HIS 405 Philosophy of History Q&A PDF

**HIS 405: PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY**. Explain in detail the 14 centuries theories of dynastic cycle? (This question is about ibn Khaldun cyclical view and the Chinese mandarin). Ibn Khaldun born in the 1332 in Tunisia, an active governmental, scientist, theologian, a clerk, ambassador, peace maker a...

**HIS 405: PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY**. Explain in detail the 14 centuries theories of dynastic cycle? (This question is about ibn Khaldun cyclical view and the Chinese mandarin). Ibn Khaldun born in the 1332 in Tunisia, an active governmental, scientist, theologian, a clerk, ambassador, peace maker and a lecturer per excellent like Elijah. Ibn Khaldun was a medieval Islamic philosopher who discover that history like any other sciences required research. He was the first to detach history from Islamic studies, the first to study history in a scientific way. Khaldun tried to understand history in a cyclical view, he views history as the science of circumstances and events, and it causes are profound. Thus, it is an ancient, original part of wisdom and deserves to part of sciences. Ibn Khaldun started the introduction of world history as Al-muqaddimah which was the introduction of Kittab Al-ibar. The Al- muqaddimah was the first volume of his universal history of the Arabs and the Berber. It analyses the dynamic change and evolution in Arab societies and civilization at large. He explained how the pastoral and the city people related. Khaldun said in history one group will always invade and conquer the other. The concept of change to Khaldun means the transformation of society from a simple state to more complex one. History, to Ibn Khaldun is a cyclical process in which sovereign powers come to existence, get stronger, lose their strengths and are conquered by other sovereign powers over time. He critically analyses the generational transition of the Bedouins, that is, the nomadic tribe who are viewed as uncivilized elites. Precisely, every community is uncivilized at the beginning and tries to acquire the power around its own territory until it became civilized. Bedouins conquer lands and take over the power. The new leaders have the solidarity with society but after a while, the strive for all authority. Later, they start governing their subject through assistants and distance themselves from the people. After 2 to 3 generation, Asabiyya which was the core factor uniting their early ancestors weakens within the society. Luxury begins to affects ethical life. Just like before civilization, states are destroyed by more dynamic and uncivilized Bedouins who come with a stronger Asabiyya. Khaldun outline four stages in which states and civilizations pass through. The **conquest stage** in which pastoral and nomadic tribes invade the civilized coastal states and conquer them. **The stage of consolidation,** this is characterised by growth and expansion after the new conquerors who take up power and ruler ship of the city state and become the new rulers or ruling class. This is followed by **the stage of stagnation** were they have satisfaction and peacefulness. Leaders desire of luxury, unwilling to go to war and engage themselves in a lavish lifestyle. This lead the final stage which is the **stage of decline**, where they have lost their ideal and collective bond which units their ancestors until they are defeated by another new crop of pastoralist and the cycle begin again. Khaldun note that this cycle took four generations which is the period of 120 years. The main item which control the process is the condition of **Assabiyya,** which aim is to create a state base on this feeling of unity. Thus, the strength of Assabiyya play a determining role in the rise and fall of the sovereign power because it is the defining factor that give the pastoralist an advantage over the city people who do not have that kind of unity to withstand onslaught from outside. In conclusion, Ibn Khaldun theory has create a clear picture and understanding of the rise and decline of dynasties and states but while this account is accurate in the Maghreb region. It is incompatible with other part of the world whose societies have different setups from North Africa. Also, his point takes four generations for state to rise, grow and decline. It is not applicable across board as there were empires that survive longer for instance, the ottoman empire which lasted for more than 620 years showing that while his theory is accurate, it is not totally without exception. **The Chinese mandarin** The Chinese mandarin were intellectuals, administrators who propagated the legitimacy of kingship in china. There were the only ones to declare an emperor fit to rule. They believed the emperor holds supremacy after the heavenly mandate to rule, they claim to be the sons of the sun. individual must seat and pass certain exams to be a mandarin. One of the major features of the Chinese history as propagated by the mandarin is the adoption of the mandate of which can be interpreted as a cyclical view of history also the dynastic cycle. Ibn Khaldun also share this thoughts of the cyclical history where different nomads, town people traders interact with each other and effect one another in a continuous pattern. In the case of the Chinese historiography, the rise and fall of