How Revisionist History is a Good Thing

[@TheWelshViking]

I apologise for mispronouncing DuBois, gang!

[@taylorfusher2997]

To Welsh Viking: What does swallower of Heaven’s Wheel mean in simple terms? What does the swallower of the wheel of Heaven mean in simple terms? What does the gnawer of the moon mean in simple terms? What does this describe the troll woman that was met by Bragi the Old? There are other verses in the description that the troll mentioned to Bragi the Old. What does all that mean about the troll?

[@nobodynowhere3322]

Forgiveable. You're Welsh and in Europe that name is commonly pronounced the French way, and plenty of Americans make that mistake as well. I think the majority of mispronunciations come from someone who has seen the word or name in print but not heard it spoken, and unfortunately we still don't talk about DuBois enough that folks hear it in spoken discourse. but good on you for noting it. ❤

[@hopenield8234]

Great to have a piece of revisionism in action. We’re constantly learning new information and the fact that DuBois pronounced his name to separate it from French colonialism is something I had no idea about. I loved that the person who shared this did so in a kindly manner. I think we have way too many keyboard warriors online who seem to want to try and make genuine - and often common - mistakes look like deliberate offenses.

[@rynrose83]

I took many ethnic studies classes in college and I still forget which way it’s pronounced 😅. My Africana studies prof said something like, “if you’re in the know, you pronounce it du boice”

[@hejnye]

just ignore the s at the end, it's a french thing

[@chrisball3778]

"I don't like insulting people, because I'm nice." Wonderful words.

[@gypsydonovan]

@@SpaceGhost1701revisit the word “literally”. Even if you were correct it doesn’t change the comment. Those are wonderful words. Maybe you meant to comment on something else that would make more sense?

[@davidcheater4239]

In Biology.we say; "A beautiful theory killed by a nasty ugly little fact."

[@professorpeachez]

As a museum professional, I LOVE this conversation. How we share and interpret history has changed so much in the last few decades and it's really great to see so many new voices entering the field of history and museology and sharing their perspectives.

[@fionaellem4379]

I was fascinated by the take on Winston Churchill. I know that he is revered in the UK - he certainly got the country working together, which is a pretty impressive accomplishment. But in Australia, we know him, first and foremost, as the author of the Gallipoli campaign, which was a disaster militarily speaking. Then there is PM John Curtin’s refusal to send all our troops to Europe at Churchill’s demand, because Singapore was about to fall to the Japanese and Australia was next in line …. Over here he’s seen as a more complex, nuanced character with some very good qualities and some very deep flaws. Oh, and I envy you your needle storage!

[@asterismos5451]

My dad works in history of medicine and science and gets so adamant about how the "stupid" things people did and believed in the past did actually make sense based on their understanding of the world at the time and was in fact quite clever and neat and led to our modern medicine and science, even if it mostly turned out to be total BS. Similarly to what you've been talking about. So the study of previous beliefs is in and of itself a valid and thriving field!

[@angelcollina]

I love hearing about so called “Old Wives Tales” and folk remedies. Because even if the reason why is off, what it shows us is how acutely historical people observed their world. And often they were on the right track for treating the ailment given the technology of their day.

[@hedgehog3180]

Science history is generally underrated. Everyone loves hearing about the great geniuses who discovered the truth when everyone else was being stupid but no one is really interested in learning how exactly those advancements happened and why people believed what they did before Newton, Darwin or Einstein. It's honestly kinda ironic considering how humble most of these people were.

[@whatgoesaroundcomesaround920]

Those old grannies and their herbs: real medicine at work, at the time and place.

[@mermaidstears4897]

I think it’s important to remember that “heroes” were first and foremost, just human, with human weaknesses, with good traits as well as bad ones. I think balance is important.

[@lordofuzkulak8308]

21:31 - anyone else now imagining Jimmy as an old man with a big Gandalf beard stuffed with knitting needles and balls of wool, and accidentally knitting his beard into the jumper he’s knitting? 😂

[@caspenbee]

Years ago an anonymous commenter called my Harry Potter fanfic "revisionist history" and I have never let it go. They're WIZARDS

[@mikeymullins5305]

What did you do 😂😂😂😂

[@Randoplants]

It was inescapable if you knew anyone who could read.

[@pennobrien6735]

In high school I had a history teacher who I very much admired. He had opinions on historical events which I strongly disagree with but he taught me how to analyse evidence and ideas and bias enough to be able to challenge his ideas, and encouraged we do so. And I will always be grateful for that.

[@quinn0517]

If we weren't constantly looking back at history to reinterpret it in a new paradigm & integrate new information, what would even be the point of having historians? This notion some are waving about that we've never revised history before now is absurd. Thank you, as always.

[@nascenticity]

TIL that i’ve been using the term “historical revisionism” wrong for years for what i should have just been calling denialism. Thank you for talking about this!

[@npdesign8202]

Where were you when I was being educated? Your knowledge, enthusiasm for history and genuine concern for what we know and need to be offered would have pulled me in hook, line and sinker! I had to grow old and maybe more patient to enjoy and benefit from the lessons of the past! Thank you so much!

