Is history made by individuals?

In the specific case of inter-war Germany, it is likely that somebody would have taken Hitler's place, or that a less assertive man would have been out-manouevred by the communist movement.

Individuals sure can shape history, but only because the actions they take can change from ripples to waves over time. The fact of the matter is that history is created by PEOPLE, in any case, and context has to be considered (as the above example shows).

Hugo,

There is a very interesting book by Jose Saramago called The History of the Siege of Lisbon that's more or less about what you posted. I would suggest reading it, I really enjoyed it. Here is the review off of Amazon.

Originally posted by Amazon.com "If proofreaders were given their freedom and did not have their hands and feet tied by a mass of prohibitions more binding than the penal code, they would soon transform the face of the world, establish the kingdom of universal happiness, giving drink to the thirsty, food to the famished, peace to those who live in turmoil, joy to the sorrowful ... for they would be able to do all these things simply by changing the words ..." The power of the word is evident in Portuguese author Jos� Saramago's novel, The History of the Siege of Lisbon. His protagonist, a proofreader named Raimundo Silva, adds a key word to a history of Portugal and thus rewrites not only the past, but also his own life. Brilliantly translated from the Portuguese by Giovanni Pontiero, The History of the Siege of Lisbon is a meditation on the differences between historiography, historical fiction, and "stories inserted into history." The novel is really two stories in one: the reimagined history of the 1147 siege of Lisbon that Raimundo feels compelled to write and the story of Raimundo's life, including his unexpected love affair with the editor, Maria Sara. In Saramago's masterful hands, the strands of this complex tale weave together to create a satisfying whole. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

There is no doubt that history happens, the trick is to record what happened, how it happened, the personalities involved and what can be learned, but there are many pitfalls along the way.

 For instance some (like Paul McCarthy) say all vegetarians are non-violent � Hitler was a vegetarian so in the light of that dietary evidence could we turn around and say all vegetarians are sinister? Would world history be different had he eaten more meat instead of vegetables as a child? Hitler bad, Ghandi good, but both were connected by being vegetarians? What a trivial puzzle!

 Much of history is written and then rewritten to suit the ruling culture and community standards of the age. It amuses me to pick up a book that says, �The History of the World� as if all major events of history could be written in one book! Some brilliant condensations seem to sum up the whole of a war or mass social movement into one paragraph or sweeping statement, but the devil is in the detail. Once you take the time to learn the fuller story your eyes are opened to more about life and the way people live it.

History is made by the winners

I think there is a difference between ''history'' as in events that did really happen or the true nature of them, and ''history'' as in "'set of lies agreed upon'' (Napoleon).
In the latter case, ''History'' is definitely written from the perspective, imagination, desire of winners, or certain individuals who happened to be the ones to record the events or powerfull enough.

But I guess Hugoestr meant the former version of ''history''.

I do think that history is made by individuals, not only by certain individuals, but by every single individual. In my opinion, if you take out even the most seemingly insignificant and unknown person or a being , the course of history would change, because I think that history is a huge mechanism every single part of which depend on one another. We are all living in a big interrelated web.

Edited by omshanti - 10-Aug-2007 at 01:40