the dynasties as a function of the mandate of heaven, depict a cyclical view of history. This cyclical view of history is defined that no matter what, the history would repeat itself. The mandate of heaven is ancient Chinese philosophical concept which originate during the Zhou dynasty 1046- 256 BC. The mandate determines where an emperor of china is sufficiently fit or not. These mandarin provide powerful leadership in china, they own legitimacy to worship kingship and divinity. The emperors of china claimed they have right to rule from the sun and their subject respect them for this and they are called sons of the sun. the mandarins adopted the heavenly mandate which is right to rule and can also determine if the king is fit or not. The mandarins draw their conclusion if the king is fit or unfit to rule from the natural disaster, china is located in the mason region which is prone to natural disaster such as Tsunami, earthquake, flood etc. so anytime these disasters occur, it is an indication that the king or emperor is unfit to rule. But in the absence of such disaster the king is regard as fit to rule. The Chinese mandarins attach kingship to environmental change or disaster. In the area of the cyclical view, the Chinese mandarins also wrote on the history of the china as was done by Ibn Khaldun in the north Africa. The mandarin assert that, the Mongolians of the central china who are pastoralist on top hill or plain of the Malaya mountain invade and attack china from time to time. It was this very invasion by the Mongolians that led to the erection of the chinses wall. And when such attacks happen the king or emperor was declared unfit to rule by the mandarins. Humeilewa wrote the chines mandarin exams three times but failed. After failing the exams, he organized a revolution. It was this very resolution that led to overthrow of the zuit regime in china. The argument was that, the mandarin failed to declare king unfit to rule even when actually the king was unfit because of natural disaster that did not occurred. The cyclical view is that, the ruler ship is overthrown in cycle while the geographical view is that ruler ship is overthrown as natural disaster occur, heavenly mandate that make the emperor unfit to rule. They attach ruler ship to natural disaster which they cannot control. A flaw of the view, one could conclude by saying since history is about change and continuity, the cyclical/ environmentalist Chinese mandarin present a clear picture of this assertion as argue by Ibn Khaldun. Bibliography: Walsh, W. Henry: A philosophy of history introduction (harper torch books, tb1020 (the academic library)1958,16. Issawa, leaman; ibn khaldun. Arnold Toynbee; a study of history (cyclic view vs linear view), abridge by somer-vall Longdon 1962 pp 261-263. Georg wilhem friedrich hegel, the philosophy (batche books Kitchener,2001) pp 142-143. Sir Aurobindo, the human cycle- the ideal of human unity war and self-determination, pp 45-56. What did Leopold von Ranke believe should be the goal of history research? History should be studied in a scientific way: evaluate the justification of this contention? 2016/2017 session. According to Leopold von Ranke, methodology of history should be studied in a scientific way. Debate this assertion in light of Benedetto Croce and R.G Collingwood's view on the philosophy of history? 2020/2021 **LEOPOLD VON RANKE PHILOSOPHY VIEWS.** Leopold von Ranke is a 19^th^ -- 20^th^ century German historian. Ranke tried to understand political order within its own context. To understand the nature of historical phenomena such as institution and idea, one had to consider its historical development and the change it underwent over a period of time. Historical epochs, Ranke argued that, history should not be judge by contemporary value or ideas, rather, they had to be understood on their own terms by empirically establishing history. Ranke emphasised on both individuality and development in history. Each historical phenomenon, epoch and event had its own individuality and it was the task of the historian to established its essence. To do this, historians had to immerse themselves in the epoch and asses it in the manner appropriate for that time. That is, to extinguish their own personality. To von Ranke there was meaning and coherence in history and the establish political institution embodies with moral forces. Von Ranke was recognised as the father of the scientific and the founder of the historical school of 19^th^- 20^th^ century. Because of the industrial revolution in Europe which paved way for science and technology. It makes Ranke to profound that history to be studied scientifically. In order to avoid the usual act of the old historian which is coping and pest without adding anything to the body of knowledge. To him, data generated on their owned tells the story without the historian view. He further added by acknowledging that the scientist and historian are similar at the foundation level to the extent that they both desire to explained and involve in fundamental process of question and answer. Scientist, social scientist and historian are all engaged in different in different branches of the same study, the study of man and his environment, of the effects of the man on his environment and of the environment on the man. Von Ranke emphasized the idea of objectivity and historicism. To him, in