Socio-historic Context

   Should we separate socio-historic context and the belief and values system? In many ways, history is an argument that cannot be won. It is ongoing, subject to interpretation, and voiced individually, collectively, culturally, etc.
   Western mentality applies science and logic in discerning history. Traditional cultures worldwide accept dissemination of knowledge from higher sources as bona-fide. Unless historians and anthropologists accept spiritual revelation as a means of imparting knowledge (including history), the divide will remain, with analysis shackled, and bogged down in divisive debate.

   History is social studies removed from context by time and space. Fictional re-enactment brings archeology and anthropology to life. However, expecting universal acclaim regarding veracity of claims is unreasonable.
   A writer is influenced by socio-historic conditioning. Beliefs and values are an important aspect of personality. To deny them or exclude them is unwarranted. In writing history, beliefs and values assist in defining angle of vision. Depending on the work at hand, belief or value will take on greater or lesser import.

   Revealed truths, on the other hand, can also be presented as valid. History regarding indigenous people worldwide should welcome native insight. They may accept nature spirits and guides, angels, demigods, demonic forces etc, as part of reality.
   Without delving deeper into these truths history will remain a two dimensional cut-out of the real deal, as seen through the eyes of the invading colonists, enforced by a weighty baggage of belief and custom. Genuine historians do more than just paper over the cracks of our past.

   When applying history to a culture, the spiritual beliefs, practices, and revealed truths are most relevant and essential, without which an accurate depiction is impossible. Otherwise, justification by invaders becomes paternalistic, absolving historians from the need for equal voice.
   Technological improvement in global communities doesn't automatically equate to increased wisdom. Our nature runs deep, bolstered by prior understanding. Many  traditions accept unseen agents such as karma and reincarnation as reality being progressively experienced, a part of our collective history.

   Some accept this earthly realm as being one of many interconnected worlds. Modern methods and structure in history are restrictive in knowledge assimilation.
   Universal traits enable people to communicate and express ideas. There is a possibility that occasional differences are designed to destabalize as well as  harmonize.
   A writer of history should search for the truth, and expect limitations in expressing truth, while also accepting the validity of alternative theory.




                                       End