|
Welcome to the History Files website
We want to help you get the best from the History
Files website so some basic information on the layout used here
is necessary.
The History Files is divided into two main sections:
features and king lists.
Features
These are added regularly, and cover various
subjects across the whole time scope of human history and prehistory,
as well as all previous eras. These come from three main sources:
- First, and least, many are drawn from news
media and contain archaeology or science-based news on historical or
prehistoric topics
- Secondly, a few are reproductions of previously
published material, with the permission of the author(s), and often with
their active cooperation
- Thirdly, and most importantly, many features
are contributions from individuals with an interest in, and some
knowledge of, history.
Anyone is welcome to submit material. Submitted material will be
highlighted on the website's front page, usually as a banner feature,
usually for at least a full calendar month, and the author will be
fully credited for their work on the page in question. The work must
be your own, and not a direct copy of something that already exists.
Contact us here for
more details.
Each feature page is split into two sections. The main
body text is on the left-hand two-thirds of the page. The sidebar
(established in 2002 and not related to the later Microsoft use of the
name) on the right is reserved for associated images, related internal
links, external links to other websites, and links to other content
around the History Files.
The History Files is not responsible for the content
of other websites.
King lists
These lists act as a detailed source of information
to back up the features and to provide detailed information in their
own right. In some instances they are even more detailed than a feature
page might be.
They are ordered much as they were created, being
first grouped into broad categories (continents), and then broken
down wherever possible into regions dictated to an extent by modern
national borders or long-lasting historical ones. Where possible,
continuity from one set of rulers to another in the same country or
region is maintained, and frequent notes explain and expand upon the
process of any changes.
Where important or prominent members of a ruling
family did not actually rule themselves, they are often shown on a
darkened background. In some cases, especially with the kings of
Celtic Britain, semi-legendary family lineages are also shown. These
are backed by a red tint.
A detailed breakdown of the formatting used on a
king list page is shown
here.
Dating conventions
In the main, conventional formats are used, including
'c' for circa, and 'fl' (flourit, the Latin verb which supplied
the modern word, flourished) to indicate a specific, known date
or dates for a ruler where the ruler in question must have been in
power for a period longer than just that one date or the period
included in those dates. There is also the occasional use of 'bef'
(before) where the earliest known date for a ruler is available,
but where he was probably in power before that date.
The use of 'b' and 'd' are for born and died,
so 'b.c.435' would mean born circa AD 435. This usage is
diminishing in favour of writing it in full, but it still exists in
some places around the site.
Care has been used to maintain the correct usage
of the prefix 'AD' in these files. This is often used incorrectly,
being placed after, instead of before, a date. It's fine to do that
with a century, but not with a specific year. This usage originates
from the practice of teaching Latin syntax in the Augustan/Vergilian
'Silver Age' of the Roman empire, which demanded that the year preceded
'ab urbe condita' ('in the year of the city'), and this was why anno
domini ('in the year of our Lord') followed the same format in
English, having been used initially by members of the monasteries,
often the only literate people in the country at the time. This format
was adopted later, according to the dictates of such luminaries as
Swift and, most especially, Pope in the early eighteenth century.
Other stylistic devices were also introduced.
It was only at this time that the split infinitive
and the separation of phrasal verbs began to be frowned upon as
they didn't suit the dictates of the grammarians of the time, so
heavily were they immersed in the Latin models from which they drew
their inspiration. With the subsequent removal of the Latin prefix,
it no longer makes any sense to say (for example) 1999 anno domini
(as well as being poorly constructed English), so that now anno
domini (or AD) should always precede the date to which it appends.
The cultural persuasion and inherited dating system
of the reader makes no difference here. If one is going to use this
particular and widespread form of dating, one may as well do it
correctly.
Note that the largely US-inspired and largely
meaningless use of BCE and CE to replace BC and AD will not be
followed anywhere on this site. The intention in their use is to
remove religious connotations, but to do that properly the entire
concept of counting the year from the birth of Christ must be
abandoned. What would the best alternative be? Dating from the
foundation of Rome again - a very popular system for the best part
of a millennium or more? Anyway, until a decision is reached, any
contributed material will be edited to maintain this rule.
Compiling the king lists
The king lists were originally built up from paper
notes from the mid-1980s onwards and from sources which were only
listed from the late 1990s onwards. Sources since 2012 have been
shown in the relevant page itself rather than in a single and now
largely defunct
sources page, but the
process of adding these and upgrading pages so that they are more
detailed than originally is on ongoing one (and possibly a never-ending
one!). The help of anyone who is interested is more than welcome.
Just get in touch here.
The king lists have been compiled for a couple of
reasons - the first being sheer passion for the subject. The second
is more prosaic. It seems that history in modern schools is not taught
in terms of dynasties and rulers any longer (and this seems to be as
true of the USA as it does of the UK). The liberalist thinking behind
this appears to be that learning about rulers is elitist and irrelevant
compared to understanding the lot of the average citizen at any period
in time. The History Files itself has a fairly liberal inclination,
but this particular bit of thinking appears ill-founded.
In fact it seems downright nonsensical. Rulers and
their impact on national and international events is what makes much
of human history. In the form of (usually unrecorded) tribal leaders
they would have led migrations such as those of the vastly important
Yamnaya horizon which saw much of the known world become dominated by
Indo-European-speakers. In the form of kings and emperors and the like
they led the creation and evolution of most states throughout written
history, so how can one begin to understand the lot of the common man
without knowing about the essential construction of his society?
History without the skeletal framework of events that centre around
rulers is meaningless.
So works of this nature, which lay out the framework
of states and nations through their rulers, are essential before more
intimate studies can be made of individuals who lived in those societies.
Origins
The very start of the king list pages on the
History Files came about for one reason. One of the most interesting
and consistently fascinating periods is the Late Romano-British /
Early Welsh period known alternatively as sub-Roman or post-Roman,
the 'Twilight of the Celts', or the beginning of the (latest or many)
dark ages.
This remarkable and extremely unstable era of
British history began its life in the History Files as a series
of handwritten lists of rulers and kingdoms. These lists remained
on paper until the early 1990s, when they were finally digitised
(along with the other original lists). Then the internet arrived
and those digitised lists were placed online. Enthusiasm for this
project and its subject matter spilled over into compiling further
lists on all British rulers, and then spread by stages to cover the
world.
That project is ongoing. New material is constantly
being added, and all contributions and submissions of data and
features are highly welcome.
|