order to discover God's plan for humanity through understanding history, perfect objectivity is needed. He put himself through conscious process of shedding his preconception of the past, present and feature, each time he began work in the achieves. Ranke believed he approach historical documents with open mind making him to able to analyse the historical documents on research in the achieve. Historicism had been practice by lawyers since the earliest jurisprudence. Ranke applied this notion to historical research. He strongly believes that it was not the place of the historian to judge the past, only to understand it. He believes that his commitment to objectivity and historicism would best place the historian to understand as it actually occurs. He further added that; while objectivity and historicism provide and apparently scientific approach, intuition or historical imagination was needed to actually recreate the past. Finally, he argued that after the historian has gather his data, scientific methodology in analysing data should be carried out. And the main aim of reconstructing history as scientific methodology is to render it as it really occurred. Making the historian to identified the problem, render the problem in hypothesis, carry data analysis and by carrying this steps it would make the historian not to biased. Ranke is most convincing as a scientific historian with respect to this methodology. He aimed to examine every source forensically. He used an unusually variety of source for historian of his age which include primary sources as diaries, letter, first-hand account of eye witness etc. He further equates the archive as a laboratory in which are sources, propose use as experiment. He also introduces a referencing style called footnote. He emphasizes on the importance of providing references that way all the assertions and statements could be supported by giving full details of sources from which they were derived from. He differentiates between fact and interpretations, the primary of facts is supported by evidences-base or source which the historian job is to establish facts and interpretation. Bibliography: 1 History definition retrieved 21 January, 2014. 2 Boldt, a 2007. The role of Ireland in life of Leopold von Ranke (1795-1886): the historian and historical truth. Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen press. 3 Iggers, G.G. and J.M. Powell.1990. Leopold von Ranke and the shaping of the historical discipline Syracuse.syracuse university press. 4 Iggers,G.G (1962). The image of Ranke in America and Germant Historical thought; history and thought 2. Pp 17-40. 5 Schevill, ferdinant (1952). Ranke. Rise, decline and persistence of reputation: the journal of modern history, vol 2 24(3) pp 219-234. 6 Arnold, john H. (2000): A very short introduction. Oxford. 7 Carr, E.H. (2001) what is history? Basingstoke. **BENEDETTO CROCE HISTORICAL PHILOSOPHY VIEW** According to Benedetto Croce history is not form of science because science operates through concepts and establishes general laws and where there is no establishment of laws there is no science. Therefore, history is a form of art, in which art is understand as the mood of knowledge od particulars. To him, history is a presentation of reality and not a scientific approach of it due to the fact that it does not deal with general law. To Croce, history does not seek laws nor it form concepts, it does not employ induction or deduction, does not build universals and abstraction but enounces intuition. Only historical knowledge is true and the historical judgement that the predicates of true and false are properly applicable. To Croce, scientific knowledge is gained through the intellect, it's a knowledge of universal and it result is concepts while historical knowledge also known as intuition knowledge is gained through imagination. Its object is the knowledge of the individuals, the particulars or relationship between them. Unlike science, history is flexible while science is limited to a body of general proposition and principle as such no critical look outside it domain for solution or answer. Furthermore, Croce believes that spirit is the human mind. The act of the thinking is of central importance, for it is the human mind which apprehends and therefore create the word we live in. thus, the mind is reality and the principle which govern history are found within human itself. Croce believed that history is no longer the work of nature, history is a human creation which is a humanistic conception of history. When the spirit or the mind achieves self-consciousness, human being become free not only to describe the world but to change the world. It is our mind the stimulate the creation of history. The characteristic of every history is the fact that it vibrates and lives in the mind of the historian. Only record that satisfies the present interest of the historian and is apprehend and relived in the mind of the of the historian that become history, if not it remains a dead and empty chronicles. Thus the existence of history is only in the of the human who is the historian. Since history only gets it existence from the mind, the historian serves as link between the past and the present. His contention is that every history is contemporary history. For any past fact to become contemporary history and vibrates the historian mind it must relate