Unit+1


 * Jennifer Lim's Family History Project**


 * History Introduction**

__**Vocabulary**__ heretical- something that most people think is wrong because it disagrees with what is usually accepted by others faggot- a bundle of sticks Eucharist- a Christian ceremony for the remembrance of the Last Supper abstain- keeping someone from doing something; holding someone back penance- where you confess your wrong doings and promise to never do it again beseeching- the expression of someone who wants you do a certain thing source- where a certain thing comes from

Hogsflesh is declaring the fact that he was convicted for heretical beliefs and penancing for them. He believed that people shouldn’t Virgin Mary, there was no need, that Christ’s body was not present n the Eucharist, and that he doesn’t need a confession to a priest to be saved from evil. The historian is trying to show the past when people penanced if they had heretical beliefs.
 * 1. In section 1, Heretical Beliefs, the historian gives his account of a historical event. What is happening to Hogsflesh? What is the historian's “story” or main point of the article?**

John Arnold states that there are two roles of a historian and they are synthesizing and story telling. He says that a historian should be able to collect information and make them into a pattern, and tell a story through it. I agree with his assumptions, but I think there are more roles to a historian than just two. I believe that historians should be able to elaborate on what they find and use context clues to complete the story if there are missing pieces to it as well as synthesize and story tell.
 * 2. What are the roles of a historian defined by John Arnold? Do you agree or disagree with his assumptions? Can you think of any other roles?**

Treating sources with fidelity means that historians should be able to believe and support the sources they find, and complete the story of the history. They shouldn’t doubt it and change information. It is important to remember this when reading historical references because if you believe and support what you are reading, you will understand much more and learn more from it.
 * 3. What is meant by “treat(ing) their sources with fidelity?” Remember to put your response in your own words. Why is it important to remember this when reading historical references?**

A single event could be interpreted in more than one way depending on their past experiences and their opinions. An event in my life that historians could interpret with different points of view is when one time I tried to make friends with new students after a huge fight with my best friend. Some people thought that I was being friendly to new students because I needed a new best friend, but some people just thought that I didn’t care as much about the fight I had with my friend, and was simply being nice.
 * 4. How can a single event be interpreted in more than one way? Can you think of an event in your life that historians could interpret with differing points of view?**

I talked to my sister about a fight we had over a new bag. We both wanted to wear it on the first day of school. As I remember it, we played a game of rock paper scissors and I won, so I got to wear the bag. As my sister remembers it, I just took the bag from her. After our conversation, I do not believe that it is possible for a historian to be completely objective because sometimes they remember it the way they want to.
 * 5. Talk to a family member or friend about something that happened to you both a long time ago. Examine how you both remember the incident and write about it. With that in mind, when attaching meaning to history, is it possible for a historian to be completely objective? Use examples from the incident you just discussed to reinforce your response.**

A lot of problems may arise when historians practice subjective history. They would write history just as they wanted to remember it and be completely biased. However, subjective history could be beneficial to the study of history by giving a chance to other people to look at history from different points of view. It made sense for me to remember the incident the way I did because I felt that I won fair and square, and I had every right to wear the bag. My sister might remember the incident the way she does because she still felt that it was unfair that I got to wear the bag, and made me want to look bad. This tells us that history can be easily changed by how people believe to remember it.
 * 6. What problems may arise when historians practice subjective history? In what ways may subjective history be beneficial to the study of history? Think back to the incident you just discussed with your family member or friend. Why did it make sense for you to remember the event the way you did and for the other person to remember it the way he or she did? What does this tell us about history?**

Every historian is a storyteller because their job is to collect information about the past, form a story through it, and let others know about the story. I do not think that we can trust historians because there are myriad versions of every story, and that just proves to us that no one has the facts straight, and everyone is biased. Readers understand history the way they read and understand it, which the historians write, which has a fair chance of being biased.
 * 7. Why is every historian "a storytell****er?" If all historians are storytellers and there are myriad versions of every story, can we trust historians? Why or why not?**

By this reading, I realized that we cannot trust everything we read because it could be biased. I realized that not everything the historians say is always right. Now that I have explored these views, I will not always understand history the way historians write it. I will try to understand it from different perspectives than the historian does and wants me to, too.
 * 8. How did your view of history and historians change based on this reading? How will you approach history now that you have explored these views?**