§1. WRITING A HISTORY ESSAY
An essay is a piece of sustained writing in response to a question, topic or issue.
Essays are commonly used for assessing and evaluating student progress in history.
History essays test a range of skills including historical understanding, interpretation
and analysis, planning, research and writing. To write an effective essay, students
must examine the question, understand its focus and requirements, acquire
information and evidence through research, then construct a clear and well-organised
response. Writing a good history essay should be rigorous and challenging, even for
stronger students. As with other skills, essay writing develops and improves over
time. Each essay you complete helps you become more competent and confident.
This page contains some general advice for writing a successful history essay. You
may also find our page on writing for history to be useful.
Study the question
This is an obvious tip but one sadly neglected by some students. The first step to
writing a good essay, whatever the subject or topic, is to give plenty of thought to the
question. An essay question will set some kind of task or challenge. It might ask you
to explain the causes and/or effects of a particular event or situation. It might ask if
you agree or disagree with a statement. It might ask you to describe and analyse the
causes and/or effects of a particular action or event. Or it might ask you to evaluate
the relative significance of a person, group or event. You should begin by reading the
essay question several times. Underline, highlight or annotate keywords or terms in
the text of the question. Think about what it requires you to do. Who or what does it
want you to concentrate on? Does it state or imply a particular timeframe? What
problem or issue does it want you to address?
Begin with a plan
Every essay should begin with a written plan. Start constructing a plan as soon as you
have received your essay question and given it some thought. Prepare for research by
brainstorming and jotting down your thoughts and ideas. What are your initial
responses or thoughts about the question? What topics, events, people or issues are
connected with the question? Do any additional questions or issues flow from the
question? What topics or events do you need to learn more about? What historians or
sources might be useful? If during this process you encounter a mental ‘brick wall’,
or are uncertain about how to approach the question, don’t hesitate to discuss it with
someone else. Consult your teacher, a capable classmate or someone you trust. Bear
in mind too that once you start researching, your plan may change as you locate new
information.
Start researching
After studying the question and developing an initial plan, start to gather information
and evidence. Most will start by reading an overview of the topic or issue, usually in
some reliable secondary sources. This will refresh or build your existing
understanding of the topic and provide a basis for further questions or investigation.
Your research should take shape from here, guided by the essay question and your
own planning. Identify terms or concepts you do not know and find out what they
mean. As you locate information, ask yourself if it is relevant or useful for addressing
the question. Be creative with your research, looking in a variety of places. If you
have difficulty locating information, seek advice from your teacher or someone you
trust.
Develop a contention
All good history essays have a clear and strong contention. A contention is the main
idea or argument of your essay. It serves both as an answer to the question and the
focal point of your writing. Ideally, you should be able to express your contention as
a single sentence. For example, the following contention might form the basis of an
essay question on the rise of the Nazis:
Q. Why did the Nazi Party win 37 per cent of the vote in July 1932?
A. The Nazi Party’s electoral success of 1932 was a result of economic suffering
caused by the Great Depression, public dissatisfaction with the Weimar Republic’s
democratic political system and mainstream parties, and Nazi propaganda that
promised a return to traditional social, political and economic values.
An essay using this contention would go on to explain these statements in greater
detail and justify them with evidence. At some point in your research, you should
begin thinking about a contention for your essay. Remember, you should be able to
express it briefly as if addressing the essay question in a single sentence, or summing
up in a debate. Try to frame your contention so that is strong, authoritative and
convincing. It should sound like the voice of someone well informed about the
subject and confident about their answer.
Plan an essay structure
Once most of your research is complete and you have a strong contention, start
jotting down a possible essay structure. This need not be complicated, a few lines or
dot points is ample. Every essay must have an introduction, a body of several
paragraphs and a conclusion. Your paragraphs should be well organised and follow a
logical sequence. You can organise paragraphs in two ways: chronologically
(covering events or topics in the order they occurred) or thematically
(covering events or topics based on their relevance to a). Every paragraph should be
clearly signposted in the topic sentence. Once you have a plan, start drafting your
essay.
Write a compelling introduction
Many consider the introduction to be the most important part of an essay. The
introduction is important for several reasons. It is the reader’s first experience of your
essay. It is where you first address the question and express your contention. It is
where you begin to signpost the direction your essay will take. Aim for an
introduction that is clear, confident and punchy. Get straight to the point – do not
waste time with a rambling or storytelling introduction. Start by providing a little
context, then address the question, articulate your contention and indicate what
direction your essay will take.
Write fully formed paragraphs
Many history students fall into the trap of writing short paragraphs, sometimes
containing as little as one or two sentences. A good history essay contains paragraphs
that are themselves ‘mini-essays’, usually between 100-200 words each. A paragraph
should focus on one topic or issue only – but it should contain a thorough exploration
of that topic or issue. A good paragraph will begin with an effective opening sentence,
sometimes called a topic sentence or signposting sentence. This sentence introduces
the paragraph topic and briefly explains its significance to the question and your
contention. Good paragraphs also contain thorough explanations, some analysis and
evidence, perhaps a quotation or two.
Finish with an effective conclusion
The conclusion is the final paragraph of your essay. A good conclusion should do two
things. First, it should reiterate or restate the contention of your essay. Second, it
should close off your essay, ideally with a polished ending that is not abrupt or
awkward. One effective way to do this is with a brief summary of ‘what happened
next’. For example, an essay discussing Hitler’s rise to power in 1933 might close
with a couple of sentences about how he consolidated and strengthened his power in
1934-35. Your conclusion need not be as long or as developed as your body
paragraphs. You should always avoid introducing new information or evidence in a
conclusion.
Reference and cite your sources
A history essay is only likely to succeed if it is appropriately referenced. Your essay
should support its information, ideas and arguments with citations or references to
reliable sources. Referencing not only acknowledges the work of others, it also gives
authority to your writing and provides the teacher or assessor with an insight into
your research. More information on referencing a piece of history writing can be
found here.
