![]() |
In historiography, historical revisionism is the reinterpretation of a historical account.[1] It involves challenging the orthodox (established, accepted or traditional) scholarly views or narratives regarding a historical event, timespan, or phenomenon by introducing contrary evidence or reinterpreting the motivations of the people involved. Revision of the historical record can reflect new discoveries of fact, evidence, and interpretation as they come to light. The process of historical revision is a common, necessary, and usually uncontroversial process which develops and refines the historical record to make it more complete and accurate.
One form of historical revisionism involves denying the moral significance or accuracy of the historical record.[2] This type of historical revisionism is called historical negationism, and is contentious as it often includes denying the veracity of genuine documents, or deliberately manipulating statistical data to reach predetermined conclusions. The destruction or alteration of cultural heritage sites is also considered a form of illegitimate historical revisionism when it serves to deny the cultural or historical claims of ethnic groups.[3] Negationists may use the term "revisionism" to portray their pseudoscholarship as legitimate, especially in the context of genocide denial.[4][5]
The ability to revise and update historical narrative – historical revisionism – is necessary, as historians must always review current theories and ensure they are supported by evidence. … Historical revisionism allows different (and often subjugated) perspectives to be heard and considered.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires |journal=
(help)
© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search