Hi! I am writing a history essay and we have to answer the question as to why basing a history text book heavily on the works of another reputable author is a good thing. Can you help me think of strengths? thanks

All Answers To Questions

why basing a history text book heavily on the works of another reputable author is a good thing? For this question the only reason I get is that the "reputable" author may have done more research on the subject. Writing History text-books is a tough job. YOu have to analyse a lot because here you cannot give any opinions and ideas. YOu have to write what you know to be true, or if you have - provide all references. It is still not a good idea to write off the text book as being wrong until there id not overwhelming support for it. TW K

To best understand the underlying reason, one must, of course, review precedents in history. Josephus, a Roman historian, was a scribe who documented a litany of historical events and thereby became noted for having done so. When his written documents survived the ravages of time and were then used to counter informal, oral legends and myths, the validity of written over oral tradition was given its greatest strength. But, Josephus was not the only venerated soul . Socrates, Plato, Pliny the Elder, etcetera, were all key sources with written and verified stories later declared nonfiction. In essence, if a story survives long enough to be the only written proof of that event, it is considered "real" even if it might actually be a complete fabrication, like, say, JUSTIN'S SPACESHIP, which is currently unabashed fiction. In more blunt terms, if the aforementioned book were to survive long enough, it could be construed as a "historical" document by someone in the far future.