and answer present event rather than past event. If by any means it does not satisfy a present interest of the historian then the event is considered not to be history. Bibliography: Wildon H.Durham.D, the philosophy of Benedetto Croce. St.martins stress, London; Macmillan and co. limited,1917. Teygve R. what is living in Croce's theory of history? Birmingham university pree, 1961. Gramsci Antonio, Marxism, philosophy and politics, edited b james martin. Vol 2. **R.G COLLINGWOOD'S VIEW ON THE PHILOSOPHY OF HISTORY** Collingwood categorized history as science. Although, he distinguished history from the natural science which basically make use of direct observation and experiment. He rather sees history as social science because it deals with human and human affairs, the past cannot be directly observed. According to Collingwood, the concern of the history is the actions of the man that affords it an advantage in natural science. Historians being themselves people, can imaginatively identify with past people sharing their thoughts (motive and intentions) even if not their feelings. Collingwood was mainly concerned and insist that history involve thoughts, the framing and treating of imaginative hypotheses and that history was not simply the compilation of chronicles. According to Collingwood, the thought is the re-enactment of the past thought. It is the re-enactment of the past thoughts in the historians own mind. The historian not only re-enacts past thoughts but re-enacts it in the contest of his own knowledge, he said historical thinking means nothing else than interpreting all the available evidence with the maximum degree of critical skill. It does not mean discovering what really happened, rather what the evidence indicates. If there is once a happened event in which no piece of evidence survives, the event is not part of historical evidence. It is not the historian business to discover it since it not a gap in any historical knowledge that he doesn't know it. Collingwood argues that, history is concerned with what man had done in the light of their conception of the nature and their world. The historians task was to re-enact the thought of the agent. Face with confusing piece of evidence, he had to establish what man in particular circumstances would logically be up to. His solution to the dilemma would be an inference from the document at his disposal. Collingwood's idea of history is humanist. Before Collingwood, various philosophers had developed the humanistic conception of history. What Collingwood did to add a rationalist dimension to the humanism, which already existed. Secondly, Collingwood view that history is an infinite in which the knowledge of every fact is included differs from earlier thought which confined history to the actions of national leaders and heroes who were divinely inspired. However, Collingwood view that history is infinite impose limitation in it sheer extensiveness. Collingwood believed that human actions are the motor of historical processes which are product of conscious or rational idea. Bibliography: (Chang ach 2015), chang ach, john, koskey. Development of philosophy of history since 1900. New York: open science publishers, 2015 pp 83-84. (R.G 1956) R.G, Collingwood. The idea of history. New York: oxford university press and publishers, 1956. Pp 558-560. (Chang ach 2015) Chang ach, john koskey. Development of history scince 1900. New York: open scince publishers,2015. Pp, 86-87. (Chang ach 2015) Chang ach, john koskey. Development of history scince 1900. New York: open scince publishers,2015. Pp, 88. **THE EVOLUTIONIST PROCESS OF GIAMBATISTA VICO.** Introduction. Giambatista Vico (1668-1744) is often credited with the invention of the philosophy history. He was the first to take to take seriously that people had different ways of thought in different historical eras. For this reason, Vico became the first to chart a course of history that depended on the way the structure of thought changed over time. Vico developed an account of human institutions that centred on the class struggle which will later be termed as evolutionist in nature. The evolutionist progress of history in nutshell sees history as transitional and holds that history is lineal and progressive. Vico writings would influence a wide variety of thinkers such as Von J. Harder, Karl Marx, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, James Joyce, Benedetto Croce R.G. Collingwood etc. Vico who was a professor of Rhetoric in Naples, came up with a unique line of thought in an attempt to explain the history of man. He came up with what he calls "Scienza Nuova" meaning new science. The objective of Vico New science was to disclose the ideal Eternal history, which lies behind the separate histories of gentile nations. Vico used the Roman empire to demonstrate his "Eternal History" Mythical Romulus is used to signify a time when rebellion by the servants "Farnulus" against the vichian father led to emergence of a class society whereby patriarchs were rulers over the plebeians in a feudal society. After a class struggle period, the plebeians gained equal right with patriarchs and a free society emerges with civil sovereignty and democracy. First, he stated that people of the past did not behave or thought the way we do today. But we could understand how they did through language, fables, myths and traditions (source