[@kleineanna13]

Thank you for this video! I studied history and am now studying to become a primary school teacher. I always get the question from students (and even colleagues!) 'Why do we need to learn history?' And I tell them we do not need to learn history, we need to study it. To question our own ideas and beliefs to better understand the society we live in and ultimately, people as a whole. Learning dates and events is like the grammar needed to speak the language of history, and not the goal. I always find it hard to explain al this to Ppeople, and you did it marvelously. Thanks for that!

[@hedgehog3180]

The methods you learn for examining historical sources are also useful for examining contemporary ones. Is this a first or second hand account? Was the person writing this present at the event? Is there reason to suspect that the source is intentionally biased? Might the source have a skewed perspective? Do multiple independent sources claim the same thing as this source or do they disagree?

[@NSYresearch]

Have been involved in WW1 reenacting and living history for over 12 years the greatest piece of revisionist history I read was Mud Blood and Poppycock bt Gordon Corrigan. He used statistical data, original and period writings by often unpublished writers, primary evidence and more. He was able to break down so many of the myths about the Great War that had been held sacrosanct by academics and ordinary people. In the years following reading this I hunted out autobiographies and diaries of ordinary soldiers and, whilst remembering that memory is never perfect, better understood what the ordinary British soldier experienced.

[@lilykatmoon4508]

We see a lot of denialism and negating of the horrors of slavery here in the US, especially in southern states. I taught history in Texas for 18 years and in a 2016 geography textbook adoption, they adopted a book that referred to enslaved populations as “immigrants and workers” and literally said maybe some enslaved people were abused busy most did ok. The book had to be retracted and parts of it rewritten. In Florida they’re trying to say slavery had benefits to the enslaved population because they learned skills. Sure, they did, but skills they were forced to learn, they had no self determination in either the skills they learned, how that learning occurred, and what they did with that learning. It’s flabbergasting to me that people really feel confident in BS like that. I thought this was a really good video, because I agree completely most modern history and science is constantly being revised as technology makes answers from the past more clear. People who want to cling to the past so badly need to realize that these new understandings are essential to moving forward as people and changing.

[@sarar4901]

Had a professor in undergrad who claimed that cw: violence and denialism The reason you always see that picture of the enslaved man with the massive ropey scars is that that guy was unusual because slaveholders didn't usually treat their expensive property like that. If violence against the enslaved was common there would be other pictures like that. No, dude, that guy just had keloids that made his scars really visible and prominent. You're gross.

[@d20avatar]

"The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views."

[@Bildgesmythe]

Sadly very true

[@Odontecete]

I remember my physics teacher explaining that in the late 1800's physicists thought there was no point in studying physics because everything to be discovered had already been discovered. Now the caveat was/is that it was the more arrogant physicists that were more concerned with "class" that spread this thinking they could create and elitist group. I always remember that because it was a lesson in not just the scientific method but also a great lesson for learning pretty much any subject. Question the culture and motive of the writer as well as the information.

[@nyves104]

oh my god, I was just rereading Howl's Moving Castle and only just now realized that the song at the end of your videos is the same one Sophie calls "Calcifer's silly little saucepan song."

[@SaszaDerRoyt]

A bit on my own experience of challenging the preconceptions I grew up with, as someone with an Israeli parent and a whole half of my family deeply involved in Israeli history (for instance, my grandparents were part of the founding nucleus of a Kibbutz, my grandfather was a military man and diplomat who knew Ben Gurion and many other later PMs and Presidents as well as Moshe Dayan). Learning that the simplistic and heroic story I learned about the founding and building of the State of Israel was basically a fictional retelling of the real events, that places I grew up visiting and exploring every year used to be bustling Palestinian villages that had been ethnically cleansed, amd that some of my relatives may well have been complicit in war crimes, was all quite difficult to come to terms with. While it was challenged by people I knew, I mostly did the research myself and thankfully that prevented those issues of getting defensive and doubling down that often happens when you contradict the beliefs that someone builds their identity on. I find that if you do challenge those sorts of deeply held but deeply harmful historical beliefs, you need to be gentle and guide people in doing their own research, or else they'll just shut themselves down to any new information. A bit more rambly than I meant to write but good video, really interesting take on the topic!

[@SaszaDerRoyt]

*the comment is rambly, not the video

[@MichaelBerthelsen]

​@@SaszaDerRoyt Excellent comment, regardless of level of ramblyness...? Rambleness? Ramblicity...? Ramble...🤷👍

[@asterismos5451]

Fully agree with what you're saying in the later part of this! I met a girl on exchange from China when I was in high school and we were hanging out and talking for the day and she at one point mentioned how Mao is on their money and a few people had mentioned now that she was here how he was a really horrible person but she'd only known of him as a great leader and heroic figure but hmm dunno.... So I took the approach you are saying here and just affirmed that I knew of him as a horrible person and yeah that might be worth looking into more. Hopefully she did.