Proofread, edit and seek feedback
Every essay should be proofread, edited and, if necessary, re-drafted before being
submitted for assessment. Essays should ideally be completed a few days before their
due date, then put aside for a day or two before proofreading. Look first for spelling
and grammatical errors, typographical mistakes, incorrect dates or other errors of
fact. Think then about how you can improve the clarity, tone and structure of your
essay. Does your essay follow a logical structure or sequence? Is the signposting in
your essay clear and effective? Are some sentences too long or ‘rambling’? Do you
repeat yourself? Do paragraphs need to be expanded, fine-tuned or strengthened with
more evidence? Read your essay aloud, either to yourself or another person. Seek
feedback and advice from a good writer or someone you trust (they need not have
expertise in history, only in effective writing).
Some general tips on writing
Always write in the third person. Never refer to yourself personally, using phrases
like “I think…” or “It is my contention…”. Good history essays should adopt the
perspective of an informed and objective third party. They should sound rational and
factual – not like an individual expressing their opinion.
Always write in the past tense. An obvious tip for a history essay is to write in the
past tense. Always be careful about your use of tense. Watch out for mixed tenses
when proofreading your work. One exception to the rule about past tense is when
writing about the work of modern historians (for example, “Kershaw writes…”
sounds better than “Kershaw wrote…” or “Kershaw has written…”).
Avoid generalisations. Generalisation is a problem in all essays but it is particularly
common in history essays. Generalisation occurs when you form general conclusions
from one or more specific examples. In history, this most commonly occurs when
students study the experiences of a particular group, then assume their experiences
applied to a much larger group – for example, “All the peasants were outraged”,
“Women rallied to oppose conscription” or “Germans supported the Nazi Party”.
Both history and human society, however, are never this clear cut or simple. Always
try to avoid generalisation and be on the lookout for generalised statements when
proofreading.
Write short, sharp and punchy. Good writers vary their sentence length but as a
rule of thumb, most of your sentences should be short and punchy. The longer a
sentence becomes, the greater the risk of it becoming long-winded or confusing.
Long sentences can easily become disjointed, confused or rambling. Try not to
overuse long sentences and pay close attention to sentence length when proofreading.
Write in an active voice. In history writing, the active voice is preferable to the
passive voice. In the active voice, the subject completes the action (e.g. “Hitler [the
subject] initiated the Beer Hall putsch [the action] to seize control of the Bavarian
government”). In the passive voice, the action is completed by the subject (“The Beer
Hall putsch [the action] was initiated by Hitler [the subject] to seize control of the
Bavarian government”). The active voice also helps prevent sentences from
becoming long, wordy and unclear.
——————————————————————————————————
SUMMARY:
1. Study the question
2. Begin with a plan
3. Start researching
4. Develop a contention
5. Plan an essay structure
6. Write a compelling introduction
7. Write fully formed paragraphs
8. Finish with an effective conclusion
9. Reference and cite your sources
10. Proofread, edit and seek feedback
——————————————————————————————————
—
§2. WRITING FOR HISTORY
Like other branches of the humanities, history is carried by the written word. Ever
since the days of Herodotus and Plutarch, historians have relied on written texts to
communicate historical narrative and meaning. Despite the technological advances of
the last two decades, not much has changed in this regard. Modern historians still use
documents, books, essays and other forms of writing to record their findings. New
technologies have changed the ways that historical sources and written information
are stored, shared and presented – but not the information itself. Despite the advent of
these new technologies, history students should still expect a sizeable amount of
reading and writing. Success in history hinges not just on your interest in and
knowledge of the past but your ability to write clearly and effectively.
There is no denying the challenges of writing for history. It is not a natural or innate
talent; nobody is born a great historian or historical writer. Like other skills, they are
learned, developed and practised over time. If you are taking a senior history course
for the first time, think of your historical writing as a work in progress. The best
advice is to study how the professionals write history. As you read
different historians, think about how they organise their writing; how they weave
together narrative, evidence and analysis; and how they communicate with their
readers. As you write your own pieces, think critically about your writing and seek
feedback from others. With practice, advice and reflection, you will become an
effective history writer. It is not an easy process: it will take time and cannot be
hurried. As with many things, different students will progress at different speeds. The
important thing is to work hard, be patient and remain positive.
Here are some general tips about writing for history. You can also find useful
information on our page about writing history essays.
Plan your writing
When writing anything for history, do not leave your structure or organisation of
content to chance. Starting a lengthy piece of writing without any planning, in the
hope that it will ‘fall together’ or ‘work out’, is rarely effective. It is very difficult to
structure and organise writing ‘on the fly’, even for skilled writers. The longer the
task, the more effort you should put into structuring and planning. Before drafting a
long paragraph, extended response or essay, construct some kind of brief plan. It need
not be complex: a list, some dot-points or a concept map is sufficient. This plan
should provide a framework for the ideas, arguments and information you intend to
present.
Think before writing, think while writing
An obvious piece of advice but one that is easily forgotten or ignored. You should
think continually during the process of writing, from start to finish. A sentence or
complicated phrase should be fully conceived in your mind before you commit it to
paper. A moment’s thought and mental planning before each new sentence or
paragraph is often the difference between clear and effective writing and aimless
waffling. Pause before starting a new sentence and ask yourself what you intend to
say and how you want it to sound. Read every sentence and paragraph when complete
and think whether it says what you want it to.
Know your answer or contention
Most history writing responds to a problem, question or statement. Before starting to
write you should have a clear contention – in other words, an argument or ‘answer’
that responds to the question or statement. In an essay, your contention must be
clearly expressed in the introduction. It should be revisited and restated regularly
through the body of your writing, then reiterated in the conclusion. The contention is
vital for two reasons. First, it shows that you have contemplated the question and
formed a confident and cogent answer. Second, the contention should serve as the
focal point or ‘backbone’ of an effective essay or extended response.