of history). He also stated that aspect of any given society fellow a coherent pattern and connected with one another. Such view is held by Karl Marx, Hegel and Ibn Khaldun. Vico stated that human societies pass through determinate stage of growth and decay which follow a pattern. To him, the first stage was the "bestial" condition which led to the emergence of gods with patriarchal family being the basic unit, man in this stage is controlled by fear of supernatural gods. This, he claims is the beginning of religion. The second stage of historical evolution according to Vico is the "stage of Heroes". This happens when the fathers of the patriarchal families' form alliance to protect themselves from the internal dissidents and external attack, and oligarchy is created and society is divided among the rulers (patricians) and the plebeians (serfs). The age of men is the next stage in his evolution theory. To Vico, this is brought about by class struggle in the society. The oppressed serfs would agitate and achieve equal rights as the rulers. They will question traditional laws and customs. Republic would be established which would lead to corruption and finally dissolution of states. This would be through conquest from outsider or internal disintegration. The cycle of evolution comes to an end and back to the stage of barbarism. Vico believe that in ancient history, there is providential transition from the dominance to Greeks rational speculation and search for truth to the dominance of Roman law and respect for authority. The Greeks in Vico's view thought of their history in terms of the awakening of reason, while the Romans thought of theirs as the development of civic authority a public virtue. This means the history moved from the Divine to heroic to the human. Vico Giambattista claimed he could discern God's providence at work in history, particularly in the history of language and literature of social ritual and customs. To support his argument Vico came up with two principles the Verum-factum principle which holds that one can know the truth in what one makes, as Vico writes, for the Latins, Verum (the true) and Factun (what is made) are interchangeable or they are convertible, rather than believed one should apply reason. The second was the Verum-certum principle. in this, Vico writes "The certain is part of the true". For Vico making something became the criteria for knowing the truth about it. Vico Giambttista's major works were Ancient wisdom, the universal Law, on the one principle and one end of universal Law, on the constancy of the jurisprudent and dissertations, goal of these works is to show that all truth and all law comes from God, he simply asserts that there is truly one universal law in history and posits that while there are different manifestations of the law, they are reducible to the one Eternal Law. Vico directly contradicts Rene Descartes by arguing that the natural sciences can never produce knowledge which is certain and secure because God made the natural order and fallen man can never grasp is vast designs. **CRITICISM** Vico glorified knowledge in poetry and the imagination at the expense of the physical science, and this made his works unreadable for many since his thoughts tended to random at times. Vico's premise centres on the Judeo-Christian God and for that reason, ends up with the specifically the catholic church as the single institution for knowing the mind of God and essence, interpreting the human story. Vico expression of history in transition terms, with its origins in the Divine, will later be put to use by social Darwinians in postulating an evolutionary theory of history which will be used to justify., the dominance of one race over the other. Vico's works are difficult to decipher even today and this was what made him to be largely ignored during his own life time. Vico's anti-enlightenment views opened him up to the accusation of attempting to return men to the dark ages. Vico did not achieve much fame during his life time or after because his work is difficult to grasp and his style is challenging. CONCLUSION. Vico was highly original in his synthesis of the various philosophical creeds and scholarly disciplines of his own time, a synthesis which took into account the Materialism of Hobbes and the Idealism of Descartes and framed them into a new approach to history. Vico in coming up with his synthesis places providence at the centre of all and succeeds in giving a counter to the Rationalism of Descartes which had places man at the centre of history. He succeeded in developing a new line of thought in the approach to the study of history, which while not placing man at the centre at least describes as the object and subject of history. Bibliography: Bedani gino, vico Revisited orthodoxy, naturalism and science in science nuova. Oxford: berg, 1989. Goetsch, James Robert, Vico's Axioms: the geometry of human world. New haven: yale university press 1995. **HISTORY AND RELATION WITH OTHER DISCIPLINES** History is defined as the study of past human events. This definition is however very limited for it is not all past human events that constitute history, human activities are multiple and take place every day that cannot be all taken as historical event. History therefore is the study of the selected past human events. The selection of study of historical events depends on the