The Historian's Craft, and a question

[Fleet Admiral JD]

In his final, unfinished work, The Historian’s Craft, Marc Bloch lays out his ideas on the study of history; this book is not a study of a specific era of history, nor is it a meditation on historiography. Moreover, it is a “how-to” guide for students of history, as given by an excellent historian. Bloch examines the fundamentals of the study of history; he begins with a section entitled “History, Men, and Time.” Here, he defines history as he understands it as “the science of men and time.” He also looks into the concept of time and supports the idea of contemporary history. His second section is entitled “Historical Observation,” wherein he examines the concept that historians cannot directly observe the events that they study; he also states that being in the present rather than the past has advantages, such as the ability to dissect events in much greater detail than an observer who was there. The third section of Bloch’s book is entitled “Historical Criticism,” and here he discusses the fallibility of primary source documents, even government records and ostensibly well-kept accounts. In his fourth section, “Historical Analysis,” in which he talks about first the need for many disciplines to be used in the study of history, and second about the uncertain state of nomenclature in the study of history. His final section, which will forever remain unfinished, is entitled “Historical Causation,” and begins examining the chain of events that lead to a culminating event, and what effect older events have on more recent ones. On the whole, Bloch presents a great number of insights that now are known as fundamental to the study of history, and despite not being able to finish the book, has created a lasting impression on the study of history.

Basically, the stuff that is in this book you probably already know, BECAUSE of this book.

Now, I'm more interested in this methodology stuff than historiography; can anyone recommend any other books that may be similar? Thanks!

[Akkleptos]

Ah, Marc Bloch!

As a History School drop-out, I can say it's precisely the understandimg of the things contained in works like Bloch's what mark the difference between being a true historian or just a history-buff. It's not so much "Who won this battle and when?" as much as it is "How did this come to happen? What circumstances brought this about?". As I used to tell people who asked: "Knowing a huge lot about history doesn't make you a historian". No. Knowing your Bloch, Childe, Pirenne, etc does.