Plan and signpost
The first step toward well organised and effective writing is a good plan. The second
step is to signpost as you write. A signpost is a sentence or phrase that tells the reader
the direction your writing is going to take. Signposting can be used anywhere in
your writing, though it is usually found in the introduction or in topic
sentences. There are several different ways you can signpost. Some signposting is
direct and obvious, e.g. “This essay will begin by examining the propaganda methods
used by the Nazis before considering factors behind their rise to power in 1933.”
Rhetorical questions can also serve as signposts, e.g. “What factors led to the
appointment of Hitler as chancellor in January 1933?” When discussing multiple
points you can signpost by beginning each sentence with “First,” “Second,” “Third,”
and so on. These devices will organise your ideas and prepare your reader for what to
expect.
Be clear, confident and direct
In history, the style and tone of your writing should be clear and straight to the point.
You should aim to sound well informed and confident, even if you are not. Write
assertively and directly. State information and arguments as though they are beyond
doubt. Avoid flowery or overly descriptive language, wishy-washy statements or
irrelevant background information. Get straight to the point by addressing the
question and outlining your contention. Use shorter sentences wherever possible.
Write in the active voice rather than the passive voice. Proofread your work carefully
and, if possible, have someone else proofread it for you. A good test for clarity in
writing is whether it can be fully understood after one reading – is this the case with
yours?
Avoid hyperbole and cliché
Hyperbole (pronounced high-perba-lee) is language that is exaggerated, overly
colourful or dramatic. It is used for effect rather than accuracy. Examples of
hyperbole might include “George Washington was a colossus of a man” or “the fall of
the Bastille brought Europe to a standstill”. A little hyperbole can add colour and flair
to writing but in most cases, it sounds silly. You should avoid using hyperbole and be
wary of it, particularly when proofreading your final work. The best history writing is
convincing because it presents evidence, facts and argument in a calm and rational
manner – not because it employs dramatic language.
A cliché is a tired and overused expression or phrase. Most clichés started as creative
and meaningful statements – but have lost their meaning or impact through constant
use and overuse. Some common cliches include “since the dawn of man”, “in the
nick of time”, “survival of the fittest”, “history repeats itself”, “as good as gold”,
“time flies” and “hook, line and sinker”. A comprehensive list of clichés can be found
at clichésite.com. It is almost impossible to write without any cliché at all, however,
an essay or text with too much cliché will sound unoriginal, lacking in creativity and
annoying. Be wary of clichés and try to limit them in your writing. It is much better
to develop your own ways of expressing ideas and information.
Avoid generalisation
A common trap in history writing is the habit of generalising, especially when
discussing nations, societies or other large groups of people. Some
common generalisations include statements like “the nobles distrusted the king”, “the
peasants were all starving”, “the French people wanted reform” or “the nation rose up
as one”. People are almost never this united, nor do they behave in such a uniform
way. The larger the group, the more likely that it contained different conditions, ideas,
opinions, loyalties and interests. When writing about a large group, be sure to
acknowledge that it contained different responses, views and perspectives. Doing so
avoids generalisation and gives your writing greater depth and complexity.
Write as journalist or neutral observer, not as character
History writing should demonstrate research, analysis and evidence, while
articulating a compelling argument. It is not a forum for creative writing or personal
viewpoints. Think of yourself as a reporter, using information and sources to explain
a particular event. Try to avoid getting bogged down in irrelevant facts or stories just
because they sound interesting. Write clearly, objectively and dispassionately. Avoid
making value judgements or using emotive labels such as “evil”, “twisted” or
“abhorrent”. Always write in the third person, as someone looking at the topic from a
neutral perspective. Never write in the first person or use phrases like “I think…” or
“In my opinion…”.
Use narrative, analysis and evidence
A common pitfall in writing for history is failing to strike a balance between
narrative (describing what happened) analysis (explaining how or why it happened
and why it was significant) and evidence (information from primary or secondary
sources that supports your narrative and analysis). Weaving these three things
together is not an easy skill – but it is important. Too much narrative will make your
writing sound like a story or a descriptive piece. Too much analysis will make your
writing seem ‘dry’, abstract and convoluted. A lack of evidence will make your
writing sound unconvincing and without authority. Read a few paragraphs from a
reputable historian and think about how they use narrative, analysis and evidence.
Strive to achieve the same balance in your own writing, aiming for roughly equal
parts of each.
——————————————————————————————————
§3. HISTORY WORDS
History, like many disciplines, has its own distinctive forms and styles of writing. As
well as learning to think about the past, history students must also learn to write
history in a clear and convincing manner. Those who are already strong writers will
relish this challenge but others may find it confronting. This page contains several
lists of ‘history words’ to provide you with a head start in writing history. You will
encounter many of these words when reading history while others are useful
descriptive words you can use in your own writing. These lists are not comprehensive
or exhaustive but may prove useful for inexperienced writers. If you are new to
history, or have difficulty finding the right words, save or print off these lists and
keep them to hand. If you would like to suggest words for these lists, please make
contact with your ideas.
