ABSTRACT
It has been argued by realist or reconstructionist historians that history, if done properly, should simply be concerned with fi nding out what happened. Historians should divorce themselves from any subjective, political or ideological interests that they may have, and research and write history ‘for its own sake’. However, as we saw in Chapters 5 and 6, many historians now believe that it is impossible for a historian to completely remove herself from her own personal interests and concerns and the wider socio-cultural framework, theories, models and classifi catory systems she uses to make sense of, or interpret, the world. For such historians, therefore, historical narratives always refl ect to some degree the ideological or political perspective of the historian. The question is not, then, whether a particular narrative is ideologically motivated, but rather whether it consciously acknowledges the viewpoint from which it is written and the functions it hopes to have. The argument that we study and write history for its own sake and do not use it for political, social or cultural ends is further undermined by the vast sums of money that are spent worldwide each year on providing history education in schools and universities, organising conferences and subsidising the publication of books. If history has no socio-political function, then why do governments invest all this money in it?