[@JasTheMadTexan]

Yes! I work in public history in Texas and challenging the Grand Myth of Texas has to be done very carefully if you don’t want certain folks in power to come down on you like a ton of bricks

[@catherinespencer-mills1928]

A time I recalled is not about historical revision, but biology. I attended a seminar at university by request. My husband was the biologist, not me. I was the nerd. Anyway, the presenter was modestly famous in the biology field and was invited to give a presentation at the university where my husband worked. (Too much intro?) So the presentation rolls along until (dum, dum, dum) a question is posed: How did you account for ? Jaw dropped. Dead silence. Response was along the lines of: I didn't. The intent was not to embarrass the presenter. Fortunately, the presenter returned to his university and proceeded to create a major redo of his life's work. And made a better case for the opposite conclusion. TL DR: Confrontation unintentional or not may bring on positive revision.

[@timmadison5410]

I confess I've always used the term "historical revisionism" to mean replacing evidence-based history with a fabricated, self-serving narrative. As a non-academic, I totally accept this is not what historians typically mean, but I wonder if the popular use (or mis-use) of the term has kind of taken over. My feeling is that any academic field of study should fundamentally function as you've described and re-assess established ideas when new evidence comes to light. That whole notion that our understanding of the history, the world, the universe is always growing and consequently changing, sometimes radically, seems like the source of such a great divide today. To your point, so many people feel the need for a kind of control of the world that doesn't allow for the admission that "Hey, we've learned something new." or worse yet "You know what? Maybe we were wrong."

[@jeannegreeneyes1319]

Thank you for mentioning how difficult, even painful for people who have devoted lives and careers to particular views n theories to have it change or fall apart or become obsolete. I have seen professors go through this. 😞

[@626jean]

This was a nice talk. Thanks. Often we're so busy figuring out all the new things (there are so many!) that we don't take the time to think of those who are dragging their feet.

[@MsSteelphoenix]

Absolutely love that the conclusion is 'more tea and biscuits'! But seriously, I appreciate the point that you should be kind, and nuanced, and understanding of people's hurt in the re-examination of history. I think if more people considered this, the common understanding of history might be a little less fraught.

[@cheerful_something_something]

More important than being nice: You are compassionate and you are fair. You are kind and you are good. Re-examine history and check your sources for bias and persepective and mistakes! Shifts in language use changing what they meant compared to what you read even in the same language! :)

[@angelcollina]

This is a very important and powerful video/Ted Talk. I remember quite vividly when I moved away for college (University) and some of my foundational beliefs were challenged. I remember feeling that dig-in-your-heels reaction wanting to continue believing as I did and breaking into sobs over some things. But I learned gradually along with some peers to hold the things I believed as “just ideas” and not as core beliefs that made up my soul and identity as a person. (It sounds kinda weird, but it’s hard to put into words.) That way when I learned something new or had to change something, I just “changed that idea I had” That was a lot easier that changing a part of my identity. Of course, I still have beliefs that make up my identity, I’m not perfect, but learning that trick early in college has allowed me to learn so much and to nearly painlessly replace out of date knowledge with new knowledge. I was just lucky to learn it so soon. It becomes much more difficult to adjust later in life as I understand.

[@loraleitourtillottwiehr2473]

Would love to see a Ted Talk from you debunking Viking myths! Could be a good lense to talk about unpacking preconceived notions and looking complexly at the past.

[@davidschwartz8125]

After watching this episode last night, I read this passage this morning, and it dovetails nicely with what you said. "This (the event described) illustrates the principle that even an amateur historian quickly learns: history is not so much about the past as it is about records of the past, that may or may not reflect what really happened. Even when written down, there is no guarantee that the realities of things were recorded accurately, or even that the documentation wasn't written to conceal the truth instead of record it." Found at the absolute bottom of Airvetors, Mitsubishi A6M Zero.

[@nixhixx]

BTW, one of my best friends is a professor of Black History, Black Experience, and education. He's written several books on the subject of W.E.B. DuBois and it is pronounce Doo - Boyz. (There's also a small city in my home state pronounced the same way.)

[@SauronsAccntnt]

Another engaging, thoughtful musing! I appreciate the defense of a gentle touch; kindness is not a weakness nor a waste of time - some folks tend to write it off until they don't receive it themselves. Thank you for the nuanced chat, I"ll sign the petition for more snacks for our historians!

[@pinkcloudsnightlightbell]

Yes, more snacks! 🍡🌈

[@isobelholland8552]

Please don't apologise for wordiness when what you have to say is nuanced and important.

[@rowanrooks]

This was very helpful! I never learned about what revisionism actually means, but it has usually been implied to me that it involves a misinterpretation of the past using contemporary values and beliefs. I'm starting to realize that "revisionism" is possibly being used like the phrase "politically correct" where certain people are being hateful and speak disparagingly about something that is usually quite good.

[@esthermcafee5293]

I took some Archaeological Methods and Materials courses in the 1990s (why no, I don’t use my cultural anthropology degree in my day to day life - why do you ask? 😂) and participated in a few digs. One thing my professors were quite keen on was the idea of leaving parts of the site undug whenever possible, so that when techniques or technology improved future archaeologists wouldn’t have access to nothing but strip mined husks.

[@Aethelgeat]

Same here regarding using my anth degree and being taught to leave as much as possible of the sight undisturbed for future research and improved technology. We also would take additional measurements in relation to the site and datum that we ourselves were not going to use in the hope that future research would be able to use the data, because once we excavate, we can't take those measurements anymore.

