This holds true with the later scholars as well. After the fall of Rome and the rise of the Christian churches, many new historians cropped up, eager to tell the tale of the burgeoning religion. These historians were Christian themselves and believed in the new religion whole-heartedly. Rome had a long history (before Constantine) of treating Christians poorly, therefore many historians of this age painted Rome as a dark, twisted playground for debauched Pagans. Unfortunately we get most of our history about the Roman Emperors from these historians. Nero, who tortured Christians mercilessly for the burning of Rome, is nearly always painted as a cruel tyrant, wracked with insanity, hated by the common folk. However, we know from the scant contemporary sources that Nero was actually quite beloved. After his death, the Emperor Otho reinstalled statues of Nero because he was so popular. Nero was hated by a number of Senators because he sang in contests, and singers and actors were caste in with the likes of prostitutes and vagabonds. When Rome caught fire, it started in the poorest areas where the buildings were wooden and very close together. Nero was at his vacation villa and by the time he arrived in Rome nearly one quarter of it had already burned. He ordered the tear-down of many unscathed houses so there would be a fire-break. This was an unpopular decision, but it did end up stopping the fire. I won't go on and on about Nero, his many inventions, his incredible ideas on architecture and art, because this blog entry is about history.
History is a record of events as described by a person. That person may not have even been around during the events, and may in fact have lived hundreds of years afterward. This historian probably had a reason to write their history, and we must always take this reason into consideration when reading their history.
Bias is nearly always present in histories. Modern historians are not immune from bias. Glenn Beck's favorite historian is a man named David Barton. Barton has written many books and papers and made numerous appearances on radio and television shows and is a self proclaimed expert on America's founding fathers. He is also the founder and president of Wallbuilders, a Christian "pro-family" organization which focuses on using history of the founding fathers to help guide modern people. In his most recent book "America's Godly Heritage" he asserts a number of historical events which prove the nation was founded on Christian principals by Christian fathers. Of course a cursory review of these events will provide a number of factual errors Barton has either created himself or borrowed from negligent sources.
One such story is about George Washington. In fact Barton's book cover uses a painting based on this often repeated tale. The story says that Washington, while at Valley Forge, was seen by a man named Pots, to be praying by the river. Pots went home and told his wife Sarah about the scene and how it moved him. The problem with the tale is that Pots didn't marry Sarah until many, many years after the event was to take place. Pots owned the farm where Washington's men were camped, but he wasn't actually there. Pot's aunt lived there, alone. Since the story is so suspect, does this mean Washington never prayed? Of course not, we have many instances of letters and documents where Washington called on God, but this one little story doesn't prove it. It's bad history. It's biased history.
Barton goes on to claim that founding father Adams was a paragon of Christianity. However, Christian author John Fea quotes Adams in his new book "Was America Founded as a Christian Nation?":
[Adams] could not accept the historic Christian belief that Jesus Christ was God or that his death atoned for the sins of the world: "An incarnate God!!! An eternal, self-existent omnipresent Author of this stupendous Universe suffering on a Cross!!! My Soul starts with horror, at the Idea." Adams thought the notion of "a mere creature, or finite Being," making "Satisfaction to the infinite justice for the sins of the world" was a "convenient Cover for absurdity." These doctrines were not part of the pure and undefiled teachings of Jesus as found in the Gospels, but were rather created by the leaders of the early Christian church who "misunderstood" Jesus' message and thus presented it in "very paradoxical Shapes."
The Tea Party lauds the American Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as evidence the founding fathers were Christian. However, we have numerous letters from the Anti-Federalists who were against the creation of the Declaration and the Constitution because the documents were not "Godly" and didn't invoke the name of "Jesus" anywhere.
One of my favorite stories is that of Paul Revere and his midnight ride. The story we all know is actually from a poem by Longfellow written to stir the hearts of men during the Civil War and is not a record of what actually happened back during the Revolution. In fact, Paul Revere never really got anywhere during his ride. He was captured by the British, so he never got a chance to wave any lanterns.
How will the recent events in the Middle East or Wisconsin play out in our history books? How will historians' bias affect the way future generations learn about the events?
No comments:
Post a Comment