historian himself, his own background, the political and socio-economic environment in which he lives, the massage he wants to communicate to his consumers and the lesson he wants them to learn. Therefore, we can define history as an interaction between the historian and his fact and interaction between the past, present and the feature. History as a subject of study is of grave importance to the society and other academic field of study as there is a history behind everything leaving the society with key questions only history can provide answer to, therefore this speaks of its relationship with other disciplines ranging from social science, natural science, management science, political science and Arts. No discipline is an island. In the past hundred years or so, the way that we study history, write and teach history have changed drastically, often because of influence from other discipline. In the interwar period, the encounter of a few French historians with geographers, among others, gave rise to what became the annals school. Since then, social history has existed in close dialogue with economics, demography and anthropology. Intellectual history has long had ties with political theory and philosophy of political with political science. In the 1980s, literary theory, culture anthropology and psychoanalysis nourished the new culture history. Ecology served as an inspiration for environment history. Some world historians seek the aid of neuroscience, genetics, and archaeology to recast millennial history of the human species. And the list could go on. The interaction between history and other disciplines in short, has been the source of fruitful innovation and it now a routine feature of our profession. History has a relationship with every other academic discipline but we are going to be looking at the relationship between history and major discipline. **HISTORY AND ARCHAEOLOGY**: for a long time until 20^th^ century, written sources had been regarded as only the source of history, absence of such sources in sub-Saharan Africa lead to the conclusion by the colonial historian that black Africans had no history. The necessity to decolonize Africans history from its colonial biases, following attainment of independence by Africans states leads to the rigorous search for others sources. The application of these new sources made it possible to rewrite the African history more scientifically and from an African point of view whereby shading it from the colonial biases from 1960s onwards. Archaeology is a source of history concerned with the study of past human physical and cultural remains (fossil and artefacts) recovered from the earth by archaeological exaction. As such archaeology deals with pre-historical periods of the human society. All archaeology agree that their fundamental responsibility is to conserve the past for future generation. It can therefore be argued that archaeology is closely related with history as both disciplines seek knowledge of human past, history deals primarily with written account from the past and archaeology deals primarily with the physical remains of the past. Archaeology is also linked with history in more particular manner, the history of the earliest literate societies such as those of Egypt, Mesopotamia, Greece and Rome heavily depends on archaeology which was in the first place resistible for the recovery of the written history documents through archaeology excavations. Both archaeology and history complement each other together providing a more complete record of the past.eg some archaeological invisible activities may be described in historical documents, also sometimes history can be used to locate the archaeological sites. They are both related in methodology used in finding the past, e.g. observation. **HISTORY AND POLITICAL SCIENCE** Professor Seeley summed up the relationship between history and political science exquisitely, that "history without political science, is like a tree with no fruit and political science without history is like a tree with no root". Political science is a social science which deals with systems of government governance, and the analysis of political activities, political thoughts and political behaviour. A historian is not merely concerned with the tracing of the history of the political process by a narration of the episodes, but he has to learn the nature of fundamental political principles and basic forms of political institution. In the view of the closeness between the two subjects, the development of political institutions, rules, regulations, right and duties, law more of justice, executive, legislative and administrative functions, economic and financial implications, nature of bureaucracy, fundament principles of state policy are all defied under constitution history. History is very helpful to politics because the political aspects is a part of the whole range of activity recorded by historians and knowledge of history would enable the politicians to know politics better and play their role effectively. Professor Acton has correctly point out, "the science of politics is the science that is deposited by the stream of history like grains of gold in the sand of a river. **HISTORY AND GEOGRAPHY** Universally it is accepted that history and geography has close ties. In fact, it would be practically impossible to study certain branches of