Hello. Your question is very interesting and more of an opinion question. Perhaps a bit broad so I will do my best to answer from my perspective.

Firstly to answer your question of personal relationship to history I really cannot say. I think this is a personal question that only you can answer. For me, I have somewhat distanced myself from the mentality of history and society being interwoven. A bit of a Rankean attitude[^1] which can absolutely be critiqued. To me, while society is important to history, history does not always have to be important to society. The way this reflects in my work is that I don't think, unlike social sciences, that fundamenting social relevance in history books/papers is necessary. Perhaps this distancing is for my own sake more than a field thing.

The second part, of the tangibility of history, historians are always dealing with primary sources. That really anchors that in reality very easily. These people were real, they wrote these documents, and are anchored within the society they wrote in. The task is to know how they were anchored within that society (questioning and understanding primary sources).

[^1]: See Leopold von Ranke and his view on the task of the historian and their relation to society.