[@kellyburds2991]

I do not know if you are nice, Jimmy, but you are definitely kind. You take the time to gently explain why someone's security-blanket beliefs may be factually incorrect, without telling them they are stupid or awful for believing. Nice would be smiling and nodding and going on with your day. Nice is easy. Kind takes work.

[@nailguncrouch1017]

I find that when talking to people who were around during WW Two, especially if they were children, really had no idea what was going on overseas. They take what was told by the media as the truth, pass those stories on, and struggle with the idea that maybe things were slanted.

[@SonsOfLorgar]

In my line of work, I once had the heart breaking honour of driving two old ladies who survived childhood through ww2, one was of German orgin who recounted how she had been forcefully slapped over the face by her panicked mother for running away from her school class on the way to the bomb shelter, running and weaving from doorway to doorway through the incendiary bombs and fire storm to her familys designaged city block bomb shelter and how her neighbourhood adults had lynched the corner store NSDAP member grocer for ratting out a local jewish family to the gestapo early in the war. The other lady was of Danish orgin and her grocer father had fled with her and the family to Sweden early on and how her father and brother had spent the war smuggling weapons, food and supplies to the Danish resistance out of Sweden in small motor boats, and downed allied pilots back from Denmark so the pilots could recover and be returned home safely.

[@paulaunger3061]

Yeah. And I think the schooling and media of the late 40s and all the way through the 50s was very oppressive and proscriptive. And people of that generation are loath to part with what they learned from it - a politically motivated view of history, the main point of which, I thought, was to get people idolise the military and do whatever the government told them. While nothing's perfect, I think we're moving away from all that, thank God.

[@Loweene_Ancalimon]

My grandfather was born in Berlin in 1926. Before he died when I was 14, we had a long chat about the Hitler Jugend, and how he absolutely loved going as a child. Because, yes, it was absolutely revolutionary in that it got kids of all classes together, and out of cities, and meeting children from the other side of the country at big gatherings. Many poor city children had never been more than a few km from their homes, and had never really seen the countryside, fields and lakes. His mother put back as much as she could having to sign him up, but there came a point where she couldn't put it off any longer. Yes, it all served to create a sentiment of national unity, because it's a lot easier to understand why the Nation as a whole should be protected when you can put faces and memories of play on X or Y city on the other side of the country, and eventually that feeds into indoctrination, but it also was an amazing and very formative experience for most children. It allowed them a third space outside of family and school, without the presence of adults, as it was mostly run by the elder kids. They camped, played, sang, went to bed way too late, cooked on wood fires, learned how to swim... After the war, he worked on deconstructing many things, and while he realised how in the ends it had been a means of indoctrination, I think he made a conscious effort to not let his positive memories of it be tainted, while having that extra layer of understanding. He went on to being a Lutheran minister, and to create an "anarcho-protestant" scouting movement, anarchist in the sense of not affiliated with a political party. The kerchief he picked for it, as fabric was scarce after the war, was the black one of the HJ, with a white border sewn on by the mothers. The white of peace, and the reclaiming of the symbol of the black kerchief. I've always found that absolutely lovely. The movement still exists today, and now the kerchiefs are manufactured that way, but I think I somewhere have his first one, which is indeed his modified HJ one. Nuance, baby.

[@yvonnemason9137]

You should totally have a TED talk! This is a compassionate and very well communicated explanation of revisionism and one which I'll be using with my students. Thanks so much for sharing. :)

[@maranutt775]

Jimmy always comes in with bangers, and this is one of your best. Thank you so much for this video! Every person on earth should watch it imo

[@ObsessiveGinger]

I loved this video! As a public historian this video filled my heart with glee! Thank you! I don't comment a lot but I love your channel!

[@robertmellin6495]

(Laura Mellin) I have painfully close experience with this; my maternal grandfather was an officer in the Raj. He and my grandmother were in India from 1925-ish to the start of WWII. He was in charge of the southern half of India. My mother and her siblings lived there until 1934-ish (my mother doesn’t talk much about it). I watch RRR, and turn to my husband, and say, “that’s what my grandparents were doing”. They weren’t evil people, but they participated in an evil system. Sometimes revisionism is just listening to the other people’s voices. And sometimes it’s pointing out unconscious bias on the part of the researcher. I do (amateur) historic stuff, too - late 16th-early 17thC England - and I’m AuDHD, so my interpretations are sometimes at odds with the majority opinion, but detail and pattern recognition is my thing.

[@theriverspath]

As a fiber art enthusiast without facial hair, I'd never considered the practical use of a beard as knitting needle storage. It looks like it sure beats loosing them between the couch cushions when you set them down for half a second.

[@1One2Three5Eight13]

I'm not sure what your "hair on the top of the head" situation is, but I find that either the French braid going down the back of my head, or at the base of a ponytail (between my head and the elastic) are also excellent places to store a dpn. (I say this, and have used them, but the last time I was switching needle sizes on a sock it lead to a "mom, why do you have needles in your sock?" question, which I'm sure you can parse correctly.)

[@Tvianne]

@@1One2Three5Eight13 having prehensile hair (curls), I don't even need an elastic or braid, lol.

