History, 17.12.2020 01:00 bella122805
HEL
I WILL GIVE FREE BONUS POINTS IF I PASS THIS (NO PLAGERISM)
Historical “revisionism” is the practice of revising the generally accepted version of a history. Rather than assuming that history books and previous historians are “telling the whole truth” about history, revisionists reexamine the evidence left by history and may assign new and different meaning or significance to historical events.
Reasonable people disagree about whether historical revisionism is a valid and beneficial practice. What do you think? Should people accept the version of history that they’ve been taught, or should they look for other ways to interpret, view, or describe historical events?
Explain your answer in a thoughtful discussion post, including your reasons for thinking as you do about revisionism.
Answers: 1
History, 21.06.2019 15:30, Shayleechase
Atch the terms with their definitions. 1. power-hungry militants who grabbed absolute control by force "direct democracy" 2. set the rules and maintained authority within the city-state nobles 3. first name given to the greek democracy solon 4. lofty, financially well-to-do citizens who carried much power within the community assembly 5. in 594 b. c. he was chosen as an athenian statesman with reformation powers tyrants
Answers: 1
History, 21.06.2019 21:20, alishabhappy1
Which empire was called "the sick man of europe? "
Answers: 1
HEL
I WILL GIVE FREE BONUS POINTS IF I PASS THIS (NO PLAGERISM)
Historical “revisionism...
Historical “revisionism...
Mathematics, 11.04.2020 04:23
Mathematics, 11.04.2020 04:23
Mathematics, 11.04.2020 04:23
Mathematics, 11.04.2020 04:23