The work questions the very possibility of “history,” not in terms of fairness, accuracy, or authorship, but in its selective construction. Which events are integrated into history depends on ethical perspectives and spatiotemporal contexts, shaped by ideologies that prioritize certain narratives over others. History does not exist naturally; it is an assemblage of words arranged to fit specific contexts. Just as one cannot insert planetary formation into the history of the French Revolution, or health insurance into the history of Zionism, the logic of context dictates historical inclusion. The Markov-generated timelines reveal not a jumble of events but a linguistic dissonance, highlighting history as a textual, rather than purely factual, construct.

Modern education tends to present history as centralized and authoritative, something to be learned rather than investigated. Yet as shown by the diversity of timelines on Wikipedia, perspectives are multiplying. Alternative histories—such as timelines of LGBT history or women’s legal rights—challenge fixed narratives. As Benedetto Croce observed, “All history is contemporary history”; it is constantly overwritten in light of current ideologies.

With the rise of the internet, the nature of record-keeping has changed dramatically. Social media generates vast personal archives of text, images, and videos, often without historical framing, yet potentially influential in future narratives. As the digital archive expands, we edge toward “a society that has already recorded everything.” This accumulation produces a “super-diversity” of potential histories alongside inevitable gaps in understanding. The question remains: will this lead to a fragmented world divided by conflicting narratives, or a society where individuals can construct their own optimized histories?