[@Treia24]

Just wanted to say, I have the utmost respect for the education work you're doing here. You have a real talent for making this kind of information accessible and fun, and that is such an important thing to be doing. Thank you.

[@michaelgrummitt8395]

Although I believe that changing names of historical methods can be confusing, I think that "Revisionism" and "Post-Revisionism" should be changed to something like "Constant Assesment" to reflect a more nuanced approach. The rate of historical re-appraisal has accelerated, especially in certain archaeological research such as ancient DNA. This means that soon we will talking about Post Post Post-Revisionist".

[@tetchedistress]

Many much tea and biscuits are needed. History is brutal and painful. Humans treat each other horribly everyday and have since the first man roamed the planet. It's why I prefer domestic history more so than greater History. Give me a good how to on weaving or household skills and I am down for it. I'm curious how we innovated livestock care, what grains we ate, who or how did they decide to invent the loom or the dishwasher. That last clip of the video made me smile, by the way. Those particular sticks are magical and can produce great things. 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@ulrike9978]

What a fascinating discussion of terms I have to confess I was only half aware of. This really makes me miss academia! And when I still thought I would go into academia, I really hoped I wouldn´t turn into one of these scholars who couldn´t let go of a theory in the light of new evidence, even if it´s hard to do so. Also: oh god, the difficulty about accepting that your not-so-recent ancestors did horrible stuff is really something. (My great-grandfather was in the SA and spied for the Gestapo, a fact I found out at 25. I have rarely been so disturbed and upset in my life.)

[@nataliestanchevski4628]

I think I've only ever heard of revisionism used in place of denialism so I've had a negative impression of the word. Thank you for correcting the definition for me.

[@paulaunger3061]

Excellent vid. People need to watch this, not just for the insight into what revisionism should be, but how it is done and how anyone could really look into the records and do it themselves. Something other than conspiracy theory for internet ppl to 'do their own research' on.

[@marthahawkinson-michau9611]

I think there is a significant moral difference between saying that a previous interpretation of an event was incorrect and saying that someone’s beliefs about an event are wrong. Honestly, a massive part of the backlash against historical revisionism has to do with the emotional weight of the words. Nobody likes being told that they’re wrong. “Wrong” has an emotional, moral weight to it. It’s quite easily weaponized. “Right” and “Wrong” are often seen as polar opposites, especially by those who are prone to black and white thinking. “Correct” and “Incorrect” have significantly less emotional weight to them. Furthermore they allow for more nuance in a discussion. There can totally be a spectrum in between “Correct” and “Incorrect”.

[@FeatherCharm436]

Brilliant video, Jimmy. I really appreciate the deep dive into historical theory!

[@MichaelBerthelsen]

@The Welsh Viking Just an FYI, Du Bois didn't pronounce his name as 'Duboa'. He saw it as French collonial, so insisted on pronouncing all the letters properly: 'DuBoys'. Learnt that from F.D. Signifier who (other than being an AWESOME channel in general) has studied Du Bois and I believe he studied at the same university where Du Bois worked...? Something like that. And he mentioned it in a video because EVERYONE was correcting his pronunciation whenever he spoke of 'Du Boys', so he felt that he needed to explain WHY he was pronouncing it the 'non-French' way. Just an FYI for next time.😉👍

[@alundavies1016]

It’s like scientific hypotheses. People propose new ones, other people chew through them, some they spit out, some they swallow. It moves history along and keeps it interesting, relevant and exploratory. Otherwise it’s just dogma.

[@nyella]

Yes plase do a Ted Talk :D Also and more importantly, THANK YOU again for your kindness, consideration ... it's sort of healing to hear you talk about complicated issues in that way!

[@edgeeffect]

This is fascinating, I've always regarded "revisionism" as a pejorative term for just making-up non-existent history so suit your own aims and goals. And what you describe here as revisionism, I'd considered to be "just historians doing what historians do" It's nice to have your assumptions overturned... thanks.

[@scousecaraid97]

I thought exactly the same! Revisionalism always hat a bad taste for me. Maybe there is also a difference between countries/languages how revisionism is defined? Just checked briefly the german wikipedia site, and here it looks like revisionism in the german language means negationism, wheras historical revisionism means what Jimmy explained.

[@edgeeffect]

@@scousecaraid97 I'm basing my wrong opinion on what I've heard in the media.

[@ViJoker1]

Revisionism does have a pejorative conotation, but not in history in general terms, but in marxism specifically. Revisionists in marxist circles are those who distort Marx's works and other marxist thinkers to justify actions and policies that are non-marxist or even anti-marxist (this is a very simpified explanation, of course).

[@hedgehog3180]

A lot of the time when lay people use “revisionism” they're more or less using it as a synonym for denialism or negationism. The confusion probably just stems from the fact that the wider public generally doesn't understand how any specific field of academia works and so they often think that academia just produces an ever growing static body of knowledge. When you think academia works like that then any reexamination of that knowledge might seem like a malicious attempt to subvert facts, especially if the reexamination conflicts with your own personal beliefs. Of course the reality is that academia doesn't produce static knowledge but is constantly reexamining every bit of knowledge to confirm its validity and itself, nothing really stays static, but that's rarely how academic fields like natural science and history are taught. They're usually taught as a static collection of facts where it was just a question of discovering them in the first place and those facts can never be reexamined.