Sections or groups in society
academia
People who work in schools and universities, teaching or
undertaking research
agrarian
People involved in producing crops and livestock through
farming
aristocracy
People who possess noble titles and privileges, often with
wealth and power
artisans
People involved in the manufacture or repair of items,
such as mechanics
bourgeoisie
People who own capital, such as land, factories and raw
materials
capitalist
As for bourgeoisie (above), people who own capital and
the means of production
clergy
People ordained by the church to carry out its functions,
such as priests, monks and nuns
commercial
People involved in trade, such as importing and
exporting, buying and selling
economic
People, institutions and activities that produce society’s
wants and needs
establishment
The political, social and economic elites who wield power
in a society
gender
Refers to the rights, roles and conditions of men and
women in a society
industrial
The mass production of wants and needs, particularly on
a large scale
intelligentsia
People who develop ideas, theories and policies in a
society
middle class
The social classes who own some property and enjoy safe
and stable standards of living
military
A state’s defence forces, such as the army, navy and air
force
monarchy
The institution of hereditary royalty, led by a king, queen
or emperor
nobility
People who possess noble titles, either from birth, royal
grant or venality
peasantry
People who work the land, usually as tenant farmers and
often in impoverished conditions
philosophes
Intellectuals and writers who engage in critical study of
society, beliefs and ideas
political
The people, bodies and processes that govern and make
decisions in a society
proletariat
People who work for wages in a society, particularly in
the industrial sector
provincial
The areas of a nation outside major cities, such as lesser
towns, rural areas or colonies
upper class
The upper levels of a society, such as royalty, aristocracy
and the very wealthy
urban
The people, actions and conditions in large cities
village
A small agricultural community, usually in a rural area
working class
The lower levels of society, whose members must work to
survive
Political systems
absolutism
Any political system where the ruler or government
wields absolute power
anarchism
A political system that seeks to abolish the state and
create a communal society
autocracy
A system where political power is concentrated in the
hands of a single person
capitalism
An economic system where most companies, land and
other resources are privately owned
colonialism
A system of claiming, settling, ruling and maintaining one
or more colonies (see imperialism)
communism
A political-economic system with no state, minimal class
differences and economic equality
constitutional
monarchy
A political system with a monarch whose power is limited
and shared with the people
democracy
A political system where the government or parts of it are
selected by the people
divine right
A form of political authority where power is said to be
ordained by God
fascism
A political system marked by authoritarian rule,
nationalism, state and military power
feudalism
A medieval socio-political system with a hierarchy of
kings, lords, knights and vassals
imperialism
A system where a powerful state conquers territories
(colonies) for its own gain
Marxism
A system or world view based on material factors,
inequalities of wealth and class struggle
mercantilism
An economic system designed to increase national power
by increasing wealth and trade
militarism
A system where military needs are prioritised and the
military exerts political influence
nationalism
An ideology urging loyalty to one’s own country; to put
your country first
popular
sovereignty
A form of political authority where power is derived from
the consent of the people
socialism
A system where the government rules in the interests of
the workers or common people
syndicalism
A form of socialism where the workers collectively
control their factories or workplaces
theocracy
A system where government and laws are determined by
religious leaders and teachings
totalitarianism
A political system where the power of the state often
overrides the rights of individuals
welfare state
A system that provides necessities of life to the homeless,
unemployed, sick or elderly
Political concepts
assembly
A body of people, elected or appointed to form
government or make decisions
autocracy
A form of government where one person is responsible
for decision making
constitution
A document defining systems of government and the
limits of government power
democracy
A political system where government is formed by
popular elections
divine right
The idea that governments and autocrats derive their
power and authority from God
elections
The process of voting to select others, usually to form a
representative government
executive
The branch of government responsible for leadership and
day to day decision making
government
A system responsible for leadership, making decisions
and making laws in a society
ideology
A system of ideas and beliefs that shapes one’s views
about politics and government
legislature
An assembly that exists to pass new laws or review,
amend or abolish existing laws
parliament
An elected legislature from which an executive
government is also formed
participation
The involvement of ordinary people in selecting
government and in political discourse
popular
sovereignty
The idea that governments derive their power and
authority from the consent of the people
representation
A political concept where some individuals act, speak or
make decisions on behalf of others
sovereignty
The supreme authority of a government, the basis for its
power and autonomy
state
The state’ describes an organised society and the political
system that governs it
Economic concepts
capital
The resources needed to produce things, such as land,
raw materials and equipment
commerce
The business of buying and selling, particularly on a
large scale
debt
Money owed to another party, usually because it has been
previously borrowed
deficit
The shortfall that exists when spending is greater than
income
exports
Resources or goods sold and shipped to another country,
which boosts national income
finance
Describes the sections of an economy concerned with
managing money, such as banking
imports
Resources or goods bought and shipped in from another
country, depleting national income
industry
The production of raw materials and manufactured
goods within an economy
inflation
An increase in prices for goods and services, reducing the
purchasing power of money
labour
The people who provide work to enable production or
delivery of services; the workers
laissez-faire
French for “let it be”; an economy free of trade
regulations, tariffs or costs
manufacturing
The process of making or producing goods, particularly
on a large scale
production
The process of making things, particularly things that
have additional value
profit
Financial reward obtained from business or investment,
where income exceeds costs
revenue
Money received for normal activities, such as sales
(business) or taxation (government)
taxation
Money collected from individuals and groups by the
government to fund the state
trade
The buying or selling of goods, usually in exchange for
money
Words for describing historical cause
agitated
aroused
awakened
brought
about
catalyst
developed
deteriorated
encouraged
exacerbated
fuelled
generated
incited
inflamed
instigated
kindled
led to
long term
motivated
popularised
propagandis
ed
prompted
promoted
protested
provoked
radicalised
reformed
rocked
roused
set off
short term
solicited
sparked
spurred
stimulated
stirred up
transformed
triggered
urged
whipped up
worsened
Words for describing historical effect or consequence