history without rudimentary knowledge of geography e.g. diplomatic or military history cannot be followed without necessary geography knowledge of the region. Geography is one of the eyes of history the other eye being chorology. Time and space factors give history its correct perspective. Professor Michelet was of the opinion that history was in essence found upon geography. He says without a geographical basis the people, the makers of history, seek to be influence of climate having crucial influence on the course of history as well as on race temperament. History and geography were taught together in the 50s, one stresses time and the other emphasis on space, i.e. history studies people of different places. Both history and geography are concerned with the inter-play of human and physical factors. The correlation between history and geography become quite evident if we look at the equipment/apparatus used for teaching these subjects, like maps, pictures and atlas. Both geography and history are concerned with the interplay of human and physical factors. **HISTORY AND ECONOMICS:** Economics is a social science that studies resource allocation, distribution and consumption; of capital and investment; and of management of the factors of production. History is closely related to economics. As the activities of a man in the society are very related with the economic matters, the historian of any period must possess at least a rudimentary knowledge of the economics. In fact, the economic history of any period is an important branch of history and its understanding of history of history of ant period. No doubt, it is true that during last few years economic has become very complex and difficult subject, mostly dependent on mathematic, and modern historian cannot acquire basic working knowledge of economic theory without devoting a lot of time and leaving little time for the study and writing of history by the use of economic, historians have emerged who try to study economic history. Economic history is closely interlinked with the study of economic problems that it would not be possible to reconstruct history without knowledge of the relevant economic problems. **HISTORY AND SOCIOLOGY.** History and sociology are intimately related and a number of sociologists like Augute comte are also important figure in the development of historical studies. Both history and sociology are concerned with the study of man in society and differed only with regard to their approach. In recent years it was realized that a fruitful interaction between the two disciplines was possible and Emile Durkheim, Marx weber acknowledge the initial dependence of sociology upon history. Although, history also benefits from the synthesis produced by the sociologists. **HISTORY AND STATISTICS.** In the present century the writing of history has been greatly influenced by the statistical data. With the invention of computers, the collection of statistical data has become possible. The historians have even give up the former practice of using in the exact term like majority of historians or people, wide support etc. and have started quoting the exact percentage of people or the help of the computer and processing of enormous data can be completed within a short span and a systematic information can be collected. Though, the conclusion drawn on the basic of the data may be known to the historians on the basis of the impressionistic evidence, which does reduce the value because it provides a concrete evidence for a previously held thesis. On the same line the use of the historical demography viz information regarding the movement of people, births and deaths, fertility rates, immigrations etc. cannot be possible without the means to process and correlate the vast and complex data made available by various official records. This type of the detailed information helps the historian to understand the different facts of the past life. A new branch called clinometric has come into vague, according to which the use of mathematic has come into greater play in writing of history and interpretation of the numerous sources. Conclusively, history has tie with every academic discipline as it's a subject of vital importance because it answers fundamental questions on the minds of every society and scholar. But the perils and pitfall always lurk. Infatuations with other disciplines have at times produced short lived historiographical fashions. According to some critics, challenges from other disciplines have foisted inappropriate standards and methods on the historians undermining our epistemological certainties or encouraging us to generalize too boldly. Still other critics have accused historians of a quite disciplinary imperialism; a tendency to adopt alternative methods in a simplified form that tames those method most provocative assumptions. Bibliography 1 Fagan, B.M. In the Beginning: An introduction to archaeology, Torongo: little brown and company 1985. 2 Terimo, E.C.J. An introduction to African history to 1880. Dares salaam: open university of Tanzania (out). 3 Willey, R and sabbloff, A. a history of American archaeology. San Francisco. Freeman and company,1988. 4 Robert, JS. Historical discovering our past, Pennsylvania university press 2003. 5 Relationship between history and science disciplines.http://www.scienceblogspot.com/accessed may 10 2018. **GIDAMZ WORK**