[@edgeeffect]

​@@hedgehog3180 "They're usually taught as a static collection of facts where it was just a question of discovering them in the first place and those facts can never be reexamined." Oh, good god, yes... I'm in software development, outside of academia... and I keep being clobbered by this every single day! :)

[@judym7153]

Thank you for your wonderful insight on this topic. Which I did enjoy with a cup of tea!

[@Dreymasmith]

I did Early English and some Classics in the 90s through to PhD level (didn't finish, doesn't matter). My youngest is now doing Classics and History. It is fascinating seeing how some interpretations have grown or changed even in that time. Love discussing revisionism and historiographie in general with him.

[@SunCrowned]

Get this man his damn tedtalk

[@samuelleask1132]

“God’s rewind button on the cosmic VCR is always the same” best line ever 😂😂😂

[@Nebulouslystarlight]

ngl, when I saw the title pop up in my feed, I side eyed it reeeeeeeeal hard. But I'm glad I watched it, always a treat to see what you're up to

[@wintyrqueen]

It’s like the original meaning of ret-con. It often gets used to describe writers changing what happened in the past, but as originally intended it was meant to add new perspectives to existing events, sometimes radically shifting the underlying meaning of things, but not altering any of the things that were previously established

[@TheMayLight]

Well said! Your words are very wise and should definitely be considered not only in relation to history and research, but generally in communication and dealing with difficult topics of conversation. 👏

[@inkymunster1591]

I actually was starting tea and a biscuit as the notification popped up.... Must be a Cymru thing. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿

[@pufthemajicdragon]

So it sounds to me like you're saying that Revisionism is not revising the past, it's revising what we know and understand about the past.

[@hedgehog3180]

Revisionism is going from “Christianity caused the downfall of the Roman Empire” to “The downfall of the Roman Empire was complex and had no single cause and really it's inaccurate to talk about a single downfall”.

[@mariebray9831]

"Revisionism" is more about adding to history and asking questions. We shouldn't be surprised that heroes turn out to be human and villains too.

[@natmorse-noland9133]

History isn't the past; history is the stories we construct out of the past.

[@fivesilvercoins]

Reminds me of the novel The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro. It's about a butler who spent his entire life serving an employer who he thought was an honourable man, but who ended up being taken in by nazi propaganda when the war rolled around. The butler is at that point already elderly, and has sacrificed his every chance at having a life of his own because of his dedication to his job. He's left with the question if his life's work was ever worth anything. The author is British Japanese, and I don't remember if this is confirmed anywhere or if it was just a pet theory of mine at uni, but I think the theme of the book may have been inspired by how the Japanese people believed in their country's indestructability, and their emperor's divine lineage and so on, and how that belief was taken from them in one fell swoop when the country was forced to open up by the US after their defeat in the second world war. It fascinates me that we in the west have, for the most part, fought tooth and nail to turn our countries into democracies, either through reforms or revolutions, but Japan had it forced on them by a foreign culture over night. I imagine it'd make you see democracy in a different light.

[@kittling5427]

if you read An Artist of the Floating World, (an earlier book by him) you'l find that explored

[@fivesilvercoins]

@@kittling5427 oh, cool! I'll add it to my TBR

[@mollysheridan7134]

Nuance is a lost art in modern society. So few people want to have a conversation and consider other perspectives. In the US cognitive dissonance has become an epidemic. You are a breath of fresh air and I thank you for this “Ted talk”.

[@amberadams9310]

Dang it, now I have to enter academia, so I can hold conferences and offer a variety of teas and biscuits

[@Kelli.Hicks.5]

Being able to admit you're wrong is such a hard skill.

[@Randoplants]

I still remember when I learned that history books could be wrong. It was such a fundamental shift in thinking

[@MrsMelrom]

The question here is: should we consider the study of history to be a science and to treat it as such? A good scientist strives for new answers, and revises their concusions as evidence is discovered.

[@Tvianne]

Isn't it already a science?

[@mikeymullins5305]

Some people would say so! Some people would say that art and science are outdated binaristic terms!

[@elizabethsmith3553]

Really interesting point - as a baby environmental scientist, I watched this video and drew so many parallels with scientific research.

[@hedgehog3180]

History sits kinda halfway between the classical domains of the Humanities and Science since it uses methods from both. However both of those terms feel more and more outdated in the modern world as both domains start to resemble each other more and more. That being said reexamining old ideas and adopting new ones isn't really exclusive to Science, the Humanities have always done that, the difference was always in the methodology behind gathering evidence and building up arguments. Though innovations in the Humanities tend to filter through to the general population much more slowly.