boosted
catastrophic
consolidated
crippled
decimated
demoralised
depleted
disastrous
disbanded
disoriented
dispersed
dissolved
divided
drained
elevated
emboldened
enriched
exhausted
fatigued
hardened
heartened
improved
inspired
mobilised
prospered
punished
restored
sapped
scattered
separated
stimulated
strained
strengthened
stretched
unified
united
unsettled
uplifted
upset
wearied
Words for describing historical continuity
blocked
calmed
censored
clamped
down
concealed
conservative
contained
curbed
deterred
dispersed
froze
halted
held back
limited
mollified
pacified
oppressed
overpowered
prohibited
quashed
quelled
reactionary
regressed
repressed
resisted
restored
restrained
restricted
smothered
stabilised
stemmed
stunted
subdued
suppressed
wound back
Words for describing historical significance
adverse
calamitous
catastrophic
destabilising
destructive
devastating
dire
disastrous
essential
expedient
far reaching
far sighted
fateful
forerunner
ground
breaking
healing
important
innovative
meaningful
modernising
negative
ominous
opportune
profound
pivotal
positive
revolutionar
y
ruinous
serious
shaking
shattering
significant
spear
heading
timely
trail blazing
transforming
tumultuous
unsettling
uprooting
vital
Words for evaluating historical sources
balanced
baseless
biased
convincing
credible
deceptive
dishonest
distorted
doubtful
dubious
emotive
exaggerated
fallacious
far fetched
flawed
honest
imbalanced
impossible
inflated
limited
misleading
one sided
overwrought
persuasive
phoney
plausible
propagandist
realistic
reasonable
selective
sensationalis
t
skewed
sound
spurious
unrealistic
unreliable
untenable
useful
valid
vivid
Command words for history tasks and activities
analyse
Examine and discuss the important structure or parts of
something
annotate
Record written questions, comments or explanations on a
document or visual source
annotated
bibliography
A list of books that contains a note about the content and
usefulness of each book
argue
Present a case, to express and explain a particular reason
or theory
brainstorm
Gather and record thoughts and ideas spontaneously,
without sorting or evaluating them
cite
Refer to an authority or trusted source, as evidence of
your information or idea
compare
Examine two or more propositions and identify and
discuss similarities between them
concept map
A visual chart or diagram, using shapes and lines to
organise and connect topics or ideas
conclusion
The last paragraph in sustained writing, it restates the
contention and ’rounds off’ the text
contrast
Examine two or more propositions and identify and
discuss differences between them
critically analyse
Analyse something and offer views and judgements about
the merit or value of its parts
define
Provide precise meanings and explanations about
something
describe
Provide a detailed and graphic account of something
discuss
Provide a balanced commentary about something,
mentioning arguments for and against
evaluate
Analyse something and form final conclusions about its
value, credibility or merit
explain
Provide a clear, straightforward and detailed account of
something
historiographical
activity
A task requiring discussion of historians and their
interpretations of a particular topic
interpret
Examine something to extract its meaning and express it
in your own words
introduction
The first paragraph in sustained writing, offering a
contention and an outline of the text
issue
A topic or question that is open to discussion, debate or
dispute
justify
Provide clear reasons, grounds and evidence for a
particular argument or conclusion
outline
Provide a basic overview of something, describing only its
main features
paraphrase
To describe someone else’s words, statement or meaning,
in your own words
review
Read or examine something and offer your own thoughts
and judgements about it
signpost
Use phrases and sentences outlining the direction or
structure your writing will take
summarise
Briefly describe the main points or attributes of
something, without going into much detail
——————————————————————————————————
—
§4. WHAT IS HISTORIOGRAPHY?
Historiography is the study of how history is written and how our historical
understanding changes over time. Historiography considers the approaches used by
historians and seeks to understand how and why their theories and interpretations
differ. While the past itself never changes, history – in other words, our understanding
of the past – is always evolving. New historians explore and interpret the past through
their own methods, priorities and values. They develop new theories and conclusions
that may change the way we understand the past. Historiography acknowledges and
discusses this process of change. Historiography is a difficult and complex field of
study. It is a critical component of most college or university-level history courses,
where students are expected to
know about the past and how it
has been interpreted over time.
Many senior secondary and
high school courses also include
some basic historiography,
usually through the study of
different historians and different
historical perspectives.
To understand historiography,
one must first accept that
history is never set in stone. Our
understanding of the past is not
immune to criticism, challenge
or revision. One must also
understand the critical difference between historical facts (things shown conclusively
by evidence and accepted as true) and history (the human study and interpretation of
these things). History certainly contains millions of concrete truths or facts. Abraham
Lincoln was shot and killed by John Wilkes Booth in 1865; the Japanese bombed
Pearl Harbour in December 1941; Germany was gripped by rampant hyperinflation in
1923; approximately 58,000 American servicemen were killed in the Vietnam War.
On the evidence currently available, those facts are beyond doubt. But taken on their
own, these facts may be ‘dry’, isolated or lacking in meaning. The role of the
historian is to make sense of these facts through research and analysis. They do this
by examining and interpreting evidence, forming conclusions, developing theories
and articulating their findings in writing. Historians must answer many questions,
including:
· How and why particular actions, events or ideas came to be (causes)
· The outcomes of particular actions, events or ideas (effects or consequences).
· The contributions made by different people, groups and ideas (actions).
· The relative importance or impact of different people, groups or ideas
(significance).
· Things that altered and things that stayed the same over a period of time (change
and continuity).
Unlike the physical sciences, history often churns out different answers to the same
question. Historians frequently study the same sets of facts but end up reaching
different explanations or conclusions. As an analogy, think of a significant historical
event as a major sporting fixture, like an important football match watched by
thousands of people. Football matches have factual outcomes: scoring charts, a final
score, team and player statistics, player injuries and so forth. Explaining these
outcomes, however, can be a very subjective process. Witnesses to a football game
might attribute the outcomes to various factors: player selections, the performance of
individual players, fitness or injuries, umpiring decisions, weather, ground conditions,
‘home ground advantage’, coaching tactics and so forth. There may be some
consensus about these causes but there is rarely total agreement. In some respects
historians are like sports journalists: they explain outcomes after the fact, relying on
evidence but also their own judgement and interpretations. These interpretations can
vary markedly, to the point where the work of one historian may directly contradict
the work of another other.
