The concept of human history is tricky. Specifically, when does it start? Geologic time obviously doesn't work, but recorded history is far too abbreviated given the span of existence that precedes the advent of writing.



This is an interesting, but not fascinating, point. It's the sort of topic drunken grad students might get deeply engaged in, but too thin to carry an entire book.



Far more interesting is the fact that the author points to history as a spectrum of evolving interpretation therein, but takes great care to ridicule those responsible for the transition away from "sacred chronology" to cultural temporalism (yes, I made it up...but it captures the essence of history, and historicity as a human based processes).



History depends much on perspective and interpretation. My perspective is that this author forgets that it continues to evolve and will evolve past his view; there's no need to besmirch those that came before, nor to expect others to blindly accept the interpretations of historians given to speculating about the historicalness of pre-recorded history.



It was an insurmountable offense, and I gave up, sadly, after 30 pages.