THE SENSE OF HISTORY

New Zealand Listener, Volume 25, Issue 649, 7 December 1951, Page 14

THE SENSE OF HISTORY

A BIRD’S-EYE VIEW OF WORLD UHiIs.TORY, by René Sédillot, translated by PY de Hopkins; Harrap. English price, {t would be hard to imagine a better 270-odd pages for the general reader who wishes to improve his understand‘ing of thé activities of human beings in social, national, and political groups, cf the circumstances surrounding the rise and fall of leaders and governments, "thrones, dominations, virtues, prince- | doms, powers.’ Historical parallels are more Clearly seen when shorn of detail; and it is surprising how many there are. Ancient Egypt was a collectivist, authoritarian, and bureaucratic state; the picture in Genesis means much more when we find a comparison made with the U.S.S.R. But it is saddening to find how seldom, if ever, we find true democracy when systems of government in the past are analysed. Too many children, it must be admitted, leave school in this country with the impression that history began when Julius Caesar discovered Britain’ (although the Romans had previously been devising a-suitable system of law and government, the Greeks a suitable culture, and the Jews a suitable religion). After that, it would seem, Rome faded out of the picture and a period began in which everything was invented, discovered, or in the long run dominated by the inhabitants of that island, their 1ssociates and offspring overseas. Were pupils shown more clearly the earlier cultural and political European hegemonies of Italy, Spain, and France before Britain’s far-reaching 19th Century ascendancy they would have a far more real sense of the British contribution to European civilisation and the part that her culture can play in the changing situation today. At any rate, English history is taught in far too great detail to

be remembered satisfactorily by those who do not devote further attention to it, and broader studies of this kind are more likely to have a lasting effect on the average’ pupil. In a book so condensed the reader may often look in vain for a view from the author’s position of events which have particular interest for him. But there is room for a good deal of shrewd, lively, sometimes dogmatic Gallic opinion, and opinion is probably more necessary to enliven a condensed than a full account. Any academic critic who takes exception to this attempt should be in honour bound to go and do better. for such a

book is needed.

Walter

Brookes