The word “historiography” can also describe the body of history written about a
particular person, period or event. The ‘historiography of the French Revolution’, for
example, describes every significant history book written about the revolution. Some
of these historiographies can be enormous. Millions of history books, articles and
reference texts have been written about topics on the Alpha History website. This
does not mean these histories are ‘exhausted’, however, or that no new history is
being written. This is far from the case. Public interest in historical periods like the
American Civil War, Nazi Germany and the two World Wars remains high. This
interest drives new research and commercial demand for new books. Sometimes new
books contain no significant new ideas: they simply rehash existing knowledge and
present it in a different form (as Max Beerbohm once put it, “history doesn’t repeat
itself, historians repeat one another”). But some books do offer new evidence,
interpretations or arguments – and sometimes they challenge our existing
understanding. The image here (left) shows a tower of books in Washington DC, just
across from Ford’s Theatre. It is constructed from books on one topic: Abraham
Lincoln. All books in the tower are unique; it contains only one copy of each book.
Among these texts are studies of Lincoln’s childhood, family and personal
relationships; his legal career and entry into politics, his presidency and leadership
during the US Civil War; his attitudes about slavery and African-Americans. Each
book contains the author’s own interpretation of Lincoln. Some have advanced some
new evidence, ideas or theories and others have not. Such a tower can only
exist because history is a living, growing subject, filled with different ideas, voices
and perspectives.
Those setting out in a senior high school or undergraduate history course will find
historiography challenging. Learning about the factual detail of the past is
challenging enough but learning about different interpretations of the past is
particularly daunting. As with most significant journeys, the best way to start is with
manageable steps. First, understand that history is an ongoing dialogue, not an
unchanging concrete monument to the past. Understand that each historian provides a
different view of the past and that no historian is above challenge or questioning. As
you read historians, think critically about the conclusions they reach and the
arguments they present. Ask yourself how other historians might interpret the same
set of facts – and ask yourself what conclusions or arguments you might reach. When
researching or studying, compare and contrast the writings of two or more historians
on the same topic or issue. When writing about a historical topic, acknowledge that
different historians hold different views about it. Most importantly, ease yourself into
historiography rather than diving in head first. Trying to take in too much information
and too many different perspectives will only confuse you and muddy your thinking.
As your skills improve and your understanding of historiography grows, so too will
your ability and confidence.
——————————————————————————————————
§5. WORKING WITH HISTORIANS
An important challenge for history students is understanding and working with
historians. Historians are learned individuals who try to make sense of the past.
Historians gather sources and evidence, which they use to form interpretations,
conclusions and arguments. They publish their findings as academic works or books
for the open market. Most professional historians are employed in academia: as
university or college professors, lecturers or researchers. A few also work for
government bodies, in the private sector or as publishing authors. Because historians
prepare written history and deliver it to us, they play a critical role in shaping how we
view and understand the past. No historian ‘owns’ or has a monopoly on historical
truth, however, even if they claim to. History itself is not one single truth but a
broad patchwork of ideas and viewpoints, woven by many different historians over
long periods of time. Every historian looks at the past from their own perspective,
uses different sources, employs their own methods and speaks in their own voice.
Historians often reach different conclusions or answers from the same
evidence. There are several reasons for this. Just as you and other people see the
modern world in different ways, historians see the past differently. Every
historian approaches the past with his or her own values, priorities and political
perspectives. These perspectives shape the way we study, interpret and make sense of
the past. You will often hear some historians mentioned with political labels – for
example, “the left-wing historian Brown” or “Russell, a liberal historian”. These
labels summarise or encapsulate a historian’s political perspective. This is a simplistic
and sometimes problematic approach, however, because it generalises and ‘pigeonholes’ historians who may have significantly different viewpoints or arguments.
The most common of these labels are “left-wing” or “Marxist”, and “right-wing” or
“conservative”. In general terms, left-wing or Marxist historians tend to emphasise
problems and issues that affect the lower classes. The most common of these are the
ownership of wealth and capital, economic inequalities, class exploitation, the misuse
of power and the condition and grievances of workers. Historians with right-wing or
conservative views may instead focus on economic freedom and opportunity,
progress, social stability, law and order and the failures of radicalism. Somewhere
between the two are liberal historians, who tend to focus on how well a society
protects and advances individual freedoms and rights. Some historians adopt even
more complex or nuanced positions.
Histories of a significant period or event will invariably contain a range of political
perspectives. Many left-wing historians suggest the French Revolution was driven by
working class dissatisfaction, the product of decades of feudalism, gross inequality
and political exclusion. In contrast, conservative historians suggest the French
Revolution was triggered by exaggerated grievances and falsehoods; the revolution
tried to achieve too much too quickly and descended into a series of violent power
struggles. A challenge for history students is to identify and understand these different
perspectives and differentiate between them. Students should also be aware of their
own values and political assumptions, which shape the way you view and understand
history. For some insight into your own political perspectives, visit the Political
Compass website, click on ‘Take the test’ and complete the online quiz (it takes about
10-15 minutes). The quiz will provide a written and graphical assessment of your
political views. It even charts your views in relation to some famous leaders, such as
Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Margaret Thatcher and Mohandas Gandhi.
Time can also change the perspectives of historians. As the views and values of
society change and evolve, so do historians and their perspectives. Historians of a
particular generation may approach the past differently to their predecessors. They
may study different people or groups, ask different questions, consider alternative
causes and factors and form different theories. Historians who engage in this are
broadly referred to as revisionists. The last half-century or so has been a fertile period
for historical revisionism. History is accessible to more people with different ideas,
allowing for a greater exchange of information and a broader range of viewpoints.
Ideas and approaches once never considered or countenanced by historians have been
explored. Changes in social values have encouraged historical research from the
perspectives of marginalised or excluded groups, such as women, homosexuals,
colonised peoples and racial minorities. It follows that history written, say, in the
1950s may be radically different to another written in the last decade. When studying
a historian, it is useful to know when they were active and the context they operated
in.
