History, an amalgam of philosophies and opinions

5 minutes read!

We see that history is written through personal opinions, with a lot of subjectivism. This approach is profoundly wrong. History is a science, not an exact science, but it is a science. It should be seen objectively, through the facts and events described in historical documents belonging to ancient historians and of course through archaeological discoveries. After that, multidisciplinary studies must be done, in order to have an exact picture.

One method of approach in researching history is well described in the following paragraph (see Foreword, by Gabriel Gheorghe, Getica magazine nr. 1-2, 1992, p. 6-7):

We are the absolute adversaries of all form of exaggeration and prothocronism.

We are determined to adopt an independent line of thought, thoroughly excluding any tendency that may limit reason, assuming the necessary distance from both Thracomania and Latinomania, Slavomania, Francomania, or any other kind of manias that have haunted linguistics and the other humanities.

In spite of its rigors and discomforts, reason will be our only master, and we can only express out hope that we shall always be able to follow the line we profess. Our intention is that our only god should be the truth, our only method should be a rigorous and telling argumentation and our sole purpose: the growth of knowledge in an existential area as the one we are concerned with and which is so wanting in knowledge.

See the Romanian article ->