The central question in this chapter is how the historian is to assess the contribution of individuals and of impersonal social forces in our understanding of past.

The question takes several forms:

• to what extent is the individual, either consciously or unconsciously, acting under the influence of social forces that surround and influence him / her? [Max Weber's charismatic leader]
• to what extent can the individual affect historical change?

Equally significant

• to what extent is the historian, either consciously or unconsciously, acting under the influence of the forces that surround and influence him / her?
• to understand what an historian has written, we need to understand the social context that molded his/her vision of history.

Consider the implications of the statement on p. 31 (in my edition; and in reference to Mommsen) "Great history is written precisely when the historian's vision of the past is illuminated by insights into the problems of the present."

Note for discussion the following :

• history is full of meaning for us, if history appears to be going our way
• a cyclical theory of history is characteristic or a society in decline.[37].
• and what about those extraneous all powerful forces [e.g., the military industrial complex] that influence our perception of the present [and the past]?
• in reference to these forces, ''we should not confuse anonymity with impersonality'' [44]
• the function of the cult of personality (Stalin and Hitler, Kim Il-john, etc.)...what are the basic assumptions?