Historians are the gatekeepers and architects of our history. Our understanding of the
past is built upon their research, knowledge and hard work. It is important for history
students to value and respect historians. Use historians as your guides as you track
your way through the past. Draw on their findings and their knowledge, use their
writing as evidence and acknowledge them with referencing. Be aware, however, that
no historian offers a definitive or perfect account of the past. Weigh up different
perspectives and challenge historians you disagree with. Above all, think critically
not just about the past but also the historians who reveal it to us.
Tips for studying historians
Identifying a historian’s arguments, perspectives or political position can be difficult.
Students should approach the writing of every historian with a critical eye. Think
carefully about the assumptions they make, the conclusions they reach and the
theories or arguments they advance. The following filter questions might prove
useful.
When was the historian active and writing about this history?
Can you find any biographical information about the historian, such as their
nationality, their education, their political views or affiliations?
Which particular periods, people, groups, events or ideas are the main focus
of the historian’s work?
What conditions or outcomes does the historian consider important? For
example, do they place more emphasis on economic outcomes than social
improvements?
How does the historian describe and evaluate different people or groups?
Does the historian sound positive or negative about particular people, groups
or classes?
Does the historian express any value judgements or unfair assumptions about
particular people, groups or events?
What style and tone of language does the historian employ? Do they use
emotive language, exaggeration or hyperbole?
What evidence does the historian draw upon? What evidence do they
overlook, reject or downplay?
Does the historian form conclusions that are not supported by the evidence?
What other historians does this historian reference?
Common terms for describing or categorising historians
The following terms can be used to categorise or summarise historians according to
their general perspectives or approach. These terms should only be used when
speaking or writing about the broad history of a particular period or event. Students
should avoid attaching these labels to specific historians as this can be simplistic or
misleading.
conservative
As the name suggests, conservative historians tend to support
the status quo, long standing traditions, social stability and
gradual reform or change. They are critical of excessive or
unnecessary change. They are also negative about change
that does not enjoy consensus support, and tend to be hostile
toward radical movements and events, such as revolutions.
determinist
Determinist historians believe that history follows a logical
path, shaped by long- and short-term causes. They believe
that every event is caused or determined (hence the name) by
conditions or events that came before it. For example,
determinists believe the Nazi movement in Germany was the
product of German nationalism and militarism dating back
to the mid 19th century.
feminist
Feminist historians investigate history from the unique
perspectives of women. This is a relatively approach to
history, dating from the mid 1900s. Feminist historians look
at both prominent women and the lives and experiences of
ordinary women. They also focus on how women were
defined and constrained by patriarchal (male dominated)
societies and power structures.
liberal
Liberal historians, like their forebears the Whigs, are mainly
concerned with individuals and freedoms. For most liberal
historians, the measure of a society is how well it protects and
advances the rights and freedoms of the individual. Liberal
historians are therefore interested in concepts such as
political participation, capitalism and the freedom of speech
and thought.
Marxist
Marxist historians are influenced by Karl Marx’s theory of
historical materialism, which asserts that society is defined by
economic conditions and that “all history is the history of
class struggle”. Marxist historians usually focus on the
imbalanced relationship between wealth, power and labour,
as well as the conditions and exploitation of the working
classes.
postmoderni
st
Postmodernism is a complex academic and literary
movement of the late 20th century. Postmodernism sees
history not as a factual reconstruction of the past but a
subjective intertwining of truths and literary fictions. Most
postmodernist historians reject existing approaches to history
and develop their own. They also attempt to deconstruct
existing assumptions about the past.
revisionist
Historical revisionism is the process of questioning and
reinterpreting conventional knowledge about the past. A
‘revisionist historian’ does not refer to a particular position
or viewpoint. Instead, a revisionist historian is one who
challenges existing understanding by offering new evidence,
conclusions or arguments.
Whig
The term Whig describes political progressives who believe in
the gradual improvement of human society. Whigs believe
that all societies will, given time, evolve into liberal
democracies with constitutional government and universal
freedoms. Whig historians and their modern counterparts,
the neo-Whigs, write history as the story of human progress
toward these goals.
Sentence stems for writing about historians
Discussing historians demands a particular writing style. Writing about historians
goes beyond just quoting or paraphrasing their views. You must learn to summarise a
historian’s conclusions while suggesting how or why they reached them. You should
try to write comparatively and critically, weighing up one historian against others and
evaluating the validity of a historian’s work. This section contains 25 sentence stems
useful when writing about historians.
According to Historian W, this event was caused by…
Like most historians of his era, P places emphasis on…
Historian Z is scathing about this action, describing it as a…
A more sympathetic view is offered by Historian I, who says that…
Relying chiefly on this evidence, Historian V forms the assumption that…
Building on the work of Historian B, Historian W adds that…
The conventional view, expressed by historians like K and D, is that…
Historian R challenges this orthodox view, declaring instead that…
Echoing this position is Historian H, who also puts it down to…
Historian B views this with a more critical eye, suggesting that…
A more sceptical view can be found in the work of Historian M, who writes…
Unlike Historian G, Historian R places greater emphasis on…
Historian E rejects this assumption, suggesting instead that…
The position taken by Historian H is unsupported by evidence…
This is a view contradicted by Historian C, who instead attributes it to…
Historian J instead condemns this, claiming that it…
Like other left-leaning historians, B describes this as a…
Expressing his usual contempt for radicalism, Historian S states that…
Historian T, who emphasises the important of individual liberty, hails this
event as…
For progressive historians like G and O, this was an important advance
toward…
For Marxist historians like W and L, this represented an important step…
Historians like F and L have launched a stinging attack on this theory…
While Historian W claims it as a victory, G argues that it…
Words and terms for writing about historians
The following words and phrases may be useful when writing about historians,
particularly in an analytical or critical way.