[@skloak]

I think maybe some of the bad rap around revisionism is because people assume (because of revising done poorly) that you’re totally erasing the way things “used to be”, going in and changing all the books and insisting the old theories never existed. Rather than saying, ok, this is how we believe it was, but we used to believe this, and here’s why we did, and here’s why we don’t. Editing the provenance, as it were, along with the current understanding. I tend to think good historians don’t, we *want* to see where we were, any why we aren’t there anymore. But some people don’t, soo….. And I didn’t feel this was too wordy, it was correctly wordy, and used very good words. You done good Jimmy. Though your framing always makes me feel like you’re drowning at the bottom of the frame and you need to be hoisted clear, I find myself regularly tipping my chin up while I watch 😂

[@k80_]

I think that’s exactly it. People, even if they are well intentioned about their motives or end goals, have this view of history as immutable facts and that any narrative interpretation of it is because “they” are trying to decieve you for some insidious political end. I’m in the USA, and we have built up such a national mythology around our history and especially the founding of the country that people take it extremely personally when the conception of our sacred and noble god-founders is challenged. To challenge our narrative of history is to attack our national identity. I’m talking about the founding fathers because it operates similarly to the narrative surrounding Churchill in Britain, but you can see this in many more places throughout the world.

[@evilwelshman]

*@skloak* I think part of the reason revisionism gets a bad rap is what Jimmy touched on at the end of the video. It's possibly one too many instances of bad communication, where someone comes along with their new findings and understandings and treating people as foolish or horrible for having believed the old version instead. It's not erasure of the past but calling the person dumb and attacking their core beliefs as something immoral.

[@skloak]

@@evilwelshman Oh for sure, badmouthing people who were just doing the best they could with the information they had isn’t going to go very far in fostering patience and understanding.

[@DietrichvonSachsen]

Whilst I it wasn't properly revisionist history, I did do a paper in 4th year uni on the Historiography related to Economic and Industrial Development in Lower Canada (i.e. Quebec) between British Conquest and 1850. Which sounds like an eye-blisteringly dry subject, but it was by extension the historiography of the intellectual roots of Separatism. Plus I got the added bonus to be able to call out a published historian for a claim that was just patently bullshit.

[@CrazyArtistLady]

Personally I love it when we learn something new about the past and now we can see it with a whole new level of understanding ❤

[@Tvianne]

This, absolutely!

[@barbararowley6077]

In terms of meeting your heroes, the problem is that we don’t see them as whole people, but as caricatures.

[@davidwhite3291]

I'd love to know more about the role of propaganda in the creation of an accepted 'history' and how historians can break through all the lies and myths.

[@penihavir1777]

Thank you so much for this video. I’d only heard the term used incorrectly, so didn’t know the correct usage.

[@krysab6125]

Just to add a sprinkle of ~nuance~ to the matter, especially regarding feelings and how people can be hurt by them - this works *both ways*. Many formerly 'mainstream' opinions have been hugely hurtful to marginalised communities- Churchill is a prime example, if you bring up his record with anyone of Kenyan or West Bengali descent. 'History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it' is a very apt quote to describe the decision to prioritise one perspective at the expense of those of others. My first personal encounter with revisionism, as a teenager of Polish origin in late 90s Britain, was a history teacher blithely telling the class that Poland was 'liberated' in 1945. I had a blazing row with him, in front of the class, about that one - I was still fuming in the office after, it felt such an insult to family members who had 'disappeared' after WW2. Never forget that there's feelings on both sides, but the power-balance between them isn't always equal.

[@hive_indicator318]

What a great video, just after i started reading Howard Zinn!

[@jakeaurod]

Unfortunately, many people think of "nice" as meaning "weak". Nowadays people want to disrupt paradigms for their own self-aggrandizement. They forget that tact can be a useful technique, and insist on "brutal honesty". Next person who tells me they are brutally honest, I may ask them if they want a brutal pat on the back.

[@andymac4883]

I've come to the point where I just assume anybody who claims to be "Brutally honest" or who "doesn't sugarcoat things" is just saying "I want to be an asshole to people but I don't want to be called out as a bad person".

[@beth12svist]

As a person who often tends towards brutal honesty with facts in internet arguments, I beg you, please consider the fact some of us are just neurodivergent, get excited by facts, and forget the niceties. 😅 (That said, I certainly don't pride myself on being brutally honest above all; I just genuinely do it in pursuit of learning and truth and getting annoyed by inaccuracies.)

[@hedgehog3180]

@@beth12svist tbf you probably aren't doing what that person is talking about, there's a difference between being blunt and being “brutally honest”. In the later case you have comitted to being hostile in some manner, while being blunt just means that you aren't putting in extra niceties.

[@beth12svist]

@@hedgehog3180 There is a difference, but not everyone sees it.

[@pacman1386]

Thank you for another brilliant and informative video!

[@enasan9406]

Is there any chance to have a series of videos to explain concepts of history like this? I would watch the hell of them. Also, now I want a Ted Talk with you 😆

[@Arianddu]

Welsh cakes! Imagine if conferences had tea and proper welsh cakes.

[@shelleymonson8750]

Three cheers for a nice cuppa tea and a sit-down!

[@gelfrog93]

Nuanced, Nice and Knitting needles! Thank you for being a wonderful human presence in the world.

[@1412mariLU]

It's crazy to me that some people have a hard time understanding that revisionism isn't the same as denying something. Because when it comes to other fields, like tech or the medicine, people seem to accept that we exchange older views for newer, better ones. Take bloodletting, for example. I think most people agree that this doesn't do much for most illnesses. Or that it's super convenient to have several dozends of GB storage in a tiny USB stick instead of needing an entire room to set up a PC. Then why not believe in revising history?

