believe , but they come to believe anything".... Ursus identifies the common "flip side" Jungian inversion of thinking in certain "alleged" pagan groups, we might perhaps consider other "fetishes" where conformity and cultural maoism (Moonlapses blog has some excellent links) inform apparent mainstream thought . Personally I would venture to suggest an overreliance on the technological imperative (perhaps best dislayed in the technological colonistaion of medicine versus the deeply unglamorous discipline of preventative healthcare) in daily life as another manifestation of a quasi religious attitude: Kosmo's "trachology" for example.