adopts the
position
advances the
theory
asserts that
attempts to
convince
claims that
contends
that
contradicts
critical of
dismisses
downplays
embellishes
emphasises
evaluates
exaggerates
expresses the
view
fails to
consider
focuses on
ignores
launches an
attack
makes a case
makes the
argument
never
considers
obsesses
about
one sided
assessment
overlooks
overly
critical
questions
rebuts
refuses to
accept
refutes
rejects the
view
seeks to
prove
selectively
uses
skewed
perspective
shows bias
subjective
takes the
view
treads lightly
weighs up
would have
us believe
——————————————————————————————————
—
§6. PROBLEMS OF HISTORY
All of us are surrounded by history, whether we study it or not. History lives in our
social traditions, our holidays and ceremonies, our education, our religious beliefs
and practices, our political and legal systems, even in our popular culture (movies and
music frequently draw on historical events and people). One does not need to be a
qualified or practising historian to think, talk or write about the past. Anyone can
have an interest in history; anyone can read, study or discuss it. The Dutch historian
Johan Huizinga, who was imprisoned by the Nazis for his work and died in an
internment camp, once wrote of history: “no other discipline has its portals so wide
open to the general public”. This is certainly true. Discussing the past and theorising
about its meaning have never been confined or restricted to classrooms, lecture
theatres or archive rooms. History is open to all who take an interest in it, regardless
of their experience or credentials.
The accessibility of history has one great advantage: intellectual freedom. Everyone
is free to consider the past and form their own conclusions. But it also has one
significant disadvantage: ‘popular history’ and ‘good history’ are rarely the same
thing. There is a considerable gulf between historical understanding in the public
domain and the history written by historians. The general public can
be knowledgeable and interested in the past but they seldom utilise the same
standards of research and evidence as historians. Popular history is often simplified
and distorted to the point of corruption. There are several reasons for this. People tend
to value story over analysis. When considering the past, they like clear and simple
explanations. They like to assign responsibility, liability or ‘blame’. They like
interesting narratives with moral heroes, immoral culprits and satisfying endings.
They also like to think their own nations and societies as more advanced, civilised or
culturally superior than others. But as good history students know, this type of
thinking is not conducive to ‘good history’. History is rarely simple or clear-cut, nor
is it filled with obvious villains or fulfilling resolutions.
This page summarises some of the problems that can cloud our thinking about the
past. These problems are more common in popular history – but historians and
history students are by no means immune from them.
Generalisation
A significant problem when thinking about history is our habit of thinking in general
terms. For all its brilliance, the human mind has a tendency to make assumptions
about the whole based on some of its parts. In philosophy, this is known as ‘inductive
reasoning’ or generalisation. An example of generalisation is the faulty statement
“canaries are birds; canaries are yellow; therefore all birds are yellow”. Needless to
say, because some birds are yellow does not mean all birds are the same. Many
people are prone to forming general conclusions from just a few facts or pieces of
evidence. This typically occurs when studying large groups of people, such as a
nation, society or community. Most human populations contain enormous economic,
ethnic and cultural diversity. Because of this, any conclusion about an entire
population based on a small amount of evidence is likely to be flawed. History
students should be particularly wary about forming generalised assumptions and
making generalised claims. Not all the peasants in 18th century France and 20th
century Russia were poor and starving. Not all Germans in the 1930s were Nazis or
supporters of Hitler. Not all people in the Middle East are Muslim. Not all socialists
adhere to the writings of Karl Marx.
Conspiracy theories
Everyone who has read or discussed the past will know at least one or two conspiracy
theories. These fanciful stories are the gossip of history, whispered and repeated ad
nauseam but seldom supported with concrete evidence. Countless major events in
history – from the crucifixion of Christ through to the Kennedy assassination, the
Moon landing and 9/11 – have fallen victim to conspiracy theories. Many of these
theories warn of secretive but powerful groups, such as Catholics, Jews, Freemasons,
Communists, the Illuminati, the G20, the Bilderberg Group, the ‘Deep State’, CIA,
KGB, MI5 and Mossad. According to conspiracy theorists, these organisations
conjure and implement subversive plots to exert their control over the world, its
people and resources. Many of the world’s problems and misfortunes are laid at the
feet of these groups, who are said to operate in the shadows. The problem with
conspiracy theories is that they are, by their very definition, baseless theories. Most
are based on rumour, unsubstantiated stories, coincidence and circumstantial
evidence. Many are so wacky they have only novelty value. But as the rise of Nazism
and the Holocaust demonstrate, in the right circumstances conspiracy theories can be
accepted by the mainstream and become extremely dangerous.
Myths and mythology
Popular histories are riddled with myths: stories that are unsupported by evidence,
grossly exaggerated or entirely untrue. Most historians are aware of these myths and
disregard them as either apocryphal or untrue. Non-historians, however, are often
interested in the value of a story rather than its historical accuracy. Over time, many
myths and stories have become accepted as historical fact, often because they sound
appealing or fit a particular narrative. Many myths have been repeated in print, which
lends them undeserved credibility. An example of one enduring myth is the story of
Paul Revere’s ‘midnight ride’ to warn of British troop movements in Massachusetts in
April 1775. Public understanding of this event has been shaped by Henry Wadsworth
Longfellow’s 1860 poem, Paul Revere’s Ride, which is riddled with historical
inaccuracies about Revere’s actions and the events of that evening. As a result of this
Longfellow-inspired myth, Revere’s actions and importance to the American
Revolution have been exaggerated over time. While these distortions are not usually
the work of historians, they tend to create a popular but misleading narrative of
historical events like the American Revolution. Historians and history students must
be wary of these myths. Just because a story is widely accepted as fact does not make
it so.