[@hedgehog3180]

People do also sometimes expect the natural sciences to be static. Like a good recent example would be the topic of sex, a lot of people have a hard time accepting that sex isn't binary and is nowhere near as simple as XX and XY and a lot of people simply don't know what genes even are or what gene expression is. Though I guess that's an example where people have an explicitly political motivation to hold onto wrong incorrect beliefs.

[@januzzell8631]

Fascinating as always - thank you for such an erudite and thought provoking subject

[@Nova-jj6ov]

Have you looked into TEDx talks in your area? They are far easier to get then a normal TED talk. Also many do a TEDx talk first and later a TED talk.

[@angelcollina]

Welsh Viking, I think you’d be great at a Ted Talk!

[@Voronochka262]

Yes, conferences definitely need more tea and biscuits

[@pocketsizedcg]

Thank you for this!! I am going to show this to my students during the first week of my classes!!!

[@EnnameMori]

Well, technically I am a revisionist historian (medievalist). And proud of it, because it really needed revising or at least reviving. But the importance of being nice was hammered home when as a young phd student I attended the Leeds International Medieval Conference and sat in horror as a scholar of heresy presented on his new book about how, technically, there is no evidence for Cathars (as a separate, heretical church) existing outside of scholastic and inquisitorial theorising. A point... he is not actually wrong about. And as I sat there watching VERY senior scholars start screaming at him (literally frothing over my head), raising ad hominem attacks about his sexuality and background (Australian), and some crying... uh. Yeh. He was very polite, but it was brutal. And over a decade later, the field never recovered. It is still split between those who basically doubled down and either outright ignored his questions, or have spent years trying to disprove him, and those who skirt around the edges of the debate and are unable to get funding from the others. Makes for awkward conversations when friends come back from the south of France going on about Cathar resistance to the evil papacy!

[@hejnye]

Are we talking about denying history or revising history or both, regardless, Jimmy you are a joy to watch and make excellent points and I so value your opinion.

[@knutzzl]

Denialism: alcohol is good for you because I want it to. Negateisum: alcohol is good for you because I won't tell you about tomorrow morning. Revisionism: new evidence shows that alcohol is bad for you if you consume to much to often.

[@TheSaneHatter]

One of the problems with historical re-interpretation (as I might prefer to call it), is that it can get politicized, and thus result in one generation's "progressive" re-evaluation get wrongly condemned as bigotry by the next. For example, when I was a young American in the 1990s, there was a lot of publicity given, for the first time, to the role of disease in decimating the Amerindian population and paving the way for Euro-American settlement, as much as military force if not more so. The point was to disabuse us of the notion that we Americans had "won" this continent in any way, even unfairly . . . and also to deliver a backhanded point about how unsanitary we were. it was expressly intended as an antiracist development in scholarship. But in the past generation, a few have claimed that accepting this idea WAS racist, and that it was intended to "absolve" Americans of genocide, which clearly was not true. That's just one example of how the honorable principle of historical re-interpretation can get abused or misconstrued, because people are more interested in scoring points than setting the record straight.

[@mellowfishie]

changed my understanding of what this term means and its significance! Thank you!

[@crystallinecrow3365]

Another home run from Jimmy!

[@annerigby4400]

Actually, there is an excellent book about American (US) history by Howard Zinn called "The People's History of the United States", where he explains all about how history is written and how it is not necessarily reporting exactly what happened. Great read, even if you're not particularly interested in American history, but just history generally. Oh and thanks for the explanation of what revisionism is. I had had the impression that it was the same as denying or negating, i.e. revising what really happened into what serves a purpose by changing that - Holocaust denial is a good example. I'm sure I'm not alone being enlightened by your video, so thanks.

[@franzwohlgemuth2002]

Legitimate revisionism is getting history correct. Which leads to a far better understanding. Every culture, religion... needs it. Love the vid. As a historian myself, I agree COMPLETELY!

[@whatgoesaroundcomesaround920]

Revisionism has a dirty reputation because nearly any point of view can be underscored by a "reinterpretation" of evidence -- bringing some forward, leaving some in the background. Politicians do this all the time. You don't have to deny, just rearrange items in a different order of importance. As an American, and retired researcher and teacher of history, I see attempts of positive revisionism met with such prejudice that the backlash encourages negative re-writes. You only have to look at Florida and how it has reacted to attempts to teach factual history of slavery.

[@franzwohlgemuth2002]

@@whatgoesaroundcomesaround920 That's why I stated "Legitimate revisionism"

[@hitas3799]

I may be wrong on this, but isn't W.E.B. Du Bois, supposed to be pronounced "Due Boyss", IE not the "correct" French way

[@nicroach9785]

This is correct.

[@TheWelshViking]

Ah well, you live and learn!

[@hitas3799]

@@TheWelshViking Just wanted to clarify, it wasn't meant as criticism, I only know because I made the same mispronunciation 😅

[@aftonrehmann5676]

Thank you so much, I really needed this today. ❤ And I would absolutely go to your TED Talk on Nuance and Historiography. Where do I write to make it happen? ❤